Tim Visée
Tim Visée
> Our assertions are more informative, so I'd still leave them. But PR itself is LGTM. That's true, though I don't expect to hit them again. If we get a...
Two people I asked both preferred to leave the extra checks, so I'm closing this issue
@eliassama I am quite puzzled by this and am not able to reproduce this yet. Are you able to simplify your test case that reproduces it, so I can try...
You can upgrade, but I don't expect it to solve the situation. By the way, I see that you're creating a lot of collections. We highly recommend not to do...
> Can replicas be run as separate read-only nodes? > Not right now, but that is in the works. You can limit writes to it yourself externally. I see you...
I like this idea though I wonder how well it would work in practice. With this, you'd have to define some threshold which may be quite arbitrary. Also, preventing updates...
> Do you assume that the main source of the failures if WAL creating new segments? IIRC I've also seen OOD failures in RocksDB. But checking for at least WAL...
Looking at the above performance test, maybe we can make it less intensive: - periodically query free disk space in a background job - or query on something like 1%...
> However, I feel that `1` might be sufficient, but why is `2` necessary? If the upsertion rate in terms of bytes is greater than the WAL size per flush...
Good question. The request size can be measured to determine this, but that may be over-engineering it. Maybe we can pick N=1000 for now to refresh every 1000 checks. A...