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

csi: don't pass volume claim releases thru GC eval #8021

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
May 20, 2020

Conversation

tgross
Copy link
Member

@tgross tgross commented May 19, 2020

Fixes #7933

Following the new volumewatcher in #7794 and performance improvements
to it that landed afterwards, there's no particular reason we should
be threading claim releases through the GC eval rather than writing an
empty CSIVolumeClaimRequest with the mode set to
CSIVolumeClaimRelease, just as the GC evaluation would do.

Also, by batching up these raft messages, we can reduce the amount of
raft writes by 1 and cross-server RPCs by 1 per volume we release
claims on.

@tgross tgross added this to the 0.11.3 milestone May 19, 2020
Following the new volumewatcher in #7794 and performance improvements
to it that landed afterwards, there's no particular reason we should
be threading claim releases through the GC eval rather than writing an
empty `CSIVolumeClaimRequest` with the mode set to
`CSIVolumeClaimRelease`, just as the GC evaluation would do.

Also, by batching up these raft messages, we can reduce the amount of
raft writes by 1 and cross-server RPCs by 1 per volume we release
claims on.
@tgross tgross force-pushed the csi_remove_extra_gc_eval branch from 686bdf1 to a012a56 Compare May 20, 2020 14:21
@tgross tgross marked this pull request as ready for review May 20, 2020 14:36
@tgross tgross requested review from langmartin and cgbaker May 20, 2020 14:36
ModifyTime: now,
}
evals = append(evals, eval)
// Create a new evaluation
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

note for reviewers: from here down the changes in this file are restoring the code that existed pre-0.11.0

Copy link
Contributor

@cgbaker cgbaker left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

some questions, will take the answers off the air

nomad/csi_batch.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
nomad/csi_batch.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
nomad/job_endpoint.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@tgross
Copy link
Member Author

tgross commented May 20, 2020

@cgbaker I've pushed up 54bde4d which should resolve the issues you raised. And I've added d2a1a7f which fixes a bug I found in the process of resolving those (along with a test).

@cgbaker
Copy link
Contributor

cgbaker commented May 20, 2020

looks good. i think there is an argument to be made that the error releasing those volumes is ignorable considering that they will be GC'd later.

@tgross tgross merged commit b3a33e0 into master May 20, 2020
@tgross tgross deleted the csi_remove_extra_gc_eval branch May 20, 2020 19:22
tgross added a commit that referenced this pull request May 27, 2020
Following the new volumewatcher in #7794 and performance improvements
to it that landed afterwards, there's no particular reason we should
be threading claim releases through the GC eval rather than writing an
empty `CSIVolumeClaimRequest` with the mode set to
`CSIVolumeClaimRelease`, just as the GC evaluation would do.

Also, by batching up these raft messages, we can reduce the amount of
raft writes by 1 and cross-server RPCs by 1 per volume we release
claims on.
@tgross
Copy link
Member Author

tgross commented May 27, 2020

Cherry-picked to 0.11.3 branch as 4e365e0

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 4, 2023

I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 120 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active contributions.
If you have found a problem that seems related to this change, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jan 4, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

CSI: claim releases don't need to go thru GC eval
2 participants