Implement Strict Routing Semantics for Routing Rules#804
Implement Strict Routing Semantics for Routing Rules#804Peiyingy wants to merge 6 commits intotrinodb:mainfrom
Conversation
|
Just a few remarks:
|
+1 |
|
| List<ProxyBackendConfiguration> backends = gatewayBackendManager.getActiveBackends(routingGroup).stream() | ||
| .filter(backEnd -> isBackendHealthy(backEnd.getName())) | ||
| .toList(); | ||
| if (backends.isEmpty() && strictRouting) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This may be a nitpick, but evaluating strictRouting first can short circuit the backends.isEmpty() one, in case it's false. A teeny performance optimization would be to re-order these so it's if (strictRouting && backends.isEmpty())
| .filter(backEnd -> isBackendHealthy(backEnd.getName())) | ||
| .toList(); | ||
| if (strictRouting && backends.isEmpty()) { | ||
| throw new WebApplicationException( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why WebApplicationException and not IllegalStateException like in IllegalStateException("Number of active backends found zero"))
or maybe a custom Explicit Exception inherited from RouterException?
felicity3786
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's also update the official doc?
| .filter(backEnd -> isBackendHealthy(backEnd.getName())) | ||
| .toList(); | ||
| if (strictRouting && backends.isEmpty()) { | ||
| throw new WebApplicationException( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can add a WARN or ERROR with context when the 404 is triggered? Also +1 on maybe making it a NoBackendAvailableException?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's ambiguous what you mean strictRouting.
There are two fallback logics in routing.
-
If
RoutingGroupSelectorfailed to select a routing group for a query, fallback todefaultRoutingGroup. -
If there are no available active healthy cluster for the selected routing group, fallback to
ActiveDefaultBackends(ie. active healthy cluster indefaultRoutingGroup).
It's not clear which fallback logic (or both) are disabled. If you decided to disable both (currently you only handled 2), please make sure the error messages are clearly distinguishable for these cases. Docs are also required to explain the exact affect of this config.
| .toList(); | ||
| if (strictRouting && backends.isEmpty()) { | ||
| throw new WebApplicationException( | ||
| Response.status(NOT_FOUND) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Client did nothing wrong and shouldn't receive a 4xx error. We should return a 5XX indicate a server side error, maybe 503 Service Unavailable.
|
This pull request has gone a while without any activity. Ask for help on #trino-gateway-dev on Trino slack. |
Description
This PR adds
strictRoutingflag for routing as proposed in #797.Routing rules can now support
strictRouting: Trueto force pinning the query to the routing groupWhen
strictRouting = false (default), the routing behavior remains unchanged.When
strictRouting = true, the gateway would not fall back to default clusters if the pinned backend becomes unavailable. Instead, the query should fail immediately with a 404 error.Testing
mvn clean installTestStochasticRoutingManagerstrictRoutingflag works