Skip to content

[EXPERIMENTAL] Parallel VPlayer #17628

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Draft
shlomi-noach wants to merge 94 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

[EXPERIMENTAL] Parallel VPlayer #17628

shlomi-noach wants to merge 94 commits into from

Conversation

@shlomi-noach
Copy link
Contributor

@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach commented Jan 26, 2025

Description

WIP and EXPERIMENTAL. Another take on parallel VPlayer using WRITESET. This takes a different approach than #17370 and instead of conforming to existing VPlayer assumptions (serialized in-order commits, ever-increasing GTID) we propose ignoring these constraints and prioritizing same-worker dependent-transactions.

Initial commits include some code imported from #17370, just the formal changes in GTID Vevent, the bench suite, etc., but none of the actual VPlayer design changes. This PR will start from scratch.

cc @rohit-nayak-ps @mattlord

Related Issue(s)

Checklist

  • "Backport to:" labels have been added if this change should be back-ported to release branches
  • If this change is to be back-ported to previous releases, a justification is included in the PR description
  • Tests were added or are not required
  • Did the new or modified tests pass consistently locally and on CI?
  • Documentation was added or is not required

Deployment Notes

@vitess-bot
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Jan 26, 2025

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! 👋 Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

  • Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
  • Ensure there is a link to an issue (except for internal cleanup and flaky test fixes), new features should have an RFC that documents use cases and test cases.

Tests

  • Bug fixes should have at least one unit or end-to-end test, enhancement and new features should have a sufficient number of tests.

Documentation

  • Apply the release notes (needs details) label if users need to know about this change.
  • New features should be documented.
  • There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.
  • There should be a comment at the top of each new or modified test to explain what the test does.

New flags

  • Is this flag really necessary?
  • Flag names must be clear and intuitive, use dashes (-), and have a clear help text.

If a workflow is added or modified:

  • Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
  • If the workflow needs to be marked as required, the maintainer team must be notified.

Backward compatibility

  • Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
  • Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
  • RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
  • If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from vitess-operator and arewefastyet, if used there.
  • vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.

@vitess-bot vitess-bot bot added NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says labels Jan 26, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v22.0.0 milestone Jan 26, 2025
shlomi-noach
shlomi-noach commented Feb 4, 2025
View reviewed changes
go/vt/vttablet/tabletserver/vstreamer/vstreamer.go
pos replication.Position
stopPos string
lastCommitted int64
commitParent int64
Copy link
Contributor Author

@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach Feb 4, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

While I prefer the terminology of "commit parent", the reason for calling it "last committed" is because that's the term used by MySQL, and so I did not want to introduce a new term

@shlomi-noach
make proto
6305ee1 
Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <[email protected]>
@shlomi-noach
remove debug message (causes the benchmark to timeout)
7b2e600 
Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <[email protected]>
@shlomi-noach
vreplication controller has a dbClientGenerator; vplayer has initial …
16d9f8d 
…support for parallel player flag

Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <[email protected]>
@shlomi-noach
initial code for parallel producer and parallel worker
88fdaf5 
Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <[email protected]>
@shlomi-noach
store explicit GTID. not pos
28e8716 
Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <[email protected]>
@shlomi-noach
AppendGTIDSet
48c6f77 
Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <[email protected]>
@shlomi-noach
read and write to vreplication_worker_pos
8e9b661 
Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <[email protected]>
@shlomi-noach
initial full implementation
fcf20f6 
Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <[email protected]>
@shlomi-noach
fix query
b923e15 
Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <[email protected]>
@frouioui frouioui added this to the v23.0.0 milestone Apr 1, 2025
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach mentioned this pull request Apr 23, 2025
Merged
5 tasks
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented May 7, 2025

This PR is being marked as stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity. To rectify, you may do any of the following:

  • Push additional commits to the associated branch.
  • Remove the stale label.
  • Add a comment indicating why it is not stale.

If no action is taken within 7 days, this PR will be closed.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale Marks PRs as stale after a period of inactivity, which are then closed after a grace period. label May 7, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented May 14, 2025

This PR was closed because it has been stale for 7 days with no activity.

@github-actions github-actions bot closed this May 14, 2025
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach reopened this Aug 25, 2025
@shlomi-noach
resolved conflicts
af832a0 
Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <[email protected]>
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the Stale Marks PRs as stale after a period of inactivity, which are then closed after a grace period. label Aug 26, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Sep 26, 2025

This PR is being marked as stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity. To rectify, you may do any of the following:

  • Push additional commits to the associated branch.
  • Remove the stale label.
  • Add a comment indicating why it is not stale.

If no action is taken within 7 days, this PR will be closed.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale Marks PRs as stale after a period of inactivity, which are then closed after a grace period. label Sep 26, 2025
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach removed the Stale Marks PRs as stale after a period of inactivity, which are then closed after a grace period. label Sep 28, 2025
@systay systay modified the milestones: v23.0.0, v24.0.0 Oct 8, 2025
@shlomi-noach
resolved conflicts
9ec2b42 
Signed-off-by: Shlomi Noach <[email protected]>
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Nov 19, 2025

This PR is being marked as stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity. To rectify, you may do any of the following:

  • Push additional commits to the associated branch.
  • Remove the stale label.
  • Add a comment indicating why it is not stale.

If no action is taken within 7 days, this PR will be closed.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale Marks PRs as stale after a period of inactivity, which are then closed after a grace period. label Nov 19, 2025
@shlomi-noach shlomi-noach removed the Stale Marks PRs as stale after a period of inactivity, which are then closed after a grace period. label Nov 19, 2025
@mattlord mattlord self-assigned this Dec 11, 2025
@mattlord mattlord removed the NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required label Dec 11, 2025
@mattlord
Fix linter warning
99b3dae 
Signed-off-by: Matt Lord <[email protected]>
@mattlord
Update workflow
40b0947 
Signed-off-by: Matt Lord <[email protected]>
@mattlord
Small changes
9c55185 
Signed-off-by: Matt Lord <[email protected]>
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Jan 12, 2026

This PR is being marked as stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity. To rectify, you may do any of the following:

  • Push additional commits to the associated branch.
  • Remove the stale label.
  • Add a comment indicating why it is not stale.

If no action is taken within 7 days, this PR will be closed.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale Marks PRs as stale after a period of inactivity, which are then closed after a grace period. label Jan 12, 2026
@mattlord mattlord removed the Stale Marks PRs as stale after a period of inactivity, which are then closed after a grace period. label Jan 12, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@harshit-gangal harshit-gangal Awaiting requested review from harshit-gangal harshit-gangal will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for review harshit-gangal is a code owner

@mattlord mattlord Awaiting requested review from mattlord mattlord will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for review mattlord is a code owner

@beingnoble03 beingnoble03 Awaiting requested review from beingnoble03 beingnoble03 will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for review beingnoble03 is a code owner

@frouioui frouioui Awaiting requested review from frouioui frouioui will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for review frouioui is a code owner

@rohit-nayak-ps rohit-nayak-ps Awaiting requested review from rohit-nayak-ps rohit-nayak-ps will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for review rohit-nayak-ps is a code owner

@systay systay Awaiting requested review from systay systay will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for review systay is a code owner

@timvaillancourt timvaillancourt Awaiting requested review from timvaillancourt timvaillancourt will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for review timvaillancourt is a code owner

At least 2 approving reviews are required to merge this pull request.

Assignees

@mattlord mattlord

Labels

Component: VReplication NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says Type: Performance

Projects

None yet

Milestone

v24.0.0

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@shlomi-noach @systay @mattlord @frouioui