Fix filesystem offload oom #6697
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
codelipenghui
approved these changes
Apr 9, 2020
Contributor
Author
|
/pulsarbot run-failure-checks |
sijie
approved these changes
Apr 9, 2020
Member
|
/pulsarbot run-failure-checks |
2 similar comments
Contributor
Author
|
/pulsarbot run-failure-checks |
Contributor
Author
|
/pulsarbot run-failure-checks |
Contributor
|
@congbobo184 thanks for your pull request. I have applied the modification. However, the OOM still occurs. |
Contributor
Author
I think you offload to hdfs is too slowly, and then you produce message is too fast. and then many ledger will offload int the same time. so we maybe should control the read-ahead number or the whole fileSystem offload task number |
pheecian
reviewed
Apr 11, 2020
Contributor
pheecian
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
close ledgerEntries at once or close ledger entry one by one is equivalent. this will make no difference for the memory consumption. the same idea(actually the same code modification) is tested by me already. It will not help. Anyway, it makes sense. But it helps not.
Contributor
|
quote from @congbobo184 "so we maybe should control the read-ahead number" this is what my PR want to do |
Member
|
Add label release/2.5.1 and remove label release/2.5.2 |
codelipenghui
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 22, 2020
Fixes #6692 ### Motivation avoid prefetch too much data when offloading, which may lead to OOM; fix object not close issue, which is also mentioned by congbobo184 #6697 *Explain here the context, and why you're making that change. What is the problem you're trying to solve.* ### Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts: *If `yes` was chosen, please highlight the changes* - Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): (no) - The public API: (no) - The schema: (no) - The default values of configurations: (no) - The wire protocol: (no) - The rest endpoints: (no) - The admin cli options: (no) - Anything that affects deployment: (no) ### Documentation - Does this pull request introduce a new feature? (no)
addisonj
pushed a commit
to instructure/pulsar
that referenced
this pull request
May 7, 2020
Fixes apache#6692 avoid prefetch too much data when offloading, which may lead to OOM; fix object not close issue, which is also mentioned by congbobo184 apache#6697 *Explain here the context, and why you're making that change. What is the problem you're trying to solve.* *If `yes` was chosen, please highlight the changes* - Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): (no) - The public API: (no) - The schema: (no) - The default values of configurations: (no) - The wire protocol: (no) - The rest endpoints: (no) - The admin cli options: (no) - Anything that affects deployment: (no) - Does this pull request introduce a new feature? (no)
jiazhai
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 8, 2020
Fixes #6692 ### Motivation avoid prefetch too much data when offloading, which may lead to OOM; fix object not close issue, which is also mentioned by congbobo184 #6697 *Explain here the context, and why you're making that change. What is the problem you're trying to solve.* ### Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts: *If `yes` was chosen, please highlight the changes* - Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): (no) - The public API: (no) - The schema: (no) - The default values of configurations: (no) - The wire protocol: (no) - The rest endpoints: (no) - The admin cli options: (no) - Anything that affects deployment: (no) ### Documentation - Does this pull request introduce a new feature? (no) (cherry picked from commit 514b6af)
huangdx0726
pushed a commit
to huangdx0726/pulsar
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 24, 2020
Fixes apache#6692 ### Motivation avoid prefetch too much data when offloading, which may lead to OOM; fix object not close issue, which is also mentioned by congbobo184 apache#6697 *Explain here the context, and why you're making that change. What is the problem you're trying to solve.* ### Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts: *If `yes` was chosen, please highlight the changes* - Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): (no) - The public API: (no) - The schema: (no) - The default values of configurations: (no) - The wire protocol: (no) - The rest endpoints: (no) - The admin cli options: (no) - Anything that affects deployment: (no) ### Documentation - Does this pull request introduce a new feature? (no)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
6 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Motivation
to fix filesystem offload oom #6692
Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:
If yes was chosen, please highlight the changes
Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): (no)
The public API: (no)
The schema: (no)
The default values of configurations: (no)
The wire protocol: (no)
The rest endpoints: (no)
The admin cli options: (no)
Anything that affects deployment: (no)
Documentation
Does this pull request introduce a new feature? (yes / no)
If yes, how is the feature documented? (not applicable / docs / JavaDocs / not documented)
If a feature is not applicable for documentation, explain why?
If a feature is not documented yet in this PR, please create a followup issue for adding the documentation