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

Migrations may not start for some delay if connection saturated #59

Open
jimmyaxod opened this issue Dec 3, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #63
Open

Migrations may not start for some delay if connection saturated #59

jimmyaxod opened this issue Dec 3, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #63

Comments

@jimmyaxod
Copy link
Contributor

Screenshot from 2024-12-03 11-35-57

The image shows a migration in drafter.

Drafter currently does:
for in devices {
sendDevInfo()
Migrate()
DirtyBlockMigrate()
}

This is ok, except for the fact that nothing is synchronized. So what happens often in practice is that there is a "loser" device, as in the graph, which cannot send it's devInfo, so doesn't get to Migrate() until the data rate drops. This can lead to a fair delay in sending one or more of the devices, and inefficient use of the bandwidth.

Fix:
We should separate migration into 3 distinct phases.

  1. We send all initial data for all devices (SendDevInfo())
  2. We Migrate() all devices at the same time
  3. We do DirtyBlock loops.

Just as a SendDevInfo may be delayed heavily if other devices are migrating, a dirty loop will not work well at all if there is no bandwidth because other devices are still migrating.

By synchronizing these phases across devices we should get far better bandwidth utilization for the entire migration.

@jimmyaxod jimmyaxod linked a pull request Dec 17, 2024 that will close this issue
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 a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant