Hi Robert / Vratko, Going through Vratko's gerrit, I noticed following
"Prefix-based shards do not even support "non-chained" transactions" I assume that this caveat is applicable only for the prefix-based sharding and does not necessarily hold good for those who continue to use module-based sharding. Am I correct ? The reason why I ask is we wanted to run Netvirt CSIT with tell-based protocol enabled to have a basic sanity cleared with this change and then do more focused testing with HA and scale scenarios. Regards Muthu -----Original Message----- From: Muthukumaran K Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2017 10:51 AM To: 'Robert Varga'; controller-dev Cc: odl netvirt dev Subject: RE: [controller-dev] Testing the FE BE separation of Datastore (Bug-5280) Thanks Robert. With Tom's response on 'use-tell-based-protocol' config, I started taking a peek at the changes required. Was not aware of Vratko's gerrit. Will take a look at that too to sink it in Regards Muthu -----Original Message----- From: Robert Varga [mailto:n...@hq.sk] Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2017 11:29 PM To: Muthukumaran K; controller-dev Cc: odl netvirt dev Subject: Re: [controller-dev] Testing the FE BE separation of Datastore (Bug-5280) On 24/07/17 17:28, Muthukumaran K wrote: > Hi Robert, Hello Muthu, sorry for the late response, this email got left behind in my drafts folder. > This is in context of the changes for BZ-5280. We would like to test > the changes on master branch. Have some clarifications on the same > > > > a) Since this change had been major, as I recollect, there was a > discussion earlier on isolating the changed code-path and old code path. > Is the new code-path enabled by default on master ? To utilize changed > code-path, As Tom already responded, this work is not active by default for the APIs currently used by our downstreams. It is used for fine-grained shards. > > a) any specific configuration changes in any cfg files (eg. > Datastore cfg) required or Just uncomment #use-tell-based-protocol=true in datastore.cfg before you start the controller. You should get an INFO message when it is enabled. > b) a new type of Databroker to be used to use the changed codepath > ? In case of new databroker type, if there is any sample usage, can we > get some pointer for the same ? This is an internal DS implementation detail, so no changes to wiring are necessary. > b) Can the changes be tested for specific AskTimeout scenarios - > encountered earlier, like > > a) scaled transactions with and without Transaction Chain (if Txn > Chain is used, do we still have to use pingpong broker for better > results ?) of course with appropriate heap-sizing and using G1GC Yes. I would suggest testing both, though. > b) split-brain healing with medium volume of config-data - > specifically , full split (eg. Downing node interfaces and bringing > them back up after brief period) and heal of cluster with and without > ongoing transactions. For completion sake, we can also test partial > split and heal > > > > Any other specific variances of above scenario which could put the > changes to test ? Idle split-brain recovery should not be affected. With tell-based protocol enabled, ongoing transactions should recover seamlessly if the partition heals reasonably quickly (2 minutes by default). Vratko is writing up the test scenarios that are being executed somewhere. A progress report is at https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/56454. It would be nice if the test cases could be executed in an environment more stable than our CSIT substrate. Regards, Robert _______________________________________________ controller-dev mailing list controller-dev@lists.opendaylight.org https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/controller-dev
