[SERVER-3279] User control over balancing collections Created: 16/Jun/11 Updated: 12/Jul/16 Resolved: 02/Apr/13 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | Core Server |
| Component/s: | Sharding |
| Affects Version/s: | 1.8.1 |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Improvement | Priority: | Major - P3 |
| Reporter: | hc | Assignee: | Unassigned |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 1 |
| Labels: | Balancing | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Environment: |
All |
||
| Participants: |
| Description |
|
Currently, there is no way a user can control whether a particular collection should be balanced, while others should not be. This way a user can say, collections which will possibly take less time to balance should balance first and then the others in ascending order of time taken for balancing. Or the other requirement can be that Collection A has higher priority over Collection B for balancing. There can be any number of reasons why there should be priority for balancing. Is it possible to add this feature? It may be minor but makes the server more controllable and gives more power to admins/users |
| Comments |
| Comment by Eliot Horowitz (Inactive) [ 02/Apr/13 ] |
|
this was added in 2.2 |
| Comment by Dwight Merriman [ 08/Feb/12 ] |
|
a goal is to minimize knobs; if it can be automatic, perhaps. also have to weight whether that makes more cases to QA, and if coverage does not expand appropriately, is there a reduction in test coverage. if collection A has 10 migrations queued and B has 5000, i agree ideally A's migrations are done sometime soon, not at the same time B's finish. |