Re: rgw multisite: revisiting the design of 'async notifications'

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 22/03/2022, Matt Benjamin wrote:
> Just to be clear, why do we think it doesn't serve as an optimization?

My thought being, if we're already saturated with syncing stuff,
adding more work on top of it won't help anything.

> OTOH, as Yehuda points out, the intended purpose of the async
> notifies was to implement polling avoidance--to provide wake-ups to
> sync endpoints that might otherwise sleep/idle as replication events
> accumulate.  This is a well established design pattern, and if we
> remember that the async notifies are duplicating hints, it seems to
> make sense.

Measuring to see how consequential this is would be legitimate.

I can imagine a world where if the primary has an idea what the
secondary's polling period is, and there hasn't been much sync
activity and the primary knows the secondary won't poll for a while,
it might be worthwhile to send a single wakeup event when there's new
data available telling it that there's new stuff in the data log.

Whether this is worthwhile would depend heavily on how frequently the
secondary polls the data log in the first place.

_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list -- dev@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave@xxxxxxx



[Index of Archives]     [CEPH Users]     [Ceph Devel]     [Ceph Large]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux BTRFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux