Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

scheduling/watcher, storage: store rules into the unified storage #7205

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 16, 2023
Merged

scheduling/watcher, storage: store rules into the unified storage #7205

merged 2 commits into from
Oct 16, 2023

Conversation

JmPotato
Copy link
Member

@JmPotato JmPotato commented Oct 16, 2023 •
edited
Loading

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #7200, ref #5839.

What is changed and how does it work?

Store rules into the unified storage rather than the isolated implementation.

Check List

Tests

  • Unit test
  • Integration test

Release note

None.

@JmPotato
Store rules into the unified storage
5960e88 
Signed-off-by: JmPotato <ghzpotato@gmail.com>
@JmPotato JmPotato requested review from lhy1024 and rleungx October 16, 2023 03:37
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Contributor

ti-chi-bot bot commented Oct 16, 2023 •
edited
Loading

[REVIEW NOTIFICATION]

This pull request has been approved by:

  • lhy1024
  • rleungx

To complete the pull request process, please ask the reviewers in the list to review by filling /cc @reviewer in the comment.
After your PR has acquired the required number of LGTMs, you can assign this pull request to the committer in the list by filling /assign @committer in the comment to help you merge this pull request.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Reviewer can indicate their review by submitting an approval review.
Reviewer can cancel approval by submitting a request changes review.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Oct 16, 2023
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added the status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. label Oct 16, 2023
lhy1024
lhy1024 reviewed Oct 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
pkg/mcs/scheduling/server/server.go
@@ -479,7 +479,7 @@ func (s *Server) startWatcher() (err error) {
if err != nil {
return err
}
s.ruleWatcher, err = rule.NewWatcher(s.Context(), s.GetClient(), s.clusterID)
s.ruleWatcher, err = rule.NewWatcher(s.Context(), s.GetClient(), s.clusterID, s.storage)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

BTW, after the change of placement rules, we also need to call AddSuspectKeyRange, which is similar to /config/rule [post], /config/rule/{group}/{id} [delete], /config/rule_group [post], /config/rule_group/{id} [delete]

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I will implement this in a separate PR.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Implemented in #7213.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2. and removed status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. labels Oct 16, 2023
@JmPotato
Copy link
Member Author

/merge

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Contributor

ti-chi-bot bot commented Oct 16, 2023

@JmPotato: It seems you want to merge this PR, I will help you trigger all the tests:

/run-all-tests

You only need to trigger /merge once, and if the CI test fails, you just re-trigger the test that failed and the bot will merge the PR for you after the CI passes.

If you have any questions about the PR merge process, please refer to pr process.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the ti-community-infra/tichi repository.

@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Contributor

ti-chi-bot bot commented Oct 16, 2023

This pull request has been accepted and is ready to merge.

Commit hash: 5960e88

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added the status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. label Oct 16, 2023
@ti-chi-bot
Copy link
Contributor

ti-chi-bot bot commented Oct 16, 2023

@JmPotato: Your PR was out of date, I have automatically updated it for you.

If the CI test fails, you just re-trigger the test that failed and the bot will merge the PR for you after the CI passes.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the ti-community-infra/tichi repository.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot merged commit fa92039 into tikv:master Oct 16, 2023
@JmPotato JmPotato deleted the use_correct_storage branch October 16, 2023 09:54
@rleungx rleungx mentioned this pull request Oct 23, 2023
Closed
rleungx pushed a commit to rleungx/pd that referenced this pull request Dec 1, 2023
@JmPotato @ti-chi-bot @rleungx
scheduling/watcher, storage: store rules into the unified storage (ti…
31e3a23 
…kv#7205)

close tikv#7200

Store rules into the unified storage rather than the isolated implementation.

Signed-off-by: JmPotato <ghzpotato@gmail.com>

Co-authored-by: ti-chi-bot[bot] <108142056+ti-chi-bot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@lhy1024 lhy1024 lhy1024 approved these changes

@rleungx rleungx rleungx approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. status/can-merge Indicates a PR has been approved by a committer. status/LGT2 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 2.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

mcs: support placement rules in scheduling server
3 participants
@JmPotato @lhy1024 @rleungx