keith-turner commented on code in PR #3380:
URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/3380#discussion_r1186314959
##########
core/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/core/clientImpl/TabletServerBatchReaderIterator.java:
##########
@@ -274,11 +281,13 @@ private void binRanges(TabletLocator tabletLocator,
List<Range> ranges,
failures.size());
}
+ retry.useRetry();
try {
- Thread.sleep(100);
- } catch (InterruptedException e) {
- throw new RuntimeException(e);
+ retry.waitForNextAttempt(log, "binRanges retry failures");
+ } catch (InterruptedException e1) {
+ log.debug("Retry interrupted", e1);
Review Comment:
Why make this change?
##########
core/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/core/clientImpl/TabletServerBatchReaderIterator.java:
##########
@@ -248,6 +251,10 @@ private void binRanges(TabletLocator tabletLocator,
List<Range> ranges,
int lastFailureSize = Integer.MAX_VALUE;
+ Retry retry = Retry.builder().infiniteRetries().retryAfter(100,
MILLISECONDS)
+ .incrementBy(100, MILLISECONDS).maxWait(1, SECONDS).backOffFactor(1.07)
Review Comment:
I think the max wait should be higher. If lots are batch scan client are
repeatedly failing, it would be good if their collective pressure is lower.
```suggestion
.incrementBy(100, MILLISECONDS).maxWait(10,
SECONDS).backOffFactor(1.07)
```
##########
core/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/core/clientImpl/TabletServerBatchReaderIterator.java:
##########
@@ -274,11 +281,13 @@ private void binRanges(TabletLocator tabletLocator,
List<Range> ranges,
failures.size());
}
+ retry.useRetry();
Review Comment:
Not a a problem with this PR, but I have not been calling this. I looked
at the code and it will influence the message logged by waitForNextAttempt
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
