mauricebarnum commented on pull request #2686:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/2686#issuecomment-1068539002
The motivation to call `compactRange` was to quickly drop all of the rocksdb
entries in a range when deleting a bunch of ledgers in GC so that seeking
wouldn't run
dlg99 commented on pull request #3103:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3103#issuecomment-1068564975
@hangc0276 @merlimat please take a look
--
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
dlg99 commented on pull request #3097:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3097#issuecomment-1068563406
@Shoothzj merged
--
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
dlg99 merged pull request #3097:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3097
--
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:
dlg99 merged pull request #3101:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3101
--
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:
hangc0276 commented on pull request #2686:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/2686#issuecomment-1068631708
For this issue, IMO we'd better divide into two steps:
1. remove the compactRange logic in during checkpoint
2. Figure out smarter solution for deleted entry
hangc0276 commented on pull request #2932:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/2932#issuecomment-1068634837
@mauricebarnum Would you please send a proposal discuss into
d...@bookkeeper.apache.org mail list ?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To
Nicklee007 opened a new pull request #3113:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3113
Master Issue: #3112
### Motivation
Fix the failed pid occupied check. we'll fail when use bookkeeper-daemon.sh
start or stop bookie, after the last time we exit the bookie direct
Nicklee007 opened a new issue #3112:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/3112
**BUG REPORT**
***Describe the bug***
After bookie progress is killed or occur some non-normal exit，can't start
bookie by bin/bookkeeper-daemon.sh, because the last pid occupied by other
wuzhanpeng opened a new pull request #3111:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3111
Master issue: #3085
--
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
hangc0276 commented on a change in pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#discussion_r826620612
##
File path:
bookkeeper-server/src/main/java/org/apache/bookkeeper/client/PendingReadOp.java
##
@@ -563,6 +565,10 @@ public long
lhotari commented on pull request #3107:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3107#issuecomment-1067597235
rerun failure checks
--
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
congbobo184 commented on pull request #3106:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3106#issuecomment-1067609690
https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110 will fix it
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to
lhotari commented on pull request #3106:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3106#issuecomment-1067610773
> You could always have outstanding read responses after erroring out. But
even if that happens, what exactly the error/corruption that is visible to the
client?
codelipenghui commented on a change in pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#discussion_r826617880
##
File path:
bookkeeper-server/src/main/java/org/apache/bookkeeper/client/PendingReadOp.java
##
@@ -563,6 +565,10 @@ public long
lhotari commented on pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#issuecomment-1067608248
Thanks @congbobo184 for making this PR.
I'm just wondering that `close` should get called once as a result of the
guard by
eolivelli closed pull request #3106:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3106
--
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:
eolivelli commented on pull request #3106:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3106#issuecomment-1067627998
Closing for now
--
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
eolivelli merged pull request #3082:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3082
--
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:
congbobo184 commented on pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#issuecomment-1067719275
rerun failure checks
--
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
hangc0276 commented on a change in pull request #2932:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/2932#discussion_r826749675
##
File path:
bookkeeper-slogger/slf4j/src/main/java/org/apache/bookkeeper/slogger/slf4j/Slf4jSlogger.java
##
@@ -0,0 +1,108 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to
hangc0276 commented on pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#issuecomment-1067827283
> close
@lhotari
For example
1. there is a read request for ledger 1, entryId request range is [1, 100].
When entryId [1, 10] read requests has been sent
congbobo184 commented on pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#issuecomment-1067780207
rerun failure checks
--
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
lhotari edited a comment on pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#issuecomment-1067626623
> @lhotari The `if (!complete.compareAndSet(false, true)) {` in
PendingReadOp#submitCallback just change the complete flag in PendingReadOp
instance.
>
> But
eolivelli commented on issue #3085:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/3085#issuecomment-1067692477
next step is to start the discussion on dev@bookkeeper
it looks like a nice work ! well done (I have already taken a quick look to
the PR)
--
This is an automated
eolivelli merged pull request #3092:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3092
--
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:
hangc0276 commented on pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#issuecomment-1067634348
> Why isn't the `if (!complete.compareAndSet(false, true)) {` sufficient in
PendingReadOp#submitCallback?
@lhotari The `if (!complete.compareAndSet(false, true))
lhotari commented on pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#issuecomment-1067642520
> Change the `complete` flag in LedgerEntryRequest. They are different
instances.
yes, I have noticed that there's 2 separate `complete` fields:
eolivelli commented on pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#issuecomment-1067842791
@hangc0276
in your last explanation your are not citing that there is a read error.
My understanding is that this problem may happen only when there is a read
hangc0276 commented on pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#issuecomment-1067618955
> Thanks @congbobo184 for making this PR.
>
> I'm just wondering that `close` should get called once as a result of the
guard by
lhotari commented on pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#issuecomment-1067626623
> > Thanks @congbobo184 for making this PR.
> > I'm just wondering that `close` should get called once as a result of
the guard by
hangc0276 commented on pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#issuecomment-1067891759
> @hangc0276 in your last explanation your are not citing that there is a
read error. My understanding is that this problem may happen only when there is
a read error, in
hangc0276 edited a comment on pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#issuecomment-1067827283
> close
@lhotari
For example
1. there is a read request for ledger 1, entryId request range is [1, 100].
When entryId [1, 10] read requests has been
eolivelli commented on pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#issuecomment-1068005727
thank you @hangc0276 for your clarification.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and
lhotari commented on pull request #3107:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3107#issuecomment-1068055432
rerun failure checks
--
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
lhotari commented on a change in pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#discussion_r827065870
##
File path:
bookkeeper-server/src/main/java/org/apache/bookkeeper/client/PendingReadOp.java
##
@@ -110,6 +110,7 @@
@Override
eolivelli merged pull request #3107:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3107
--
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:
lhotari commented on pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#issuecomment-1068099040
Thanks for the explanation @hangc0276 . I now understood how the race
condition happens in
`org.apache.bookkeeper.client.PendingReadOp#readEntryComplete` method and it
lhotari commented on issue #3104:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/3104#issuecomment-1068108570
This will be fixed by #3110
--
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
lhotari edited a comment on pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#issuecomment-1068099040
Thanks for the explanation @hangc0276 . I now understood how the race
condition happens in
`org.apache.bookkeeper.client.PendingReadOp#readEntryComplete` method, and
lhotari commented on pull request #3107:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3107#issuecomment-1068164325
rerun failure checks
--
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
lhotari commented on pull request #1792:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1792#issuecomment-1068111747
#3104 turned out to be a clear state handling issue in PendingReadOp class
(and included embedded classes), fix is #3110
--
This is an automated message from the Apache
lhotari commented on pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#issuecomment-1068136249
I now see the reason why Congbo chose to implement it using
```java
public void close() {
complete.set(true);
entryImpl.close();
lhotari edited a comment on pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#issuecomment-1068136249
I now see the reason why Congbo chose to implement it using
```java
public void close() {
complete.set(true);
eolivelli commented on pull request #3110:
URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3110#issuecomment-1068364436
Just to clarify: I don't think that not recycling a object is a memory leak,
as the jvm will discard it, but we are losing the chanceto save a allocation.
BTW I
45 matches
Mail list logo
