Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion
kage >> > > > > > from >> > > > > > >>> > etcd (see raft/node.go) contains some heartbeats >> mechanism >> > > etc. >> > > > > > >>> > I agree with you, this seems not to be a huge deal to >> port. >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > >>> > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:13, Alexey Goncharuk < >> > > > > > >>> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com >> > > > > > >>> > >: >> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > > > >>> >> Ivan, >> > > > > > >>> >> >> > > > > > >>> >> Agree, let's have a call to discuss the IEP. I have some >> > more >> > > > > > thoughts >> > > > > > >>> >> regarding how the replication infrastructure works with >> > > > > > >>> >> atomic/transactional caches, will put this info to the >> IEP. >> > > Does >> > > > > > next >> > > > > > >>> >> Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open >> > call >> > > > > then. >> > > > > > >>> >> >> > > > > > >>> >> As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with >> the >> > > > > > concurrency >> > > > > > >>> >> model if we choose this way, this is what I like about >> their >> > > > code >> > > > > > >>> >> structure. Essentially, the raft module is a >> single-threaded >> > > > > > automata >> > > > > > >>> >> which >> > > > > > >>> >> has a callback to process a message, process a tick >> > (timeout) >> > > > and >> > > > > > >>> produces >> > > > > > >>> >> messages that should be sent and log entries that should >> be >> > > > > > persisted. >> > > > > > >>> >> Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly >> straightforward. >> > > Will >> > > > be >> > > > > > >>> happy >> > > > > > >>> >> to >> > > > > > >>> >> discuss this and other alternatives on the call as well. >> > > > > > >>> >> >> > > > > > >>> >> чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 14:41, Ivan Daschinsky < >> > > > > ivanda...@gmail.com >> > > > > > >: >> > > > > > >>> >> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > Any existing library that can be used to avoid >> > > > re-implementing >> > > > > > the >> > > > > > >>> >> > protocol ourselves? Perhaps, porting the existing >> > > > implementation >> > > > > > to >> > > > > > >>> Java >> > > > > > >>> >> > Personally, I like this idea. Go libraries (either raft >> > > module >> > > > > of >> > > > > > >>> etcd >> > > > > > >>> >> or >> > > > > > >>> >> > serf by Hashicorp) are famous for clean code, good >> design, >> > > > > > >>> stability, >> > > > > > >>> >> not >> > > > > > >>> >> > enormous size. >> > > > > > >>> >> > But, on other side, Go has different model for >> concurrency >> > > and >> > > > > > >>> porting >> > > > > > >>> >> > probably will not be so straightforward. >> > > > > > >>> >> > >> > > > > > >>> >> > >> > > > > > >>> >> > >> > > > > > >>> >> > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:48, Ivan Daschinsky < >> > > > > > ivanda...@gmail.com >> > > > > > >>> >: >> > > > > > >>> >> > >> > > > > > >>> >> > > I'd suggest to discuss th
Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion
; I've made some edits in IEP-61 [1] regarding the group > membership > > > > > service > > > > > > > and transaction protocol interaction with the replication > > > > > infrastructure, > > > > > > > please take a look before our Friday call. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-61%3A+Common+Replication+Infrastructure > > > > > > > > > > > > > > пн, 23 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:28, Alexey Goncharuk < > > > > > > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com > > > > > > > >: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Thanks, Ivan, > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Another protocol for group membership worth checking out is > > RAPID > > > > [1] > > > > > (a > > > > > > >> recent one). Not sure though if there are any available > > > > > implementations > > > > > > for > > > > > > >> it already. > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> [1] > > > > > > > > > https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/atc18/atc18-suresh.pdf > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> пн, 23 нояб. 2020 г. в 10:46, Ivan Daschinsky < > > > ivanda...@gmail.com > > > > >: > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >>> Also, here is some interesting reading about gossip, SWIM > etc. > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> 1 -- > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > http://www.cs.cornell.edu/Info/Projects/Spinglass/public_pdfs/SWIM.pdf > > > > > > >>> 2 -- > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.antonkharenko.com/2015/09/swim-distributed-group-membership.html > > > > > > >>> 3 -- https://github.com/hashicorp/memberlist (Foundation > > library > > > > of > > > > > > >>> hashicorp serf) > > > > > > >>> 4 -- https://github.com/scalecube/scalecube-cluster -- (Java > > > > > > >>> implementation > > > > > > >>> of SWIM) > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:35, Ivan Daschinsky < > > > ivanda...@gmail.com > > > > >: > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > >> Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open > > > call > > > > > > then. > > > > > > >>> > Yes, great > > > > > > >>> > >> As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with > the > > > > > > >>> > concurrency... > > > > > > >>> > >>Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly > straightforward. > > > > > > >>> > Yes, they chose split transport and logic. But original Go > > > > package > > > > > > from > > > > > > >>> > etcd (see raft/node.go) contains some heartbeats mechanism > > > etc. > > > > > > >>> > I agree with you, this seems not to be a huge deal to port. > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:13, Alexey Goncharuk < > > > > > > >>> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com > > > > > > >>> > >: > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> >> Ivan, > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> Agree, let's have a call to discuss the IEP. I have some > > more > > > > > > thoughts > > > > > > >>> >> regarding how the replication infrastructure works with > > > > > > >>> >> atomic/transactional caches, will put this info to the > IEP. > > > Does > > > > > > next > > > > >
Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion
pdf > > > > > >>> 2 -- > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.antonkharenko.com/2015/09/swim-distributed-group-membership.html > > > > > >>> 3 -- https://github.com/hashicorp/memberlist (Foundation > library > > > of > > > > > >>> hashicorp serf) > > > > > >>> 4 -- https://github.com/scalecube/scalecube-cluster -- (Java > > > > > >>> implementation > > > > > >>> of SWIM) > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:35, Ivan Daschinsky < > > ivanda...