You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commits@druid.apache.org by GitBox <gi...@apache.org> on 2022/09/19 17:12:38 UTC
[GitHub] [druid] 599166320 opened a new pull request, #13121: Add LoadDropByPeriod to improve retention rules
599166320 opened a new pull request, #13121:
URL: https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/13121
<!-- Thanks for trying to help us make Apache Druid be the best it can be! Please fill out as much of the following information as is possible (where relevant, and remove it when irrelevant) to help make the intention and scope of this PR clear in order to ease review. -->
<!-- Please read the doc for contribution (https://github.com/apache/druid/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md) before making this PR. Also, once you open a PR, please _avoid using force pushes and rebasing_ since these make it difficult for reviewers to see what you've changed in response to their reviews. See [the 'If your pull request shows conflicts with master' section](https://github.com/apache/druid/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#if-your-pull-request-shows-conflicts-with-master) for more details. -->
Fixes [#13080](https://github.com/apache/druid/issues/13080).
<!-- Replace XXXX with the id of the issue fixed in this PR. Remove this section if there is no corresponding issue. Don't reference the issue in the title of this pull-request. -->
<!-- If you are a committer, follow the PR action item checklist for committers:
https://github.com/apache/druid/blob/master/dev/committer-instructions.md#pr-and-issue-action-item-checklist-for-committers. -->
### Description
<!-- Describe the goal of this PR, what problem are you fixing. If there is a corresponding issue (referenced above), it's not necessary to repeat the description here, however, you may choose to keep one summary sentence. -->
<!-- Describe your patch: what did you change in code? How did you fix the problem? -->
<!-- If there are several relatively logically separate changes in this PR, create a mini-section for each of them. For example: -->
The existing retention rules cannot handle the following cases well:
Data upto 3 days old lives on default tiers
Data more than 3 days old and upto 7 days old lives only on cold tier
older data is dropped
This case can be handled by the following retention rules:
```
loadByPeriod P3D _defaultTier
loadByPeriod P7D cold
dropForever
```
This retention rule can improve the tier query at the router level, but default tier stores the data of the last 7 days, which will waste the storage of default tier.
By configuring the following retention rules, you can perfectly solve the problem of _defaultTier resource waste, without affecting the existing retention rules
```
loadDropByPeriod P3D _defaultTier
loadDropByPeriod P7D cold
dropForever
```
<!--
In each section, please describe design decisions made, including:
- Choice of algorithms
- Behavioral aspects. What configuration values are acceptable? How are corner cases and error conditions handled, such as when there are insufficient resources?
- Class organization and design (how the logic is split between classes, inheritance, composition, design patterns)
- Method organization and design (how the logic is split between methods, parameters and return types)
- Naming (class, method, API, configuration, HTTP endpoint, names of emitted metrics)
-->
<!-- It's good to describe an alternative design (or mention an alternative name) for every design (or naming) decision point and compare the alternatives with the designs that you've implemented (or the names you've chosen) to highlight the advantages of the chosen designs and names. -->
<!-- If there was a discussion of the design of the feature implemented in this PR elsewhere (e. g. a "Proposal" issue, any other issue, or a thread in the development mailing list), link to that discussion from this PR description and explain what have changed in your final design compared to your original proposal or the consensus version in the end of the discussion. If something hasn't changed since the original discussion, you can omit a detailed discussion of those aspects of the design here, perhaps apart from brief mentioning for the sake of readability of this PR description. -->
<!-- Some of the aspects mentioned above may be omitted for simple and small changes. -->
<hr>
##### Key changed/added classes in this PR
* `RunRules`
* `LoadDropByPeriod`
* `PeriodLoadRule`
* `Rule`
<hr>
<!-- Check the items by putting "x" in the brackets for the done things. Not all of these items apply to every PR. Remove the items which are not done or not relevant to the PR. None of the items from the checklist below are strictly necessary, but it would be very helpful if you at least self-review the PR. -->
This PR has:
- [x] been self-reviewed.
- [x] using the [concurrency checklist](https://github.com/apache/druid/blob/master/dev/code-review/concurrency.md) (Remove this item if the PR doesn't have any relation to concurrency.)
- [ ] added documentation for new or modified features or behaviors.
- [ ] added Javadocs for most classes and all non-trivial methods. Linked related entities via Javadoc links.
- [ ] added or updated version, license, or notice information in [licenses.yaml](https://github.com/apache/druid/blob/master/dev/license.md)
- [x] added comments explaining the "why" and the intent of the code wherever would not be obvious for an unfamiliar reader.
- [ ] added unit tests or modified existing tests to cover new code paths, ensuring the threshold for [code coverage](https://github.com/apache/druid/blob/master/dev/code-review/code-coverage.md) is met.
- [ ] added integration tests.
- [x] been tested in a test Druid cluster.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@druid.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@druid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commits-help@druid.apache.org
[GitHub] [druid] 599166320 commented on pull request #13121: Add LoadDropByPeriod to improve retention rules
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
599166320 commented on PR #13121:
URL: https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/13121#issuecomment-1252271317
In addition, it is suggested to increase maxSegmentsToMove, but it will lead to a large number of replica migrations in the entire cluster, which is easy to fail and cannot solve the current problem.
Also, if the data in the large table is not deleted in time, the data in the small table will also have problems.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@druid.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@druid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commits-help@druid.apache.org
[GitHub] [druid] kfaraz commented on pull request #13121: Add LoadDropByPeriod to improve retention rules
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
kfaraz commented on PR #13121:
URL: https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/13121#issuecomment-1251945766
@599166320 , thanks for the changes.
I don't think these changes are really needed. The existing load rules are meant to handle the use case that you mention in the issue #13080 . You seem to have configured your rules correctly, but the segments that are moved to cold tier are not being fully dropped from the default tier.
You might need to look at your logs and metrics to figure out the real root cause. Please let us know how we can help you debug the issue. I would also advise you to join the Druid slack:
[https://druid.apache.org/community/join-slack](https://druid.apache.org/community/join-slack?v=1)
It's a great forum for troubleshooting and discussing improvements.
Alongwith this, there are also some segment loading improvements currently in progress, which should further mitigate such problems in the future. #12881
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@druid.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@druid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commits-help@druid.apache.org
[GitHub] [druid] 599166320 commented on pull request #13121: Add LoadDropByPeriod to improve retention rules
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
599166320 commented on PR #13121:
URL: https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/13121#issuecomment-1252260332
@kfaraz Thank you for your tips. After checking, I found that the expired data in the large table was not deleted in time. The small table is normal. Because the storage cost is too expensive, LoadDropByPeriod can delete expired data in a timely manner. I plan to use LoadDropByPeriod to solve the problem of deleting expired data.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@druid.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@druid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commits-help@druid.apache.org