Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Replication lag improvement #652

Merged
merged 14 commits into from
May 10, 2024
Merged

Replication lag improvement #652

merged 14 commits into from
May 10, 2024

Conversation

spuun
Copy link
Member

@spuun spuun commented Apr 4, 2024

WHAT is this pull request doing?

Before this we only counted data written to the follower socket as lag, we didn't count the data in the "action queue" of the follower.

This will change so we count data written to the action queue.

HOW can this pull request be tested?

Run follower specs

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Apr 4, 2024

CLA Assistant Lite bot:
Thank you for your submission, we really appreciate it. Like many open-source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution. You can sign the CLA by just posting a Pull Request Comment same as the below format.


I have read the CLA Document and I hereby sign the CLA


You can retrigger this bot by commenting recheck in this Pull Request

@kickster97
Copy link
Member

hmm @dentarg, cla assistant skipped on my pr here, but not here...

@dentarg
Copy link
Member

dentarg commented Apr 5, 2024

@kickster97 Hmm, I wonder if skipping for COLLABORATOR too would help, reading https://stackoverflow.com/questions/63188674/github-actions-detect-author-association it sounds like it. I can experiment some.

@dentarg dentarg closed this Apr 5, 2024
@dentarg dentarg reopened this Apr 5, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Apr 5, 2024
@cloudamqp cloudamqp unlocked this conversation Apr 5, 2024
@dentarg
Copy link
Member

dentarg commented Apr 5, 2024

I think (hope) the CLA workflow behaves better now going forward. Closing/re-opening didn't really work as I expected, the workflow only ran on the close event: https://github.com/cloudamqp/lavinmq/actions/workflows/cla.yml?query=branch%3Areplication-lag-improvement – I unlocked this PR with the GitHub CLI and also created #654

@spuun
Copy link
Member Author

spuun commented Apr 8, 2024

This will also count all data that needs to be sent as lag, not only "message data" (i.e. it counts filename length etc too).

@spuun spuun marked this pull request as ready for review April 8, 2024 11:26
@spuun
Copy link
Member Author

spuun commented Apr 9, 2024

This will also count all data that needs to be sent as lag, not only "message data" (i.e. it counts filename length etc too).

Maybe it should be changed to only count message data.

@kickster97
Copy link
Member

This will also count all data that needs to be sent as lag, not only "message data" (i.e. it counts filename length etc too).

Maybe it should be changed to only count message data.

Is it not more accurate if we count all data? Why would we only want to count message data?

@spuun spuun force-pushed the replication-lag-improvement branch from e5aee74 to 8f30d5e Compare May 10, 2024 07:44
@spuun spuun merged commit 9232515 into main May 10, 2024
26 of 27 checks passed
@spuun spuun deleted the replication-lag-improvement branch May 10, 2024 09:13
viktorerlingsson pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 20, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants