Skip to content

[CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1 - #2480

Closed
SteNicholas wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
SteNicholas:CELEBORN-1400
Closed

[CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1#2480
SteNicholas wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
SteNicholas:CELEBORN-1400

Conversation

@SteNicholas

@SteNicholasSteNicholas commented Apr 24, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1. Address incompatible changes:

Why are the changes needed?

Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1. Ratis has released v3.0.0, v3.0.1, which release note refers to 3.0.0, 3.0.1. The 3.0.x version include new features like pluggable metrics and lease read, etc, some improvements and bugfixes including:

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

No.

How was this patch tested?

Cluster manual test.

@SteNicholas
SteNicholasforce-pushed the CELEBORN-1400 branch 5 times, most recently from 4ac7ef8 to b9e92b9CompareApril 24, 2024 18:53
@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Ping @FMX, @szetszwo, @pan3793, @cxzl25.

@szetszwoszetszwo left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The change looks good. (Note that I am not familiar with CELEBORN.)

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@szetszwo, thanks for your review. cc @FMX.

@pan3793

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

does it allow rolling upgrades? should we upgrade followers or the leader first or something else?

@SteNicholas

SteNicholas commented Apr 25, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@pan3793, the rolling upgrade strategy should be:

  1. Try to upgrade a non-leader master node first.
  2. Follow the strategy of upgrading a single worker node - multiple worker nodes - all upgrades.

cc @RexXiong.

@FMX

FMX commented Apr 25, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@SteNicholas Hi, I wonder if this PR affects the rolling upgrade process. Can ratis 3.0.1 servers communicate with ratis 2.5.1 servers?
Can a server of ratis 3.0.1 recover from meta data generated by the ratis 2.5.1 server?

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@FMX, I didn't test the rolling upgrade process in cluster. I would like to try rolling upgrade for validation of above question.

@AngersZhuuuu

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

We meet same issue as https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RATIS-1860, better to upgrade ratis

@SteNicholas

SteNicholas commented May 28, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@FMX, @pan3793, @AngersZhuuuu, I have tested the rolling upgrade process in test environment as follows:
image
The result of rolling upgrade is that there is no compatibility problem between the communication of 2.5.1 ratis server and 3.0.1 ratis server.
image
Meanwhile, I have run a test application successfully based on the above situation of master:
image
PTAL.

@SteNicholas
SteNicholas requested a review from RexXiongMay 28, 2024 12:52

@RexXiongRexXiong left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @SteNicholas, LGTM overall. I am just wondering what the write buffer size we should set, and what is the reason?

@AngersZhuuuuAngersZhuuuu left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@RexXiongRexXiong left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thanks!

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Ping @pan3793, @FMX. PTAL.

@RexXiong

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Merge to main(v0.5.0)

Sign up for freeto 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.

6 participants

@SteNicholas@pan3793@FMX@AngersZhuuuu@RexXiong@szetszwo
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Add copy buttons to all
 blocks
(function() {
function addCopyButtons() {
document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {
if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;
codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');
var btn = document.createElement('button');
btn.textContent = 'Copy';
btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';
btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };
btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };
btn.onclick = function() {
navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {
btn.textContent = 'Copied!';
setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);
});
};
codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';
codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);
});
}
addCopyButtons();
// Re-run on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
[CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1 by SteNicholas · Pull Request #2480 · apache/celeborn · GitHub
Skip to content

[CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1 - #2480

Closed
SteNicholas wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
SteNicholas:CELEBORN-1400
Closed

[CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1#2480
SteNicholas wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
SteNicholas:CELEBORN-1400

Conversation

@SteNicholas

@SteNicholasSteNicholas commented Apr 24, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1. Address incompatible changes:

Why are the changes needed?

Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1. Ratis has released v3.0.0, v3.0.1, which release note refers to 3.0.0, 3.0.1. The 3.0.x version include new features like pluggable metrics and lease read, etc, some improvements and bugfixes including:

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

No.

How was this patch tested?

Cluster manual test.

@SteNicholas
SteNicholasforce-pushed the CELEBORN-1400 branch 5 times, most recently from 4ac7ef8 to b9e92b9CompareApril 24, 2024 18:53
@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Ping @FMX, @szetszwo, @pan3793, @cxzl25.

@szetszwoszetszwo left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The change looks good. (Note that I am not familiar with CELEBORN.)

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@szetszwo, thanks for your review. cc @FMX.

@pan3793

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

does it allow rolling upgrades? should we upgrade followers or the leader first or something else?

@SteNicholas

SteNicholas commented Apr 25, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@pan3793, the rolling upgrade strategy should be:

  1. Try to upgrade a non-leader master node first.
  2. Follow the strategy of upgrading a single worker node - multiple worker nodes - all upgrades.

cc @RexXiong.

@FMX

FMX commented Apr 25, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@SteNicholas Hi, I wonder if this PR affects the rolling upgrade process. Can ratis 3.0.1 servers communicate with ratis 2.5.1 servers?
Can a server of ratis 3.0.1 recover from meta data generated by the ratis 2.5.1 server?

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@FMX, I didn't test the rolling upgrade process in cluster. I would like to try rolling upgrade for validation of above question.

@AngersZhuuuu

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

We meet same issue as https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RATIS-1860, better to upgrade ratis

@SteNicholas

SteNicholas commented May 28, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@FMX, @pan3793, @AngersZhuuuu, I have tested the rolling upgrade process in test environment as follows:
image
The result of rolling upgrade is that there is no compatibility problem between the communication of 2.5.1 ratis server and 3.0.1 ratis server.
image
Meanwhile, I have run a test application successfully based on the above situation of master:
image
PTAL.

@SteNicholas
SteNicholas requested a review from RexXiongMay 28, 2024 12:52

@RexXiongRexXiong left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @SteNicholas, LGTM overall. I am just wondering what the write buffer size we should set, and what is the reason?

@AngersZhuuuuAngersZhuuuu left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@RexXiongRexXiong left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thanks!

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Ping @pan3793, @FMX. PTAL.

@RexXiong

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Merge to main(v0.5.0)

Sign up for freeto 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.

6 participants

@SteNicholas@pan3793@FMX@AngersZhuuuu@RexXiong@szetszwo
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Force GitHub README to respect dark mode (function() { var style = document.createElement('style'); style.textContent = ' .markdown-body { color-scheme: dark light; } .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; } .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; } .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; } .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; } .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; } .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; } '; document.head.appendChild(style); })(); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + ' [CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1 by SteNicholas · Pull Request #2480 · apache/celeborn · GitHub
Skip to content

[CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1 - #2480

Closed
SteNicholas wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
SteNicholas:CELEBORN-1400
Closed

[CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1#2480
SteNicholas wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
SteNicholas:CELEBORN-1400

Conversation

@SteNicholas

@SteNicholasSteNicholas commented Apr 24, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1. Address incompatible changes:

Why are the changes needed?

Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1. Ratis has released v3.0.0, v3.0.1, which release note refers to 3.0.0, 3.0.1. The 3.0.x version include new features like pluggable metrics and lease read, etc, some improvements and bugfixes including:

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

No.

How was this patch tested?

Cluster manual test.

@SteNicholas
SteNicholasforce-pushed the CELEBORN-1400 branch 5 times, most recently from 4ac7ef8 to b9e92b9CompareApril 24, 2024 18:53
@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Ping @FMX, @szetszwo, @pan3793, @cxzl25.

@szetszwoszetszwo left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The change looks good. (Note that I am not familiar with CELEBORN.)

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@szetszwo, thanks for your review. cc @FMX.

@pan3793

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

does it allow rolling upgrades? should we upgrade followers or the leader first or something else?

@SteNicholas

SteNicholas commented Apr 25, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@pan3793, the rolling upgrade strategy should be:

  1. Try to upgrade a non-leader master node first.
  2. Follow the strategy of upgrading a single worker node - multiple worker nodes - all upgrades.

cc @RexXiong.

@FMX

FMX commented Apr 25, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@SteNicholas Hi, I wonder if this PR affects the rolling upgrade process. Can ratis 3.0.1 servers communicate with ratis 2.5.1 servers?
Can a server of ratis 3.0.1 recover from meta data generated by the ratis 2.5.1 server?

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@FMX, I didn't test the rolling upgrade process in cluster. I would like to try rolling upgrade for validation of above question.

@AngersZhuuuu

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

We meet same issue as https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RATIS-1860, better to upgrade ratis

@SteNicholas

SteNicholas commented May 28, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@FMX, @pan3793, @AngersZhuuuu, I have tested the rolling upgrade process in test environment as follows:
image
The result of rolling upgrade is that there is no compatibility problem between the communication of 2.5.1 ratis server and 3.0.1 ratis server.
image
Meanwhile, I have run a test application successfully based on the above situation of master:
image
PTAL.

@SteNicholas
SteNicholas requested a review from RexXiongMay 28, 2024 12:52

@RexXiongRexXiong left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @SteNicholas, LGTM overall. I am just wondering what the write buffer size we should set, and what is the reason?

@AngersZhuuuuAngersZhuuuu left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@RexXiongRexXiong left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thanks!

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Ping @pan3793, @FMX. PTAL.

@RexXiong

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Merge to main(v0.5.0)

Sign up for freeto 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.

6 participants

@SteNicholas@pan3793@FMX@AngersZhuuuu@RexXiong@szetszwo
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer (function() { var ref = document.referrer; var terms = []; if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) { var url = new URL(ref); var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p'); if (q) { terms = q.split(/\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; }); } } if (terms.length === 0) return; var style = document.createElement('style'); style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }'; document.head.appendChild(style); function highlight(node) { if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node var text = node.textContent; var found = false; terms.forEach(function(term) { var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\]\\]/g, '\\') + ')', 'gi'); if (regex.test(text)) { found = true; var frag = document.createDocumentFragment(); var parts = text.split(regex); parts.forEach(function(part, i) { if (i % 2 === 0) { frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part)); } else { var span = document.createElement('span'); span.className = 'userscript-highlight'; span.textContent = part; frag.appendChild(span); } }); node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node); } }); } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT']; if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) { Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight); } } } highlight(document.body); // Re-highlight on dynamic content var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) { mutations.forEach(function(m) { m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) { if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node); }); }); }); observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true }); })(); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + ' [CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1 by SteNicholas · Pull Request #2480 · apache/celeborn · GitHub
Skip to content

[CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1 - #2480

Closed
SteNicholas wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
SteNicholas:CELEBORN-1400
Closed

[CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1#2480
SteNicholas wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
SteNicholas:CELEBORN-1400

Conversation

@SteNicholas

@SteNicholasSteNicholas commented Apr 24, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1. Address incompatible changes:

Why are the changes needed?

Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1. Ratis has released v3.0.0, v3.0.1, which release note refers to 3.0.0, 3.0.1. The 3.0.x version include new features like pluggable metrics and lease read, etc, some improvements and bugfixes including:

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

No.

How was this patch tested?

Cluster manual test.

@SteNicholas
SteNicholasforce-pushed the CELEBORN-1400 branch 5 times, most recently from 4ac7ef8 to b9e92b9CompareApril 24, 2024 18:53
@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Ping @FMX, @szetszwo, @pan3793, @cxzl25.

@szetszwoszetszwo left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The change looks good. (Note that I am not familiar with CELEBORN.)

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@szetszwo, thanks for your review. cc @FMX.

@pan3793

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

does it allow rolling upgrades? should we upgrade followers or the leader first or something else?

@SteNicholas

SteNicholas commented Apr 25, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@pan3793, the rolling upgrade strategy should be:

  1. Try to upgrade a non-leader master node first.
  2. Follow the strategy of upgrading a single worker node - multiple worker nodes - all upgrades.

cc @RexXiong.

@FMX

FMX commented Apr 25, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@SteNicholas Hi, I wonder if this PR affects the rolling upgrade process. Can ratis 3.0.1 servers communicate with ratis 2.5.1 servers?
Can a server of ratis 3.0.1 recover from meta data generated by the ratis 2.5.1 server?

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@FMX, I didn't test the rolling upgrade process in cluster. I would like to try rolling upgrade for validation of above question.

@AngersZhuuuu

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

We meet same issue as https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RATIS-1860, better to upgrade ratis

@SteNicholas

SteNicholas commented May 28, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@FMX, @pan3793, @AngersZhuuuu, I have tested the rolling upgrade process in test environment as follows:
image
The result of rolling upgrade is that there is no compatibility problem between the communication of 2.5.1 ratis server and 3.0.1 ratis server.
image
Meanwhile, I have run a test application successfully based on the above situation of master:
image
PTAL.

@SteNicholas
SteNicholas requested a review from RexXiongMay 28, 2024 12:52

@RexXiongRexXiong left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @SteNicholas, LGTM overall. I am just wondering what the write buffer size we should set, and what is the reason?

@AngersZhuuuuAngersZhuuuu left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@RexXiongRexXiong left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thanks!

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Ping @pan3793, @FMX. PTAL.

@RexXiong

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Merge to main(v0.5.0)

Sign up for freeto 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.

6 participants

@SteNicholas@pan3793@FMX@AngersZhuuuu@RexXiong@szetszwo
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page (function() { var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content', 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid', 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign']; function cleanUrl(url) { try { var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin); var changed = false; trackingParams.forEach(function(p) { if (u.searchParams.has(p)) { u.searchParams.delete(p); changed = true; } }); return changed ? u.toString() : url; } catch (e) { return url; } } function cleanLinks() { document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) { var clean = cleanUrl(a.href); if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean; }); } cleanLinks(); var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) { mutations.forEach(function(m) { m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) { if (node.nodeType === 1) { if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks(); node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) { var clean = cleanUrl(a.href); if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean; }); } }); }); }); observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true }); })(); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "youtube.com"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + ' [CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1 by SteNicholas · Pull Request #2480 · apache/celeborn · GitHub
Skip to content

[CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1 - #2480

Closed
SteNicholas wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
SteNicholas:CELEBORN-1400
Closed

[CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1#2480
SteNicholas wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
SteNicholas:CELEBORN-1400

Conversation

@SteNicholas

@SteNicholasSteNicholas commented Apr 24, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1. Address incompatible changes:

Why are the changes needed?

Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1. Ratis has released v3.0.0, v3.0.1, which release note refers to 3.0.0, 3.0.1. The 3.0.x version include new features like pluggable metrics and lease read, etc, some improvements and bugfixes including:

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

No.

How was this patch tested?

Cluster manual test.

@SteNicholas
SteNicholasforce-pushed the CELEBORN-1400 branch 5 times, most recently from 4ac7ef8 to b9e92b9CompareApril 24, 2024 18:53
@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Ping @FMX, @szetszwo, @pan3793, @cxzl25.

@szetszwoszetszwo left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The change looks good. (Note that I am not familiar with CELEBORN.)

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@szetszwo, thanks for your review. cc @FMX.

@pan3793

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

does it allow rolling upgrades? should we upgrade followers or the leader first or something else?

@SteNicholas

SteNicholas commented Apr 25, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@pan3793, the rolling upgrade strategy should be:

  1. Try to upgrade a non-leader master node first.
  2. Follow the strategy of upgrading a single worker node - multiple worker nodes - all upgrades.

cc @RexXiong.

@FMX

FMX commented Apr 25, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@SteNicholas Hi, I wonder if this PR affects the rolling upgrade process. Can ratis 3.0.1 servers communicate with ratis 2.5.1 servers?
Can a server of ratis 3.0.1 recover from meta data generated by the ratis 2.5.1 server?