@gmail.com > > > >: > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > >> Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open > > call > > > > > then. > > > > > >>> > Yes, great > > > > > >>> > >> As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with the > > > > > >>> > concurrency... > > > > > >>> > >>Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly straightforward. > > > > > >>> > Yes, they chose split transport and logic. But original Go > > > package > > > > > from > > > > > >>> > etcd (see raft/node.go) contains some heartbeats mechanism > > etc. > > > > > >>> > I agree with you, this seems not to be a huge deal to port. > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:13, Alexey Goncharuk < > > > > > >>> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com > > > > > >>> > >: > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> >> Ivan, > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> Agree, let's have a call to discuss the IEP. I have some > more > > > > > thoughts > > > > > >>> >> regarding how the replication infrastructure works with > > > > > >>> >> atomic/transactional caches, will put this info to the IEP. > > Does > > > > > next > > > > > >>> >> Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open > call > > > > then. > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with the > > > > > concurrency > > > > > >>> >> model if we choose this way, this is what I like about their > > > code > > > > > >>> >> structure. Essentially, the raft module is a single-threaded > > > > > automata > > > > > >>> >> which > > > > > >>> >> has a callback to process a message, process a tick > (timeout) > > > and > > > > > >>> produces > > > > > >>> >> messages that should be sent and log entries that should be > > > > > persisted. > > > > > >>> >> Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly straightforward. > > Will > > > be > > > > > >>> happy > > > > > >>> >> to > > > > > >>> >> discuss this and other alternatives on the call as well. > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 14:41, Ivan Daschinsky < > > > > ivanda...@gmail.com > > > > > >: > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > Any existing library that can be used to avoid > > > re-implementing > > > > > the > > > > > >>> >> > protocol ourselves? Perhaps, porting the existing > > > implementation > > > > > to > > > > > >>> Java > > > > > >>> >> > Personally, I like this idea. Go libraries (either raft > > module > > > > of > > > > > >>> etcd > > > > > >>> >> or > > > > > >>> >> > serf by Hashicorp) are famous for clean code, good design, > > > > > >>> stability, > > > > > >>> >> not > > > > > >>> >> > enormous size. > > > > > >&g
Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion
; >> Agree, let's have a call to discuss the IEP. I have some more > > > > thoughts > > > > >>> >> regarding how the replication infrastructure works with > > > > >>> >> atomic/transactional caches, will put this info to the IEP. > Does > > > > next > > > > >>> >> Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open call > > > then. > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with the > > > > concurrency > > > > >>> >> model if we choose this way, this is what I like about their > > code > > > > >>> >> structure. Essentially, the raft module is a single-threaded > > > > automata > > > > >>> >> which > > > > >>> >> has a callback to process a message, process a tick (timeout) > > and > > > > >>> produces > > > > >>> >> messages that should be sent and log entries that should be > > > > persisted. > > > > >>> >> Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly straightforward. > Will > > be > > > > >>> happy > > > > >>> >> to > > > > >>> >> discuss this and other alternatives on the call as well. > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 14:41, Ivan Daschinsky < > > > ivanda...@gmail.com > > > > >: > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > Any existing library that can be used to avoid > > re-implementing > > > > the > > > > >>> >> > protocol ourselves? Perhaps, porting the existing > > implementation > > > > to > > > > >>> Java > > > > >>> >> > Personally, I like this idea. Go libraries (either raft > module > > > of > > > > >>> etcd > > > > >>> >> or > > > > >>> >> > serf by Hashicorp) are famous for clean code, good design, > > > > >>> stability, > > > > >>> >> not > > > > >>> >> > enormous size. > > > > >>> >> > But, on other side, Go has different model for concurrency > and > > > > >>> porting > > > > >>> >> > probably will not be so straightforward. > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:48, Ivan Daschinsky < > > > > ivanda...@gmail.com > > > > >>> >: > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > I'd suggest to discuss this IEP and technical details in > > open > > > > ZOOM > > > > >>> >> > > meeting. > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:47, Ivan Daschinsky < > > > > >>> ivanda...@gmail.com>: > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > >> > > > > >>> >> > >> > > > > >>> >> > >> -- Forwarded message - > > > > >>> >> > >> От: Ivan Daschinsky > > > > >>> >> > >> Date: чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:02 > > > > >>> >> > >> Subject: Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion > > > > >>> >> > >> To: Alexey Goncharuk > > > > >>> >> > >> > > > > >>> >> > >> > > > > >>> >> > >> Alexey, let's arise another question. Specifically, how > > nodes > > > > >>> >> initially > > > > >>> >> > >> find each other (discovery) and how they detect failures. > > > > >>> >> > >> > > > > >>> >> > >> I suppose, that gossip protocol is an ideal candidate. > For > > > > >>> example, > > > > >>> >> > >> consul [1] uses this approach, using serf [2] library to > > >
Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion
f we choose this way, this is what I like about their > code > > > >>> >> structure. Essentially, the raft module is a single-threaded > > > automata > > > >>> >> which > > > >>> >> has a callback to process a message, process a tick (timeout) > and > > > >>> produces > > > >>> >> messages that should be sent and log entries that should be > > > persisted. > > > >>> >> Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly straightforward. Will > be > > > >>> happy > > > >>> >> to > > > >>> >> discuss this and other alternatives on the call as well. > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 14:41, Ivan Daschinsky < > > ivanda...@gmail.com > > > >: > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > Any existing library that can be used to avoid > re-implementing > > > the > > > >>> >> > protocol ourselves? Perhaps, porting the existing > implementation > > > to > > > >>> Java > > > >>> >> > Personally, I like this idea. Go libraries (either raft module > > of > > > >>> etcd > > > >>> >> or > > > >>> >> > serf by Hashicorp) are famous for clean code, good design, > > > >>> stability, > > > >>> >> not > > > >>> >> > enormous size. > > > >>> >> > But, on other side, Go has different model for concurrency and > > > >>> porting > > > >>> >> > probably will not be so straightforward. > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:48, Ivan Daschinsky < > > > ivanda...@gmail.com > > > >>> >: > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > I'd suggest to discuss this IEP and technical details in > open > > > ZOOM > > > >>> >> > > meeting. > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:47, Ivan Daschinsky < > > > >>> ivanda...@gmail.com>: > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > >> > > > >>> >> > >> > > > >>> >> > >> -- Forwarded message - > > > >>> >> > >> От: Ivan Daschinsky > > > >>> >> > >> Date: чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:02 > > > >>> >> > >> Subject: Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion > > > >>> >> > >> To: Alexey Goncharuk > > > >>> >> > >> > > > >>> >> > >> > > > >>> >> > >> Alexey, let's arise another question. Specifically, how > nodes > > > >>> >> initially > > > >>> >> > >> find each other (discovery) and how they detect failures. > > > >>> >> > >> > > > >>> >> > >> I suppose, that gossip protocol is an ideal candidate. For > > > >>> example, > > > >>> >> > >> consul [1] uses this approach, using serf [2] library to > > > discover > > > >>> >> > members > > > >>> >> > >> of cluster. > > > >>> >> > >> Then consul forms raft ensemble (server nodes) and client > use > > > >>> raft > > > >>> >> > >> ensemble only as lock service. > > > >>> >> > >> > > > >>> >> > >> PacificA suggests internal heartbeats mechanism for failure > > > >>> >> detection of > > > >>> >> > >> replicated group, but it says nothing about initial > discovery > > > of > > > >>> >> nodes. > > > >>> >> > >> > > > >>> >> > >> WDYT? > > > >>> >> > >> > > > >>> >> > >> [1] -- https://www.consul.io/docs/architecture/gossip > > > >>>
Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion
Hi Ivan, Unfortunately, the earliest window available for us is 12:00 MSK (1 hour slot), or after 14:30 MSK. Let me know what time works best for you. ср, 25 нояб. 2020 г. в 21:38, Ivan Daschinsky : > Alexey, I kindly ask you to move the meeting a little bit earlier, ideal > variant -- in the morning. > > ср, 25 нояб. 2020 г. в 20:10, Alexey Goncharuk >: > > > Folks, let's have the call on Friday, Nov 27th at 18:00 MSK? We can use > the > > following waiting room link: > > https://zoom.us/j/99450012496?pwd=RWZmOGhCNWlRK0ZpamdOOTZsYTJ0dz09 > > > > Let me know if this time works for everybody. > > > > ср, 25 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:42, Alexey Goncharuk < > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com > > >: > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > I've made some edits in IEP-61 [1] regarding the group membership > service > > > and transaction protocol interaction with the replication > infrastructure, > > > please take a look before our Friday call. > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-61%3A+Common+Replication+Infrastructure > > > > > > пн, 23 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:28, Alexey Goncharuk < > > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com > > > >: > > > > > >> Thanks, Ivan, > > >> > > >> Another protocol for group membership worth checking out is RAPID [1] > (a > > >> recent one). Not sure though if there are any available > implementations > > for > > >> it already. > > >> > > >> [1] > > https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/atc18/atc18-suresh.pdf > > >> > > >> пн, 23 нояб. 2020 г. в 10:46, Ivan Daschinsky : > > >> > > >>> Also, here is some interesting reading about gossip, SWIM etc. > > >>> > > >>> 1 -- > > >>> > http://www.cs.cornell.edu/Info/Projects/Spinglass/public_pdfs/SWIM.pdf > > >>> 2 -- > > >>> > > >>> > > > http://www.antonkharenko.com/2015/09/swim-distributed-group-membership.html > > >>> 3 -- https://github.com/hashicorp/memberlist (Foundation library of > > >>> hashicorp serf) > > >>> 4 -- https://github.com/scalecube/scalecube-cluster -- (Java > > >>> implementation > > >>> of SWIM) > > >>> > > >>> чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:35, Ivan Daschinsky : > > >>> > > >>> > >> Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open call > > then. > > >>> > Yes, great > > >>> > >> As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with the > > >>> > concurrency... > > >>> > >>Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly straightforward. > > >>> > Yes, they chose split transport and logic. But original Go package > > from > > >>> > etcd (see raft/node.go) contains some heartbeats mechanism etc. > > >>> > I agree with you, this seems not to be a huge deal to port. > > >>> > > > >>> > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:13, Alexey Goncharuk < > > >>> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com > > >>> > >: > > >>> > > > >>> >> Ivan, > > >>> >> > > >>> >> Agree, let's have a call to discuss the IEP. I have some more > > thoughts > > >>> >> regarding how the replication infrastructure works with > > >>> >> atomic/transactional caches, will put this info to the IEP. Does > > next > > >>> >> Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open call > then. > > >>> >> > > >>> >> As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with the > > concurrency > > >>> >> model if we choose this way, this is what I like about their code > > >>> >> structure. Essentially, the raft module is a single-threaded > > automata > > >>> >> which > > >>> >> has a callback to process a message, process a tick (timeout) and > > >>> produces > > >>> >> messages that should be sent and log entries that should be > > persisted. > > >>> >> Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly straightforward. Will be > > >>> happy > > >>> >> to > > >>> >> discuss this and other alternatives on the call as well. > > >
Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion
Alexey, I kindly ask you to move the meeting a little bit earlier, ideal variant -- in the morning. ср, 25 нояб. 2020 г. в 20:10, Alexey Goncharuk : > Folks, let's have the call on Friday, Nov 27th at 18:00 MSK? We can use the > following waiting room link: > https://zoom.us/j/99450012496?pwd=RWZmOGhCNWlRK0ZpamdOOTZsYTJ0dz09 > > Let me know if this time works for everybody. > > ср, 25 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:42, Alexey Goncharuk >: > > > Folks, > > > > I've made some edits in IEP-61 [1] regarding the group membership service > > and transaction protocol interaction with the replication infrastructure, > > please take a look before our Friday call. > > > > [1] > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-61%3A+Common+Replication+Infrastructure > > > > пн, 23 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:28, Alexey Goncharuk < > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com > > >: > > > >> Thanks, Ivan, > >> > >> Another protocol for group membership worth checking out is RAPID [1] (a > >> recent one). Not sure though if there are any available implementations > for > >> it already. > >> > >> [1] > https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/atc18/atc18-suresh.pdf > >> > >> пн, 23 нояб. 2020 г. в 10:46, Ivan Daschinsky : > >> > >>> Also, here is some interesting reading about gossip, SWIM etc. > >>> > >>> 1 -- > >>> http://www.cs.cornell.edu/Info/Projects/Spinglass/public_pdfs/SWIM.pdf > >>> 2 -- > >>> > >>> > http://www.antonkharenko.com/2015/09/swim-distributed-group-membership.html > >>> 3 -- https://github.com/hashicorp/memberlist (Foundation library of > >>> hashicorp serf) > >>> 4 -- https://github.com/scalecube/scalecube-cluster -- (Java > >>> implementation > >>> of SWIM) > >>> > >>> чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:35, Ivan Daschinsky : > >>> > >>> > >> Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open call > then. > >>> > Yes, great > >>> > >> As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with the > >>> > concurrency... > >>> > >>Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly straightforward. > >>> > Yes, they chose split transport and logic. But original Go package > from > >>> > etcd (see raft/node.go) contains some heartbeats mechanism etc. > >>> > I agree with you, this seems not to be a huge deal to port. > >>> > > >>> > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:13, Alexey Goncharuk < > >>> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com > >>> > >: > >>> > > >>> >> Ivan, > >>> >> > >>> >> Agree, let's have a call to discuss the IEP. I have some more > thoughts > >>> >> regarding how the replication infrastructure works with > >>> >> atomic/transactional caches, will put this info to the IEP. Does > next > >>> >> Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open call then. > >>> >> > >>> >> As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with the > concurrency > >>> >> model if we choose this way, this is what I like about their code > >>> >> structure. Essentially, the raft module is a single-threaded > automata > >>> >> which > >>> >> has a callback to process a message, process a tick (timeout) and > >>> produces > >>> >> messages that should be sent and log entries that should be > persisted. > >>> >> Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly straightforward. Will be > >>> happy > >>> >> to > >>> >> discuss this and other alternatives on the call as well. > >>> >> > >>> >> чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 14:41, Ivan Daschinsky >: > >>> >> > >>> >> > > Any existing library that can be used to avoid re-implementing > the > >>> >> > protocol ourselves? Perhaps, porting the existing implementation > to > >>> Java > >>> >> > Personally, I like this idea. Go libraries (either raft module of > >>> etcd > >>> >> or > >>> >> > serf by Hashicorp) are famous for clean code, good design, > >>> stability, > >>> >> not > >>> >> > enormous size. > >>> >> > But, on other side, Go has dif
Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion
Folks, let's have the call on Friday, Nov 27th at 18:00 MSK? We can use the following waiting room link: https://zoom.us/j/99450012496?pwd=RWZmOGhCNWlRK0ZpamdOOTZsYTJ0dz09 Let me know if this time works for everybody. ср, 25 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:42, Alexey Goncharuk : > Folks, > > I've made some edits in IEP-61 [1] regarding the group membership service > and transaction protocol interaction with the replication infrastructure, > please take a look before our Friday call. > > [1] > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-61%3A+Common+Replication+Infrastructure > > пн, 23 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:28, Alexey Goncharuk >: > >> Thanks, Ivan, >> >> Another protocol for group membership worth checking out is RAPID [1] (a >> recent one). Not sure though if there are any available implementations for >> it already. >> >> [1] https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/atc18/atc18-suresh.pdf >> >> пн, 23 нояб. 2020 г. в 10:46, Ivan Daschinsky : >> >>> Also, here is some interesting reading about gossip, SWIM etc. >>> >>> 1 -- >>> http://www.cs.cornell.edu/Info/Projects/Spinglass/public_pdfs/SWIM.pdf >>> 2 -- >>> >>> http://www.antonkharenko.com/2015/09/swim-distributed-group-membership.html >>> 3 -- https://github.com/hashicorp/memberlist (Foundation library of >>> hashicorp serf) >>> 4 -- https://github.com/scalecube/scalecube-cluster -- (Java >>> implementation >>> of SWIM) >>> >>> чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:35, Ivan Daschinsky : >>> >>> > >> Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open call then. >>> > Yes, great >>> > >> As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with the >>> > concurrency... >>> > >>Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly straightforward. >>> > Yes, they chose split transport and logic. But original Go package from >>> > etcd (see raft/node.go) contains some heartbeats mechanism etc. >>> > I agree with you, this seems not to be a huge deal to port. >>> > >>> > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:13, Alexey Goncharuk < >>> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com >>> > >: >>> > >>> >> Ivan, >>> >> >>> >> Agree, let's have a call to discuss the IEP. I have some more thoughts >>> >> regarding how the replication infrastructure works with >>> >> atomic/transactional caches, will put this info to the IEP. Does next >>> >> Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open call then. >>> >> >>> >> As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with the concurrency >>> >> model if we choose this way, this is what I like about their code >>> >> structure. Essentially, the raft module is a single-threaded automata >>> >> which >>> >> has a callback to process a message, process a tick (timeout) and >>> produces >>> >> messages that should be sent and log entries that should be persisted. >>> >> Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly straightforward. Will be >>> happy >>> >> to >>> >> discuss this and other alternatives on the call as well. >>> >> >>> >> чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 14:41, Ivan Daschinsky : >>> >> >>> >> > > Any existing library that can be used to avoid re-implementing the >>> >> > protocol ourselves? Perhaps, porting the existing implementation to >>> Java >>> >> > Personally, I like this idea. Go libraries (either raft module of >>> etcd >>> >> or >>> >> > serf by Hashicorp) are famous for clean code, good design, >>> stability, >>> >> not >>> >> > enormous size. >>> >> > But, on other side, Go has different model for concurrency and >>> porting >>> >> > probably will not be so straightforward. >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:48, Ivan Daschinsky >> >: >>> >> > >>> >> > > I'd suggest to discuss this IEP and technical details in open ZOOM >>> >> > > meeting. >>> >> > > >>> >> > > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:47, Ivan Daschinsky < >>> ivanda...@gmail.com>: >>> >> > > >>> >> > >> >>> >>
Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion
Folks, I've made some edits in IEP-61 [1] regarding the group membership service and transaction protocol interaction with the replication infrastructure, please take a look before our Friday call. [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-61%3A+Common+Replication+Infrastructure пн, 23 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:28, Alexey Goncharuk : > Thanks, Ivan, > > Another protocol for group membership worth checking out is RAPID [1] (a > recent one). Not sure though if there are any available implementations for > it already. > > [1] https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/atc18/atc18-suresh.pdf > > пн, 23 нояб. 2020 г. в 10:46, Ivan Daschinsky : > >> Also, here is some interesting reading about gossip, SWIM etc. >> >> 1 -- >> http://www.cs.cornell.edu/Info/Projects/Spinglass/public_pdfs/SWIM.pdf >> 2 -- >> >> http://www.antonkharenko.com/2015/09/swim-distributed-group-membership.html >> 3 -- https://github.com/hashicorp/memberlist (Foundation library of >> hashicorp serf) >> 4 -- https://github.com/scalecube/scalecube-cluster -- (Java >> implementation >> of SWIM) >> >> чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:35, Ivan Daschinsky : >> >> > >> Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open call then. >> > Yes, great >> > >> As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with the >> > concurrency... >> > >>Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly straightforward. >> > Yes, they chose split transport and logic. But original Go package from >> > etcd (see raft/node.go) contains some heartbeats mechanism etc. >> > I agree with you, this seems not to be a huge deal to port. >> > >> > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:13, Alexey Goncharuk < >> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com >> > >: >> > >> >> Ivan, >> >> >> >> Agree, let's have a call to discuss the IEP. I have some more thoughts >> >> regarding how the replication infrastructure works with >> >> atomic/transactional caches, will put this info to the IEP. Does next >> >> Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open call then. >> >> >> >> As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with the concurrency >> >> model if we choose this way, this is what I like about their code >> >> structure. Essentially, the raft module is a single-threaded automata >> >> which >> >> has a callback to process a message, process a tick (timeout) and >> produces >> >> messages that should be sent and log entries that should be persisted. >> >> Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly straightforward. Will be >> happy >> >> to >> >> discuss this and other alternatives on the call as well. >> >> >> >> чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 14:41, Ivan Daschinsky : >> >> >> >> > > Any existing library that can be used to avoid re-implementing the >> >> > protocol ourselves? Perhaps, porting the existing implementation to >> Java >> >> > Personally, I like this idea. Go libraries (either raft module of >> etcd >> >> or >> >> > serf by Hashicorp) are famous for clean code, good design, stability, >> >> not >> >> > enormous size. >> >> > But, on other side, Go has different model for concurrency and >> porting >> >> > probably will not be so straightforward. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:48, Ivan Daschinsky : >> >> > >> >> > > I'd suggest to discuss this IEP and technical details in open ZOOM >> >> > > meeting. >> >> > > >> >> > > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:47, Ivan Daschinsky > >: >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> -- Forwarded message - >> >> > >> От: Ivan Daschinsky >> >> > >> Date: чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:02 >> >> > >> Subject: Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion >> >> > >> To: Alexey Goncharuk >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> Alexey, let's arise another question. Specifically, how nodes >> >> initially >> >> > >> find each other (discovery) and how they detect failures. >> >> > >> >> >> > >> I suppose, that gossip protocol is an ideal candidate
Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion
Thanks, Ivan, Another protocol for group membership worth checking out is RAPID [1] (a recent one). Not sure though if there are any available implementations for it already. [1] https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/atc18/atc18-suresh.pdf пн, 23 нояб. 2020 г. в 10:46, Ivan Daschinsky : > Also, here is some interesting reading about gossip, SWIM etc. > > 1 -- > http://www.cs.cornell.edu/Info/Projects/Spinglass/public_pdfs/SWIM.pdf > 2 -- > http://www.antonkharenko.com/2015/09/swim-distributed-group-membership.html > 3 -- https://github.com/hashicorp/memberlist (Foundation library of > hashicorp serf) > 4 -- https://github.com/scalecube/scalecube-cluster -- (Java > implementation > of SWIM) > > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:35, Ivan Daschinsky : > > > >> Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open call then. > > Yes, great > > >> As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with the > > concurrency... > > >>Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly straightforward. > > Yes, they chose split transport and logic. But original Go package from > > etcd (see raft/node.go) contains some heartbeats mechanism etc. > > I agree with you, this seems not to be a huge deal to port. > > > > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:13, Alexey Goncharuk < > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com > > >: > > > >> Ivan, > >> > >> Agree, let's have a call to discuss the IEP. I have some more thoughts > >> regarding how the replication infrastructure works with > >> atomic/transactional caches, will put this info to the IEP. Does next > >> Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open call then. > >> > >> As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with the concurrency > >> model if we choose this way, this is what I like about their code > >> structure. Essentially, the raft module is a single-threaded automata > >> which > >> has a callback to process a message, process a tick (timeout) and > produces > >> messages that should be sent and log entries that should be persisted. > >> Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly straightforward. Will be happy > >> to > >> discuss this and other alternatives on the call as well. > >> > >> чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 14:41, Ivan Daschinsky : > >> > >> > > Any existing library that can be used to avoid re-implementing the > >> > protocol ourselves? Perhaps, porting the existing implementation to > Java > >> > Personally, I like this idea. Go libraries (either raft module of etcd > >> or > >> > serf by Hashicorp) are famous for clean code, good design, stability, > >> not > >> > enormous size. > >> > But, on other side, Go has different model for concurrency and porting > >> > probably will not be so straightforward. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:48, Ivan Daschinsky : > >> > > >> > > I'd suggest to discuss this IEP and technical details in open ZOOM > >> > > meeting. > >> > > > >> > > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:47, Ivan Daschinsky >: > >> > > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- Forwarded message - > >> > >> От: Ivan Daschinsky > >> > >> Date: чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:02 > >> > >> Subject: Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion > >> > >> To: Alexey Goncharuk > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Alexey, let's arise another question. Specifically, how nodes > >> initially > >> > >> find each other (discovery) and how they detect failures. > >> > >> > >> > >> I suppose, that gossip protocol is an ideal candidate. For example, > >> > >> consul [1] uses this approach, using serf [2] library to discover > >> > members > >> > >> of cluster. > >> > >> Then consul forms raft ensemble (server nodes) and client use raft > >> > >> ensemble only as lock service. > >> > >> > >> > >> PacificA suggests internal heartbeats mechanism for failure > >> detection of > >> > >> replicated group, but it says nothing about initial discovery of > >> nodes. > >> > >> > >> > >> WDYT? > >> > >> > >> > >> [1] -- https://www.consul.io/docs/architecture/gossip > &
Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion
Also, here is some interesting reading about gossip, SWIM etc. 1 -- http://www.cs.cornell.edu/Info/Projects/Spinglass/public_pdfs/SWIM.pdf 2 -- http://www.antonkharenko.com/2015/09/swim-distributed-group-membership.html 3 -- https://github.com/hashicorp/memberlist (Foundation library of hashicorp serf) 4 -- https://github.com/scalecube/scalecube-cluster -- (Java implementation of SWIM) чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:35, Ivan Daschinsky : > >> Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open call then. > Yes, great > >> As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with the > concurrency... > >>Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly straightforward. > Yes, they chose split transport and logic. But original Go package from > etcd (see raft/node.go) contains some heartbeats mechanism etc. > I agree with you, this seems not to be a huge deal to port. > > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:13, Alexey Goncharuk >: > >> Ivan, >> >> Agree, let's have a call to discuss the IEP. I have some more thoughts >> regarding how the replication infrastructure works with >> atomic/transactional caches, will put this info to the IEP. Does next >> Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open call then. >> >> As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with the concurrency >> model if we choose this way, this is what I like about their code >> structure. Essentially, the raft module is a single-threaded automata >> which >> has a callback to process a message, process a tick (timeout) and produces >> messages that should be sent and log entries that should be persisted. >> Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly straightforward. Will be happy >> to >> discuss this and other alternatives on the call as well. >> >> чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 14:41, Ivan Daschinsky : >> >> > > Any existing library that can be used to avoid re-implementing the >> > protocol ourselves? Perhaps, porting the existing implementation to Java >> > Personally, I like this idea. Go libraries (either raft module of etcd >> or >> > serf by Hashicorp) are famous for clean code, good design, stability, >> not >> > enormous size. >> > But, on other side, Go has different model for concurrency and porting >> > probably will not be so straightforward. >> > >> > >> > >> > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:48, Ivan Daschinsky : >> > >> > > I'd suggest to discuss this IEP and technical details in open ZOOM >> > > meeting. >> > > >> > > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:47, Ivan Daschinsky : >> > > >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> -- Forwarded message - >> > >> От: Ivan Daschinsky >> > >> Date: чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:02 >> > >> Subject: Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion >> > >> To: Alexey Goncharuk >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> Alexey, let's arise another question. Specifically, how nodes >> initially >> > >> find each other (discovery) and how they detect failures. >> > >> >> > >> I suppose, that gossip protocol is an ideal candidate. For example, >> > >> consul [1] uses this approach, using serf [2] library to discover >> > members >> > >> of cluster. >> > >> Then consul forms raft ensemble (server nodes) and client use raft >> > >> ensemble only as lock service. >> > >> >> > >> PacificA suggests internal heartbeats mechanism for failure >> detection of >> > >> replicated group, but it says nothing about initial discovery of >> nodes. >> > >> >> > >> WDYT? >> > >> >> > >> [1] -- https://www.consul.io/docs/architecture/gossip >> > >> [2] -- https://www.serf.io/ >> > >> >> > >> чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 12:46, Alexey Goncharuk < >> > >> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>: >> > >> >> > >>> Following up the Ignite 3.0 scope/development approach threads, >> this is >> > >>> a separate thread to discuss technical aspects of the IEP. >> > >>> >> > >>> Let's reiterate one more time on the questions raised by Ivan and >> also >> > >>> see if there are any other thoughts on the IEP: >> > >>> >> > >>>- *Whether to deploy metastorage on a separate subset of the >> nodes >> > >>>or
Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion
>> Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open call then. Yes, great >> As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with the concurrency... >>Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly straightforward. Yes, they chose split transport and logic. But original Go package from etcd (see raft/node.go) contains some heartbeats mechanism etc. I agree with you, this seems not to be a huge deal to port. чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 16:13, Alexey Goncharuk : > Ivan, > > Agree, let's have a call to discuss the IEP. I have some more thoughts > regarding how the replication infrastructure works with > atomic/transactional caches, will put this info to the IEP. Does next > Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open call then. > > As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with the concurrency > model if we choose this way, this is what I like about their code > structure. Essentially, the raft module is a single-threaded automata which > has a callback to process a message, process a tick (timeout) and produces > messages that should be sent and log entries that should be persisted. > Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly straightforward. Will be happy to > discuss this and other alternatives on the call as well. > > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 14:41, Ivan Daschinsky : > > > > Any existing library that can be used to avoid re-implementing the > > protocol ourselves? Perhaps, porting the existing implementation to Java > > Personally, I like this idea. Go libraries (either raft module of etcd or > > serf by Hashicorp) are famous for clean code, good design, stability, not > > enormous size. > > But, on other side, Go has different model for concurrency and porting > > probably will not be so straightforward. > > > > > > > > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:48, Ivan Daschinsky : > > > > > I'd suggest to discuss this IEP and technical details in open ZOOM > > > meeting. > > > > > > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:47, Ivan Daschinsky : > > > > > >> > > >> > > >> -- Forwarded message - > > >> От: Ivan Daschinsky > > >> Date: чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:02 > > >> Subject: Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion > > >> To: Alexey Goncharuk > > >> > > >> > > >> Alexey, let's arise another question. Specifically, how nodes > initially > > >> find each other (discovery) and how they detect failures. > > >> > > >> I suppose, that gossip protocol is an ideal candidate. For example, > > >> consul [1] uses this approach, using serf [2] library to discover > > members > > >> of cluster. > > >> Then consul forms raft ensemble (server nodes) and client use raft > > >> ensemble only as lock service. > > >> > > >> PacificA suggests internal heartbeats mechanism for failure detection > of > > >> replicated group, but it says nothing about initial discovery of > nodes. > > >> > > >> WDYT? > > >> > > >> [1] -- https://www.consul.io/docs/architecture/gossip > > >> [2] -- https://www.serf.io/ > > >> > > >> чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 12:46, Alexey Goncharuk < > > >> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>: > > >> > > >>> Following up the Ignite 3.0 scope/development approach threads, this > is > > >>> a separate thread to discuss technical aspects of the IEP. > > >>> > > >>> Let's reiterate one more time on the questions raised by Ivan and > also > > >>> see if there are any other thoughts on the IEP: > > >>> > > >>>- *Whether to deploy metastorage on a separate subset of the nodes > > >>>or allow Ignite to choose these nodes automatically.* I think it > is > > >>>feasible to maintain both modes: by default, Ignite will choose > > >>>metastorage nodes automatically which essentially will provide the > > same > > >>>seamless user experience as TCP discovery SPI - no separate roles, > > >>>simplistic deployment. For deployments where people want to have > > more > > >>>fine-grained control over the nodes' assignments, we will provide > a > > runtime > > >>>configuration which will allow pinning metastorage group to > certain > > nodes, > > >>>thus eliminating the latency concerns. > > >>>- *Whether there are any TLA+ specs for the PacificA protocol.* > No
Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion
Ivan, Agree, let's have a call to discuss the IEP. I have some more thoughts regarding how the replication infrastructure works with atomic/transactional caches, will put this info to the IEP. Does next Friday, Nov 27th work for you? If ok, let's have an open call then. As for the protocol port - we will not be dealing with the concurrency model if we choose this way, this is what I like about their code structure. Essentially, the raft module is a single-threaded automata which has a callback to process a message, process a tick (timeout) and produces messages that should be sent and log entries that should be persisted. Judging by the Rust port, it seems fairly straightforward. Will be happy to discuss this and other alternatives on the call as well. чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 14:41, Ivan Daschinsky : > > Any existing library that can be used to avoid re-implementing the > protocol ourselves? Perhaps, porting the existing implementation to Java > Personally, I like this idea. Go libraries (either raft module of etcd or > serf by Hashicorp) are famous for clean code, good design, stability, not > enormous size. > But, on other side, Go has different model for concurrency and porting > probably will not be so straightforward. > > > > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:48, Ivan Daschinsky : > > > I'd suggest to discuss this IEP and technical details in open ZOOM > > meeting. > > > > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:47, Ivan Daschinsky : > > > >> > >> > >> -- Forwarded message ----- > >> От: Ivan Daschinsky > >> Date: чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:02 > >> Subject: Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion > >> To: Alexey Goncharuk > >> > >> > >> Alexey, let's arise another question. Specifically, how nodes initially > >> find each other (discovery) and how they detect failures. > >> > >> I suppose, that gossip protocol is an ideal candidate. For example, > >> consul [1] uses this approach, using serf [2] library to discover > members > >> of cluster. > >> Then consul forms raft ensemble (server nodes) and client use raft > >> ensemble only as lock service. > >> > >> PacificA suggests internal heartbeats mechanism for failure detection of > >> replicated group, but it says nothing about initial discovery of nodes. > >> > >> WDYT? > >> > >> [1] -- https://www.consul.io/docs/architecture/gossip > >> [2] -- https://www.serf.io/ > >> > >> чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 12:46, Alexey Goncharuk < > >> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>: > >> > >>> Following up the Ignite 3.0 scope/development approach threads, this is > >>> a separate thread to discuss technical aspects of the IEP. > >>> > >>> Let's reiterate one more time on the questions raised by Ivan and also > >>> see if there are any other thoughts on the IEP: > >>> > >>>- *Whether to deploy metastorage on a separate subset of the nodes > >>>or allow Ignite to choose these nodes automatically.* I think it is > >>>feasible to maintain both modes: by default, Ignite will choose > >>>metastorage nodes automatically which essentially will provide the > same > >>>seamless user experience as TCP discovery SPI - no separate roles, > >>>simplistic deployment. For deployments where people want to have > more > >>>fine-grained control over the nodes' assignments, we will provide a > runtime > >>>configuration which will allow pinning metastorage group to certain > nodes, > >>>thus eliminating the latency concerns. > >>>- *Whether there are any TLA+ specs for the PacificA protocol.* Not > >>>to my knowledge, but it is known to be used in production by > Microsoft and > >>>other projects, e.g. [1] > >>> > >>> I would like to collect general feedback on the IEP, as well as > feedback > >>> on specific parts of it, such as: > >>> > >>>- Metastorage API > >>>- Any existing library that can be used to avoid re-implementing the > >>>protocol ourselves? Perhaps, porting the existing implementation to > Java > >>>(the way TiKV did with etcd-raft [2] [3]? This is a very neat way > btw in my > >>>opinion because I like the finite automata-like approach of the > replication > >>>module, and, additionally, we could sync bug fixes and improvements > from > >>>the upstream project) > >>> > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> --AG > >>> > >>> [1] > >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INCUBATOR/PegasusProposal > >>> [2] https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/raft > >>> [3] https://github.com/tikv/raft-rs > >>> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > >> > > > > > > -- > > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > > > > > -- > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy >
Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion
> Any existing library that can be used to avoid re-implementing the protocol ourselves? Perhaps, porting the existing implementation to Java Personally, I like this idea. Go libraries (either raft module of etcd or serf by Hashicorp) are famous for clean code, good design, stability, not enormous size. But, on other side, Go has different model for concurrency and porting probably will not be so straightforward. чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:48, Ivan Daschinsky : > I'd suggest to discuss this IEP and technical details in open ZOOM > meeting. > > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:47, Ivan Daschinsky : > >> >> >> -- Forwarded message - >> От: Ivan Daschinsky >> Date: чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:02 >> Subject: Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion >> To: Alexey Goncharuk >> >> >> Alexey, let's arise another question. Specifically, how nodes initially >> find each other (discovery) and how they detect failures. >> >> I suppose, that gossip protocol is an ideal candidate. For example, >> consul [1] uses this approach, using serf [2] library to discover members >> of cluster. >> Then consul forms raft ensemble (server nodes) and client use raft >> ensemble only as lock service. >> >> PacificA suggests internal heartbeats mechanism for failure detection of >> replicated group, but it says nothing about initial discovery of nodes. >> >> WDYT? >> >> [1] -- https://www.consul.io/docs/architecture/gossip >> [2] -- https://www.serf.io/ >> >> чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 12:46, Alexey Goncharuk < >> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>: >> >>> Following up the Ignite 3.0 scope/development approach threads, this is >>> a separate thread to discuss technical aspects of the IEP. >>> >>> Let's reiterate one more time on the questions raised by Ivan and also >>> see if there are any other thoughts on the IEP: >>> >>>- *Whether to deploy metastorage on a separate subset of the nodes >>>or allow Ignite to choose these nodes automatically.* I think it is >>>feasible to maintain both modes: by default, Ignite will choose >>>metastorage nodes automatically which essentially will provide the same >>>seamless user experience as TCP discovery SPI - no separate roles, >>>simplistic deployment. For deployments where people want to have more >>>fine-grained control over the nodes' assignments, we will provide a >>> runtime >>>configuration which will allow pinning metastorage group to certain >>> nodes, >>>thus eliminating the latency concerns. >>>- *Whether there are any TLA+ specs for the PacificA protocol.* Not >>>to my knowledge, but it is known to be used in production by Microsoft >>> and >>>other projects, e.g. [1] >>> >>> I would like to collect general feedback on the IEP, as well as feedback >>> on specific parts of it, such as: >>> >>>- Metastorage API >>>- Any existing library that can be used to avoid re-implementing the >>>protocol ourselves? Perhaps, porting the existing implementation to Java >>>(the way TiKV did with etcd-raft [2] [3]? This is a very neat way btw in >>> my >>>opinion because I like the finite automata-like approach of the >>> replication >>>module, and, additionally, we could sync bug fixes and improvements from >>>the upstream project) >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> --AG >>> >>> [1] >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INCUBATOR/PegasusProposal >>> [2] https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/raft >>> [3] https://github.com/tikv/raft-rs >>> >> >> >> -- >> Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy >> >> >> -- >> Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy >> > > > -- > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion
