Create a new monitor for node-level write load#131560
Create a new monitor for node-level write load#131560DiannaHohensee merged 5 commits intoelastic:mainfrom
Conversation
Plugs a basic NodeUsageStatsForThreadPoolsMonitor into the code and sets it up with access to information it will need to implement ES-11992. Relates ES-11991
DiannaHohensee
added
>non-issue
:Distributed/Allocation
|
Pinging @elastic/es-distributed-coordination (Team:Distributed Coordination) |
| * | ||
| * TODO (ES-11992): implement | ||
| */ | ||
| public class NodeUsageStatsForThreadPoolsMonitor { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can be more specific, for example WriteLoadMonitor. I think it should monitor write-load in general, which can be a set of different metrics - write-thread-pool utilization, index/shard write load.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure, thanks. I've renamed it WriteLoadConstraintMonitor, to follow the existing naming pattern we have.
NodeUsageStatsForThreadPools has been used generically for the thread pool usage, even though we only care about write load right now, because we'll presumably have search load in future. But I expect any monitoring added for search in future should go into a separate monitor class for maintainability reasons.
|
❌ Author of the following commits did not sign a Contributor Agreement: Please, read and sign the above mentioned agreement if you want to contribute to this project |
DiannaHohensee
added
the
auto-merge-without-approval
| * | ||
| * TODO (ES-11992): implement | ||
| */ | ||
| public class WriteLoadConstraintMonitor { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can follow disk allocator naming too, WriteLoadThresholdSettings and WriteLoadThresholdMonitor. I dont see reason for Constraint or Threshold wording here, it's implicit in the name of Monitor. If we monitor something that means there is a value and threshold for this value.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was hoping to convey the notion of resource constrained shard allocation decisions.
Monitor by itself doesn't imply thresholds or constraints. It says we're watching for something. In the case of WriteLoadMonitor, we're monitoring write load, but we aren't saying for what.
A significant part of this is simply consistency in naming. For example, you can find all the DiskThreshold* files with the same prefix. Similarly here, WriteLoadConstraint*. If we settle on something other than the WriteLoadConstraint* prefix, I'm inclined to put that in a separate PR to rename the other file as well. The new heap decider logic also follows a prefix pattern -- they in fact did a followup PR for renaming.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Went ahead with pushing this so as not to block ES-11992.
3 participants
Plugs a basic NodeUsageStatsForThreadPoolsMonitor
into the code and sets it up with access to some
components it will need to implement ES-11992.
Relates ES-11991