You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We currently communicate between rangerd and rangelets via gRPC. But we write the range and placement states to durable storage (via the Persister; only Consul, for now) first, so the RPCs could simply be considered a notification that the contents of the store have changed. As such, the rangelets could also just watch the store for the changes, and react accordingly. Would need to index placements by nodeID rather than inside of ranges, to avoid nodes having to read the entire range map.
Unsure how the nodes would communicate their actual state (RemoteState) and health back to rangerd in this scenario. Maybe still RPC probes?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We currently communicate between rangerd and rangelets via gRPC. But we write the range and placement states to durable storage (via the Persister; only Consul, for now) first, so the RPCs could simply be considered a notification that the contents of the store have changed. As such, the rangelets could also just watch the store for the changes, and react accordingly. Would need to index placements by nodeID rather than inside of ranges, to avoid nodes having to read the entire range map.
Unsure how the nodes would communicate their actual state (RemoteState) and health back to rangerd in this scenario. Maybe still RPC probes?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: