Denovo1998 opened a new pull request, #25442:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/25442
<!--
### Contribution Checklist
- PR title format should be *[type][component] summary*. For details, see
*[Guideline - Pulsar PR Naming
Convention](https://pulsar.apache.org/contribute/develop-semantic-title/)*.
- Fill out the template below to describe the changes contributed by the
pull request. That will give reviewers the context they need to do the review.
- Each pull request should address only one issue, not mix up code from
multiple issues.
- Each commit in the pull request has a meaningful commit message
- Once all items of the checklist are addressed, remove the above text and
this checklist, leaving only the filled out template below.
-->
<!-- Either this PR fixes an issue, -->
Fixes #xyz
<!-- or this PR is one task of an issue -->
Main Issue: #xyz
<!-- If the PR belongs to a PIP, please add the PIP link here -->
PIP: #xyz
<!-- Details of when a PIP is required and how the PIP process work, please
see: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/blob/master/pip/README.md -->
### Motivation
Manual bundle split requests in the extensible load manager path can fail
incorrectly when `flow_or_qps_equally_divide` is used. The broker was building
the split option from the default configured algorithm instead of the algorithm
requested by the admin API, which can trigger a `ClassCastException`. In
addition, when `flow_or_qps_equally_divide` cannot
produce a valid split boundary, the extensible load manager path turns that
no-op case into
a misleading `Bundle ... not found under namespace` error.
### Modifications
- build `BundleSplitOption` from the requested split algorithm instead of
the default broker configuration
- create `FlowOrQpsEquallyDivideBundleSplitOption` only when the actual
requested algorithm is `flow_or_qps_equally_divide`
- handle the "no valid split boundary" case as a no-op in
`ExtensibleLoadManagerImpl` instead of reporting `Bundle ... not found under
namespace`
- keep the real `bundle not found` error path only for actual split-bundle
lookup failures
- add an admin API regression test to verify `FLOW_OR_QPS_EQUALLY_DIVIDE` no
longer fails when the default split algorithm is different
- add an extensible load manager regression test to verify the no-boundary
case does not fail and leaves the bundle layout unchanged
### Verifying this change
- [x] Make sure that the change passes the CI checks.
*(Please pick either of the following options)*
This change is a trivial rework / code cleanup without any test coverage.
*(or)*
This change is already covered by existing tests, such as *(please describe
tests)*.
*(or)*
This change added tests and can be verified as follows:
*(example:)*
- *Added integration tests for end-to-end deployment with large payloads
(10MB)*
- *Extended integration test for recovery after broker failure*
### Documentation
<!-- DO NOT REMOVE THIS SECTION. CHECK THE PROPER BOX ONLY. -->
- [ ] `doc` <!-- Your PR contains doc changes. -->
- [ ] `doc-required` <!-- Your PR changes impact docs and you will update
later -->
- [x] `doc-not-needed` <!-- Your PR changes do not impact docs -->
- [ ] `doc-complete` <!-- Docs have been already added -->
### Matching PR in forked repository
PR in forked repository: https://github.com/Denovo1998/pulsar/pull/25
<!--
After opening this PR, the build in apache/pulsar will fail and instructions
will
be provided for opening a PR in the PR author's forked repository.
apache/pulsar pull requests should be first tested in your own fork since
the
apache/pulsar CI based on GitHub Actions has constrained resources and quota.
GitHub Actions provides separate quota for pull requests that are executed
in
a forked repository.
The tests will be run in the forked repository until all PR review comments
have
been handled, the tests pass and the PR is approved by a reviewer.
-->
--
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: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