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@FMX, I didn't test the rolling upgrade process in cluster. I would like to try rolling upgrade for validation of above question.

@AngersZhuuuu

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

We meet same issue as https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RATIS-1860, better to upgrade ratis

@SteNicholas

SteNicholas commented May 28, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@FMX, @pan3793, @AngersZhuuuu, I have tested the rolling upgrade process in test environment as follows:
image
The result of rolling upgrade is that there is no compatibility problem between the communication of 2.5.1 ratis server and 3.0.1 ratis server.
image
Meanwhile, I have run a test application successfully based on the above situation of master:
image
PTAL.

@SteNicholas
SteNicholas requested a review from RexXiongMay 28, 2024 12:52

@RexXiongRexXiong left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @SteNicholas, LGTM overall. I am just wondering what the write buffer size we should set, and what is the reason?

@AngersZhuuuuAngersZhuuuu left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@RexXiongRexXiong left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thanks!

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Ping @pan3793, @FMX. PTAL.

@RexXiong

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Merge to main(v0.5.0)

Sign up for freeto 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.

6 participants

@SteNicholas@pan3793@FMX@AngersZhuuuu@RexXiong@szetszwo
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube (function() { function tryTheater() { var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label="Theater mode"], ytd-player #player button[title="Theater mode"]'); if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) { btn.click(); } } // Try immediately tryTheater(); // Try after navigation (SPA) var lastUrl = location.href; setInterval(function() { if (location.href !== lastUrl) { lastUrl = location.href; setTimeout(tryTheater, 500); } }, 1000); // Also try on player load var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater); observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true }); })(); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + ' [CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1 by SteNicholas · Pull Request #2480 · apache/celeborn · GitHub
Skip to content

[CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1 - #2480

Closed
SteNicholas wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
SteNicholas:CELEBORN-1400
Closed

[CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1#2480
SteNicholas wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
SteNicholas:CELEBORN-1400

Conversation

@SteNicholas

@SteNicholasSteNicholas commented Apr 24, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1. Address incompatible changes:

Why are the changes needed?

Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1. Ratis has released v3.0.0, v3.0.1, which release note refers to 3.0.0, 3.0.1. The 3.0.x version include new features like pluggable metrics and lease read, etc, some improvements and bugfixes including:

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

No.

How was this patch tested?

Cluster manual test.

@SteNicholas
SteNicholasforce-pushed the CELEBORN-1400 branch 5 times, most recently from 4ac7ef8 to b9e92b9CompareApril 24, 2024 18:53
@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Ping @FMX, @szetszwo, @pan3793, @cxzl25.

@szetszwoszetszwo left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The change looks good. (Note that I am not familiar with CELEBORN.)

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@szetszwo, thanks for your review. cc @FMX.

@pan3793

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

does it allow rolling upgrades? should we upgrade followers or the leader first or something else?

@SteNicholas

SteNicholas commented Apr 25, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@pan3793, the rolling upgrade strategy should be:

  1. Try to upgrade a non-leader master node first.
  2. Follow the strategy of upgrading a single worker node - multiple worker nodes - all upgrades.

cc @RexXiong.

@FMX

FMX commented Apr 25, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@SteNicholas Hi, I wonder if this PR affects the rolling upgrade process. Can ratis 3.0.1 servers communicate with ratis 2.5.1 servers?
Can a server of ratis 3.0.1 recover from meta data generated by the ratis 2.5.1 server?

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@FMX, I didn't test the rolling upgrade process in cluster. I would like to try rolling upgrade for validation of above question.

@AngersZhuuuu

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

We meet same issue as https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RATIS-1860, better to upgrade ratis

@SteNicholas

SteNicholas commented May 28, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@FMX, @pan3793, @AngersZhuuuu, I have tested the rolling upgrade process in test environment as follows:
image
The result of rolling upgrade is that there is no compatibility problem between the communication of 2.5.1 ratis server and 3.0.1 ratis server.
image
Meanwhile, I have run a test application successfully based on the above situation of master:
image
PTAL.

@SteNicholas
SteNicholas requested a review from RexXiongMay 28, 2024 12:52

@RexXiongRexXiong left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @SteNicholas, LGTM overall. I am just wondering what the write buffer size we should set, and what is the reason?

@AngersZhuuuuAngersZhuuuu left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@RexXiongRexXiong left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thanks!

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Ping @pan3793, @FMX. PTAL.

@RexXiong

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Merge to main(v0.5.0)

Sign up for freeto 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.

6 participants

@SteNicholas@pan3793@FMX@AngersZhuuuu@RexXiong@szetszwo
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content (function() { function unstick() { document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role="banner"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*="position: fixed"], [style*="position:sticky"]').forEach(function(el) { if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') { el.style.position = 'static'; el.style.top = 'auto'; el.style.zIndex = 'auto'; } }); } unstick(); var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick); observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] }); })(); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); } })(); })(); [CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1 by SteNicholas · Pull Request #2480 · apache/celeborn · GitHub
Skip to content

[CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1 - #2480

Closed
SteNicholas wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
SteNicholas:CELEBORN-1400
Closed

[CELEBORN-1400] Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1#2480
SteNicholas wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
SteNicholas:CELEBORN-1400

Conversation

@SteNicholas

@SteNicholasSteNicholas commented Apr 24, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1. Address incompatible changes:

Why are the changes needed?

Bump Ratis version from 2.5.1 to 3.0.1. Ratis has released v3.0.0, v3.0.1, which release note refers to 3.0.0, 3.0.1. The 3.0.x version include new features like pluggable metrics and lease read, etc, some improvements and bugfixes including:

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

No.

How was this patch tested?

Cluster manual test.

@SteNicholas
SteNicholasforce-pushed the CELEBORN-1400 branch 5 times, most recently from 4ac7ef8 to b9e92b9CompareApril 24, 2024 18:53
@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Ping @FMX, @szetszwo, @pan3793, @cxzl25.

@szetszwoszetszwo left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The change looks good. (Note that I am not familiar with CELEBORN.)

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@szetszwo, thanks for your review. cc @FMX.

@pan3793

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

does it allow rolling upgrades? should we upgrade followers or the leader first or something else?

@SteNicholas

SteNicholas commented Apr 25, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@pan3793, the rolling upgrade strategy should be:

  1. Try to upgrade a non-leader master node first.
  2. Follow the strategy of upgrading a single worker node - multiple worker nodes - all upgrades.

cc @RexXiong.

@FMX

FMX commented Apr 25, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@SteNicholas Hi, I wonder if this PR affects the rolling upgrade process. Can ratis 3.0.1 servers communicate with ratis 2.5.1 servers?
Can a server of ratis 3.0.1 recover from meta data generated by the ratis 2.5.1 server?

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@FMX, I didn't test the rolling upgrade process in cluster. I would like to try rolling upgrade for validation of above question.

@AngersZhuuuu

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

We meet same issue as https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RATIS-1860, better to upgrade ratis

@SteNicholas

SteNicholas commented May 28, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@FMX, @pan3793, @AngersZhuuuu, I have tested the rolling upgrade process in test environment as follows:
image
The result of rolling upgrade is that there is no compatibility problem between the communication of 2.5.1 ratis server and 3.0.1 ratis server.
image
Meanwhile, I have run a test application successfully based on the above situation of master:
image
PTAL.

@SteNicholas
SteNicholas requested a review from RexXiongMay 28, 2024 12:52

@RexXiongRexXiong left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @SteNicholas, LGTM overall. I am just wondering what the write buffer size we should set, and what is the reason?

@AngersZhuuuuAngersZhuuuu left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@RexXiongRexXiong left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thanks!

@SteNicholas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Ping @pan3793, @FMX. PTAL.

@RexXiong

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Merge to main(v0.5.0)

Sign up for freeto 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.

6 participants

@SteNicholas@pan3793@FMX@AngersZhuuuu@RexXiong@szetszwo