I'd suggest to discuss this IEP and technical details in open ZOOM meeting. чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:47, Ivan Daschinsky : > > > -- Forwarded message - > От: Ivan Daschinsky > Date: чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:02 > Subject: Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion > To: Alexey Goncharuk > > > Alexey, let's arise another question. Specifically, how nodes initially > find each other (discovery) and how they detect failures. > > I suppose, that gossip protocol is an ideal candidate. For example, consul > [1] uses this approach, using serf [2] library to discover members of > cluster. > Then consul forms raft ensemble (server nodes) and client use raft > ensemble only as lock service. > > PacificA suggests internal heartbeats mechanism for failure detection of > replicated group, but it says nothing about initial discovery of nodes. > > WDYT? > > [1] -- https://www.consul.io/docs/architecture/gossip > [2] -- https://www.serf.io/ > > чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 12:46, Alexey Goncharuk >: > >> Following up the Ignite 3.0 scope/development approach threads, this is a >> separate thread to discuss technical aspects of the IEP. >> >> Let's reiterate one more time on the questions raised by Ivan and also >> see if there are any other thoughts on the IEP: >> >>- *Whether to deploy metastorage on a separate subset of the nodes or >>allow Ignite to choose these nodes automatically.* I think it is >>feasible to maintain both modes: by default, Ignite will choose >>metastorage nodes automatically which essentially will provide the same >>seamless user experience as TCP discovery SPI - no separate roles, >>simplistic deployment. For deployments where people want to have more >>fine-grained control over the nodes' assignments, we will provide a >> runtime >>configuration which will allow pinning metastorage group to certain nodes, >>thus eliminating the latency concerns. >>- *Whether there are any TLA+ specs for the PacificA protocol.* Not >>to my knowledge, but it is known to be used in production by Microsoft and >>other projects, e.g. [1] >> >> I would like to collect general feedback on the IEP, as well as feedback >> on specific parts of it, such as: >> >>- Metastorage API >>- Any existing library that can be used to avoid re-implementing the >>protocol ourselves? Perhaps, porting the existing implementation to Java >>(the way TiKV did with etcd-raft [2] [3]? This is a very neat way btw in >> my >>opinion because I like the finite automata-like approach of the >> replication >>module, and, additionally, we could sync bug fixes and improvements from >>the upstream project) >> >> >> Thanks, >> --AG >> >> [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INCUBATOR/PegasusProposal >> [2] https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/raft >> [3] https://github.com/tikv/raft-rs >> > > > -- > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > > > -- > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
Fwd: IEP-61 Technical discussion
-- Forwarded message - От: Ivan Daschinsky Date: чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:02 Subject: Re: IEP-61 Technical discussion To: Alexey Goncharuk Alexey, let's arise another question. Specifically, how nodes initially find each other (discovery) and how they detect failures. I suppose, that gossip protocol is an ideal candidate. For example, consul [1] uses this approach, using serf [2] library to discover members of cluster. Then consul forms raft ensemble (server nodes) and client use raft ensemble only as lock service. PacificA suggests internal heartbeats mechanism for failure detection of replicated group, but it says nothing about initial discovery of nodes. WDYT? [1] -- https://www.consul.io/docs/architecture/gossip [2] -- https://www.serf.io/ чт, 19 нояб. 2020 г. в 12:46, Alexey Goncharuk : > Following up the Ignite 3.0 scope/development approach threads, this is a > separate thread to discuss technical aspects of the IEP. > > Let's reiterate one more time on the questions raised by Ivan and also see > if there are any other thoughts on the IEP: > >- *Whether to deploy metastorage on a separate subset of the nodes or >allow Ignite to choose these nodes automatically.* I think it is >feasible to maintain both modes: by default, Ignite will choose >metastorage nodes automatically which essentially will provide the same >seamless user experience as TCP discovery SPI - no separate roles, >simplistic deployment. For deployments where people want to have more >fine-grained control over the nodes' assignments, we will provide a runtime >configuration which will allow pinning metastorage group to certain nodes, >thus eliminating the latency concerns. >- *Whether there are any TLA+ specs for the PacificA protocol.* Not to >my knowledge, but it is known to be used in production by Microsoft and >other projects, e.g. [1] > > I would like to collect general feedback on the IEP, as well as feedback > on specific parts of it, such as: > >- Metastorage API >- Any existing library that can be used to avoid re-implementing the >protocol ourselves? Perhaps, porting the existing implementation to Java >(the way TiKV did with etcd-raft [2] [3]? This is a very neat way btw in my >opinion because I like the finite automata-like approach of the replication >module, and, additionally, we could sync bug fixes and improvements from >the upstream project) > > > Thanks, > --AG > > [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INCUBATOR/PegasusProposal > [2] https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/raft > [3] https://github.com/tikv/raft-rs > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
IEP-61 Technical discussion
Following up the Ignite 3.0 scope/development approach threads, this is a separate thread to discuss technical aspects of the IEP. Let's reiterate one more time on the questions raised by Ivan and also see if there are any other thoughts on the IEP: - *Whether to deploy metastorage on a separate subset of the nodes or allow Ignite to choose these nodes automatically.* I think it is feasible to maintain both modes: by default, Ignite will choose metastorage nodes automatically which essentially will provide the same seamless user experience as TCP discovery SPI - no separate roles, simplistic deployment. For deployments where people want to have more fine-grained control over the nodes' assignments, we will provide a runtime configuration which will allow pinning metastorage group to certain nodes, thus eliminating the latency concerns. - *Whether there are any TLA+ specs for the PacificA protocol.* Not to my knowledge, but it is known to be used in production by Microsoft and other projects, e.g. [1] I would like to collect general feedback on the IEP, as well as feedback on specific parts of it, such as: - Metastorage API - Any existing library that can be used to avoid re-implementing the protocol ourselves? Perhaps, porting the existing implementation to Java (the way TiKV did with etcd-raft [2] [3]? This is a very neat way btw in my opinion because I like the finite automata-like approach of the replication module, and, additionally, we could sync bug fixes and improvements from the upstream project) Thanks, --AG [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INCUBATOR/PegasusProposal [2] https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/raft [3] https://github.com/tikv/raft-rs
