Masters not understanding REPLCONF ACK will reply with errors to our
requests causing a number of possible issues.
This commit detects a global replication offest set to -1 at the end of
the replication, and marks the client representing the master with the
REDIS_PRE_PSYNC flag.
Note that this flag was called REDIS_PRE_PSYNC_SLAVE but now it is just
REDIS_PRE_PSYNC as it is used for both slaves and masters starting with
this commit.
This commit fixes issue #1488.
Currently replication offsets could be used into a limited way in order
to understand, out of a set of slaves, what is the one with the most
updated data. For example this comparison is possible of N slaves
were replicating all with the same master.
However the replication offset was not transferred from master to slaves
(that are later promoted as masters) in any way, so for instance if
there were three instances A, B, C, with A master and B and C
replication from A, the following could happen:
C disconnects from A.
B is turned into master.
A is switched to master of B.
B receives some write.
In this context there was no way to compare the offset of A and C,
because B would use its own local master replication offset as
replication offset to initialize the replication with A.
With this commit what happens is that when B is turned into master it
inherits the replication offset from A, making A and C comparable.
In the above case assuming no inconsistencies are created during the
disconnection and failover process, A will show to have a replication
offset greater than C.
Note that this does not mean offsets are always comparable to understand
what is, in a set of instances, since in more complex examples the
replica with the higher replication offset could be partitioned away
when picking the instance to elect as new master. However this in
general improves the ability of a system to try to pick a good replica
to promote to master.
The previous fix for false positive timeout detected by master was not
complete. There is another blocking stage while loading data for the
first synchronization with the master, that is, flushing away the
current data from the DB memory.
This commit uses the newly introduced dict.c callback in order to make
some incremental work (to send "\n" heartbeats to the master) while
flushing the old data from memory.
It is hard to write a regression test for this issue unfortunately. More
support for debugging in the Redis core would be needed in terms of
functionalities to simulate a slow DB loading / deletion.
Redis hash table implementation has many non-blocking features like
incremental rehashing, however while deleting a large hash table there
was no way to have a callback called to do some incremental work.
This commit adds this support, as an optiona callback argument to
dictEmpty() that is currently called at a fixed interval (one time every
65k deletions).
Sometimes when we resurrect a cached master after a successful partial
resynchronization attempt, there is pending data in the output buffers
of the client structure representing the master (likely REPLCONF ACK
commands).
If we don't reinstall the write handler, it will never be installed
again by addReply*() family functions as they'll assume that if there is
already data pending, the write handler is already installed.
This bug caused some slaves after a successful partial sync to never
send REPLCONF ACK, and continuously being detected as timing out by the
master, with a disconnection / reconnection loop.
There was a bug that over-esteemed the amount of backlog available,
however this could only happen when a slave was asking for an offset
that was in the "future" compared to the master replication backlog.
Now this case is handled well and logged as an incident in the master
log file.
The previous code using a static buffer as an optimization was lame:
1) Premature optimization, actually it was *slower* than naive code
because resulted into the creation / destruction of the object
encapsulating the output buffer.
2) The code was very hard to test, since it was needed to have specific
tests for command lines exceeding the size of the static buffer.
3) As a result of "2" the code was bugged as the current tests were not
able to stress specific corner cases.
It was replaced with easy to understand code that is safer and faster.
During the replication full resynchronization process, the RDB file is
transfered from the master to the slave. However there is a short
preamble to send, that is currently just the bulk payload length of the
file in the usual Redis form $..length..<CR><LF>.
This preamble used to be sent with a direct write call, assuming that
there was alway room in the socket output buffer to hold the few bytes
needed, however this does not scale in case we'll need to send more
stuff, and is not very robust code in general.
This commit introduces a more general mechanism to send a preamble up to
2GB in size (the max length of an sds string) in a non blocking way.
Clients using SYNC to replicate are older implementations, such as
redis-cli --slave, and are not designed to acknowledge the master with
REPLCONF ACK commands, so we don't have any feedback and should not
disconnect them on timeout.
This code is only responsible to take an LRU-evicted fixed length cache
of SHA1 that we are sure all the slaves received.
In this commit only the implementation is provided, but the Redis core
does not use it to actually send EVALSHA to slaves when possible.
This feature allows the user to specify the minimum number of
connected replicas having a lag less or equal than the specified
amount of seconds for writes to be accepted.
Now masters, using the time at which the last REPLCONF ACK was received,
are able to explicitly disconnect slaves that are no longer responding.
Previously the only chance was to see a very long output buffer, that
was highly suboptimal.
ACKs can be also used as a base for synchronous replication. However in
that case they'll be explicitly requested by the master when the client
sends a request that needs to be replicated synchronously.
This special command is used by the slave to inform the master the
amount of replication stream it currently consumed.
it does not return anything so that we not need to consume additional
bandwidth needed by the master to reply something.
The master can do a number of things knowing the amount of stream
processed, such as understanding the "lag" in bytes of the slave, verify
if a given command was already processed by the slave, and so forth.
When we are preparing an handshake with the slave we can't touch the
connection buffer as it'll be used to accumulate differences between
the sent RDB file and what arrives next from clients.
So in short we can't use addReply() family functions.
However we just use write(2) because we know that the socket buffer is
empty, since a prerequisite for SYNC to work is that the static buffer
and the output list are empty, and in general it is not expected that a
client SYNCs after doing some heavy I/O with the master.
However a short write connection is explicitly handled to avoid
fragility (we simply close the connection and the slave will retry).
SELECT was still transmitted to slaves using the inline protocol, that
is conceived mostly for humans to type into telnet sessions, and is
notably not understood by redis-cli --slave.
Now the new protocol is used instead.
A Redis master sends PING commands to slaves from time to time: doing
this ensures that even if absence of writes, the master->slave channel
remains active and the slave can feel the master presence, instead of
closing the connection for timeout.
This commit changes the way PINGs are sent to slaves in order to use the
standard interface used to replicate all the other commands, that is,
the function replicationFeedSlaves().
With this change the stream of commands sent to every slave is exactly
the same regardless of their exact state (Transferring RDB for first
synchronization or slave already online). With the previous
implementation the PING was only sent to online slaves, with the result
that the output stream from master to slaves was not identical for all
the slaves: this is a problem if we want to implement partial resyncs in
the future using a global replication stream offset.
TL;DR: this commit should not change the behaviour in practical terms,
but is just something in preparation for partial resynchronization
support.
