This change adds a script to programatically group all includes in a
specific order. The script was used as a one time invocation to group
and sort all includes throught our formatted code. The grouping is as
follows:
- System includes (eg. `#include<...>`)
- Postgres.h (eg. `#include "postgres.h"`)
- Toplevel imports from postgres, not contained in a directory (eg.
`#include "miscadmin.h"`)
- General postgres includes (eg . `#include "nodes/..."`)
- Toplevel citus includes, not contained in a directory (eg. `#include
"citus_verion.h"`)
- Columnar includes (eg. `#include "columnar/..."`)
- Distributed includes (eg. `#include "distributed/..."`)
Because it is quite hard to understand the difference between toplevel
citus includes and toplevel postgres includes it hardcodes the list of
toplevel citus includes. In the same manner it assumes anything not
prefixed with `columnar/` or `distributed/` as a postgres include.
The sorting/grouping is enforced by CI. Since we do so with our own
script there are not changes required in our uncrustify configuration.
DESCRIPTION: Adds logic to distribute unbalanced shards
If the number of shard placements (for a colocation group) is less than
the number of workers, it means that some of the workers will remain
empty. With this PR, we consider these shard groups as a colocation
group, in order to make them be distributed evenly as much as possible
across the cluster.
Example:
```sql
create table t1 (a int primary key);
create table t2 (a int primary key);
create table t3 (a int primary key);
set citus.shard_count =1;
select create_distributed_table('t1','a');
select create_distributed_table('t2','a',colocate_with=>'t1');
select create_distributed_table('t3','a',colocate_with=>'t2');
create table tb1 (a bigint);
create table tb2 (a bigint);
select create_distributed_table('tb1','a');
select create_distributed_table('tb2','a',colocate_with=>'tb1');
select citus_add_node('localhost',9702);
select rebalance_table_shards();
```
Here we have two colocation groups, each with one shard group. Both
shard groups are placed on the first worker node. When we add a new
worker node and try to rebalance table shards, the rebalance planner
considers it well balanced and does nothing. With this PR, the
rebalancer tries to distribute these shard groups evenly across the
cluster as much as possible. For this example, with this PR, the
rebalancer moves one of the shard groups to the second worker node.
fixes: #6715
DESCRIPTION: Drop `SHARD_STATE_TO_DELETE` and use the cleanup records
instead
Drops the shard state that is used to mark shards as orphaned. Now we
insert cleanup records into `pg_dist_cleanup` so "orphaned" shards will
be dropped either by maintenance daemon or internal cleanup calls. With
this PR, we make the "cleanup orphaned shards" functions to be no-op, as
they would not be needed anymore.
This PR includes some naming changes about placement functions. We don't
need functions that filter orphaned shards, as there will be no orphaned
shards anymore.
We will also be introducing a small script with this PR, for users with
orphaned shards. We'll basically delete the orphaned shard entries from
`pg_dist_placement` and insert cleanup records into `pg_dist_cleanup`
for each one of them, during Citus upgrade.
We also have a lot of flakiness fixes in this PR.
Co-authored-by: Jelte Fennema <github-tech@jeltef.nl>
DESCRIPTION: Extend cleanup process for replication artifacts
This PR adds new cleanup record types for:
* Subscriptions
* Replication slots
* Publications
* Users created for subscriptions
We add records for these object types, to `pg_dist_cleanup` during
creation phase. Once the operation is done, in case of success or
failure, we iterate those records and drop the objects. With this PR we
will not be dropping any of these objects during the operation. In
short, we will always be deferring the drop.
One thing that's worth mentioning is that we sort cleanup records before
processing (dropping) them, because of dependency relations among those
objects, e.g a subscription might depend on a publication. Therefore, we
always drop subscriptions before publications.
We have some renames in this PR:
* `TryDropOrphanedShards` -> `TryDropOrphanedResources`
* `DropOrphanedShardsForCleanup` -> `DropOrphanedResourcesForCleanup`
* `run_try_drop_marked_shards` -> `run_try_drop_marked_resources`
as these functions now process replication artifacts as well.
This PR drops function `DropAllLogicalReplicationLeftovers` and its all
usages, since now we rely on the deferring drop mechanism.
The error comes due to the datum jsonb in pg_dist_metadata_node.metadata being 0 in some scenarios. This is likely due to not copying the data when receiving a datum from a tuple and pg deciding to deallocate that memory when the table that the tuple was from is closed.
Also fix another place in the code that might have been susceptible to this issue.
I tested on both multi-vg and multi-1-vg and the test were successful.
The issue in question is caused when rebalance / replication call `FullShardPlacementList` which returns all shard placements (including those in disabled nodes with `citus_disable_node`). Eventually, `FindFillStateForPlacement` looks for the state across active workers and fails to find a state for the placements which are in the disabled workers causing a seg fault shortly after.
Approach:
* `ActivePlacementHash` was not using the status of the shard placement's node to determine if the node it is active. Initially, I just fixed that.
* Additionally, I refactored the code which handles active shards in replication / rebalance to:
* use a single function to determine if a shard placement is active.
* do the shard active shard filtering before calling `RebalancePlacementUpdates` and `ReplicationPlacementUpdates`, so test methods like `shard_placement_rebalance_array` and `shard_placement_replication_array` which have different shard placement active requirements can do their own filtering while using the same rebalance / replicate logic that `rebalance_table_shards` and `replicate_table_shards` use.
Fix#5664
It was possible to block maintenance daemon by taking an SHARE ROW
EXCLUSIVE lock on pg_dist_placement. Until the lock is released
maintenance daemon would be blocked.
We should not block the maintenance daemon under any case hence now we
try to get the pg_dist_placement lock without waiting, if we cannot get
it then we don't try to drop the old placements.
Every move in the rebalancer algorithm results in an improvement in the
balance. However, even if the improvement in the balance was very small
the move was still chosen. This is especially problematic if the shard
itself is very big and the move will take a long time.
This changes the rebalancer algorithm to take the relative size of the
balance improvement into account when choosing moves. By default a move
will not be chosen if it improves the balance by less than half of the
size of the shard. An extra argument is added to the rebalancer
functions so that the user can decide to lower the default threshold if
the ignored move is wanted anyway.
Nils Dijk
Ahmet Gedemenli
Marco Slot
Gledis Zeneli
Jeff Davis
Jelte Fennema
SaitTalhaNisanci
Marco Slot