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

Hot region scheduling considers adding QPS dimension #2520

Closed
nolouch opened this issue Jun 8, 2020 · 4 comments
Closed

Hot region scheduling considers adding QPS dimension #2520

nolouch opened this issue Jun 8, 2020 · 4 comments
Assignees
@lhy1024
Labels
component/schedule Scheduling logic. epic/co-attributes relative data attributes. type/enhancement The issue or PR belongs to an enhancement.

Comments

@nolouch
Copy link
Contributor

nolouch commented Jun 8, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Feature Request

Describe your feature request related problem

ref pingcap/tidb#18012
environment:
3 tikv + 1 pd + 1tidb
workload:
tpcc 30min （1000 or 500 warehouse）
the gRPC message is unbalanced
image
image

But the leader of the hot region' writes flow looks:
image

Describe the feature you'd like

The QPS does not particularly present positively relate to the flows.
Consider introducing the QPS dimension for scheduling.

Describe alternatives you've considered

  • the request for write/read should be balanced

Teachability, Documentation, Adoption, Migration Strategy

  • Golang
  • Rust
@nolouch nolouch added type/enhancement The issue or PR belongs to an enhancement. component/schedule Scheduling logic. labels Jun 8, 2020
@nolouch
Copy link
Contributor Author

nolouch commented Jun 8, 2020

cc @lhy1024 @HunDunDM

@nolouch nolouch added the epic/co-attributes relative data attributes. label Jun 8, 2020
This was referenced Jun 9, 2020
Closed
Closed
@nolouch
Copy link
Contributor Author

nolouch commented Jul 5, 2020

ref pingcap/tidb#18012

@scsldb scsldb mentioned this issue Jul 10, 2020
Closed
4 tasks
@XuHuaiyu
Copy link

Why the count of GRPC message sent to 172.16.5.132 is small, but the total write bytes on it is large?

@nolouch
Copy link
Contributor Author

nolouch commented Jul 13, 2021

ref #3869. close this one.

@nolouch nolouch closed this as completed Jul 13, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@lhy1024 lhy1024

Labels
component/schedule Scheduling logic. epic/co-attributes relative data attributes. type/enhancement The issue or PR belongs to an enhancement.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@nolouch @XuHuaiyu @lhy1024