[SERVER-44062] Add zone operations concurrency testing for refineCollectionShardKey Created: 17/Oct/19 Updated: 29/Oct/23 Resolved: 01/Nov/19 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | Core Server |
| Component/s: | Sharding |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | 4.3.1 |
| Type: | Task | Priority: | Major - P3 |
| Reporter: | Blake Oler | Assignee: | Blake Oler |
| Resolution: | Fixed | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Backwards Compatibility: | Fully Compatible |
| Sprint: | Sharding 2019-11-04 |
| Participants: |
| Description |
| Comments |
| Comment by Githook User [ 31/Oct/19 ] |
|
Author: {'username': 'BlakeIsBlake', 'email': 'blake.oler@mongodb.com', 'name': 'Blake Oler'}Message: |
| Comment by Blake Oler [ 18/Oct/19 ] |
|
It turns out we can't verify that the balancer has balanced zones correctly en masse at the moment, due to the lack of ability to see into the balancer's "quietness" or its verification that nodes are completely balanced with regards to zones. So we'll have to hold off on verifying zones are on the right shards until then. Refer to |
| Comment by Blake Oler [ 18/Oct/19 ] |
|
| Comment by Kaloian Manassiev [ 18/Oct/19 ] |
|
Will there be separate states to ensure that adding zones concurrently with refining the shard key ends up with all zones containing the correct number of fields? Or is it the intention that swapZoneRange will emulate that? The sendZoneToOtherShard operation is an addShardToZone/removeShardFromZone combo, right? If this is the case, why is it interesting that it is tested in combination with refining the shard key given that it doesn't change the bounds? Maybe it has something to do with the refine operation potentially changing more than just the zone boundaries and overwriting the shard. Otherwise LGTM. |
| Comment by Blake Oler [ 17/Oct/19 ] |
|
| Comment by Jack Mulrow [ 17/Oct/19 ] |
|
blake.oler, the approach LGTM. This should give us really useful coverage. A couple small notes:
|
| Comment by Blake Oler [ 17/Oct/19 ] |
|
jack.mulrow Wrote up a proposal for a workload for zone operations. Can I get an LGTM? |