jasperjiaguo commented on a change in pull request #8441:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8441#discussion_r840879048
##########
File path:
pinot-controller/src/main/java/org/apache/pinot/controller/helix/core/assignment/instance/InstanceAssignmentDriver.java
##########
@@ -77,7 +95,31 @@ public InstancePartitions
assignInstances(InstancePartitionsType instancePartiti
new
InstanceReplicaGroupPartitionSelector(assignmentConfig.getReplicaGroupPartitionConfig(),
tableNameWithType);
InstancePartitions instancePartitions = new InstancePartitions(
instancePartitionsType.getInstancePartitionsName(TableNameBuilder.extractRawTableName(tableNameWithType)));
+ if (shouldRetainInstanceSequence) {
+ // Keep the pool to instances map if instance sequence should be
retained.
+ instancePartitions
+
.setPoolToInstancesMap(extractInstanceNamesFromPoolToInstanceConfigsMap(poolToInstanceConfigsMap));
+ }
Review comment:
Does this mean if we do not set `shouldRetainInstanceSequence` in the
initial assignment, the subsequent table rebalance will not be able to retain
sequence even if we set `retainInstanceSequence` in the rebalance config? Is it
okay that we always persist the instance sequence in the initial assignment?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@pinot.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@pinot.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commits-h...@pinot.apache.org
