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.

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

HPCC-32540 Roxie may flood NIC of target agents if no agents running on a channel #19050

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 9, 2024

Conversation

richardkchapman
Copy link
Member

Type of change:

  • This change is a bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue).
  • This change is a new feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality).
  • This change improves the code (refactor or other change that does not change the functionality)
  • This change fixes warnings (the fix does not alter the functionality or the generated code)
  • This change is a breaking change (fix or feature that will cause existing behavior to change).
  • This change alters the query API (existing queries will have to be recompiled)

Checklist:

  • My code follows the code style of this project.
    • My code does not create any new warnings from compiler, build system, or lint.
  • The commit message is properly formatted and free of typos.
    • The commit message title makes sense in a changelog, by itself.
    • The commit is signed.
  • My change requires a change to the documentation.
    • I have updated the documentation accordingly, or...
    • I have created a JIRA ticket to update the documentation.
    • Any new interfaces or exported functions are appropriately commented.
  • I have read the CONTRIBUTORS document.
  • The change has been fully tested:
    • I have added tests to cover my changes.
    • All new and existing tests passed.
    • I have checked that this change does not introduce memory leaks.
    • I have used Valgrind or similar tools to check for potential issues.
  • I have given due consideration to all of the following potential concerns:
    • Scalability
    • Performance
    • Security
    • Thread-safety
    • Cloud-compatibility
    • Premature optimization
    • Existing deployed queries will not be broken
    • This change fixes the problem, not just the symptom
    • The target branch of this pull request is appropriate for such a change.
  • There are no similar instances of the same problem that should be addressed
    • I have addressed them here
    • I have raised JIRA issues to address them separately
  • This is a user interface / front-end modification
    • I have tested my changes in multiple modern browsers
    • The component(s) render as expected

Smoketest:

  • Send notifications about my Pull Request position in Smoketest queue.
  • Test my draft Pull Request.

Testing:

This change should not affect functionality at all, but makes it possible
to make future changes allowing per-channel back-off.

Signed-off-by: Richard Chapman <rchapman@hpccsystems.com>
…owledged

Signed-off-by: Richard Chapman <rchapman@hpccsystems.com>
Copy link

Jira Issue: https://hpccsystems.atlassian.net//browse/HPCC-32540

Jirabot Action Result:
Assigning user: richard.chapman@lexisnexisrisk.com
Workflow Transition To: Merge Pending
Updated PR

@ghalliday
Copy link
Member

Note HPCC-31061 (found when going through changes for the last year)

@richardkchapman
Copy link
Member Author

The scaled back-off on the ack timeout may help address the concerns that led to HPCC-31061

@richardkchapman richardkchapman marked this pull request as ready for review September 4, 2024 09:53
…cknowledge enabled

Signed-off-by: Richard Chapman <rchapman@hpccsystems.com>
Copy link
Member

@ghalliday ghalliday left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That looks good so far to me.

{
return timeFirstSent && !acknowledged && now-timeFirstSent > timeout;
bool ret = timeFirstSent && !acknowledged && now-timeFirstSent > packetAcknowledgeTimeout*(resends+1);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

for discussion: (packetAcknowledgeTimeout << resends) might be better

Copy link
Contributor

@mckellyln mckellyln left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks ok to me.
I want to test it.

@ghalliday
Copy link
Member

@mckellyln have you had a chance to test this yet?

@ghalliday ghalliday closed this Oct 4, 2024
@ghalliday ghalliday reopened this Oct 4, 2024
@ghalliday
Copy link
Member

Close and open to restart the tests. @mckellyln I am inclined to merge, but some extra testing would be valuable.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 4, 2024

Jira Issue: https://hpccsystems.atlassian.net//browse/HPCC-32540

Jirabot Action Result:
Workflow Transition To: Merge Pending

@mckellyln
Copy link
Contributor

I don't really have access anymore to a large cluster with real data on it for testing.

@ghalliday ghalliday merged commit 66d1b8c into hpcc-systems:master Oct 9, 2024
75 of 79 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants