[Engine-devel] [Devel] vds_dynamic refactor

Itamar Heim iheim at redhat.com
Fri Apr 4 12:15:02 UTC 2014


On 04/04/2014 04:30 AM, Liran Zelkha wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 8:40 PM, Gilad Chaplik <gchaplik at redhat.com
> <mailto:gchaplik at redhat.com>> wrote:
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>      > From: "Liran Zelkha" <liran.zelkha at gmail.com
>     <mailto:liran.zelkha at gmail.com>>
>      > To: "Gilad Chaplik" <gchaplik at redhat.com
>     <mailto:gchaplik at redhat.com>>
>      > Cc: "Omer Frenkel" <ofrenkel at redhat.com
>     <mailto:ofrenkel at redhat.com>>, "Eli Mesika" <emesika at redhat.com
>     <mailto:emesika at redhat.com>>, "engine-devel" <engine-devel at ovirt.org
>     <mailto:engine-devel at ovirt.org>>,
>      > devel at linode01.ovirt.org <mailto:devel at linode01.ovirt.org>
>      > Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 7:51:39 PM
>      > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] vds_dynamic refactor
>      >
>      > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Gilad Chaplik
>     <gchaplik at redhat.com <mailto:gchaplik at redhat.com>> wrote:
>      >
>      > > *From: *"Liran Zelkha" <liran.zelkha at gmail.com
>     <mailto:liran.zelkha at gmail.com>>
>      > > *To: *"Gilad Chaplik" <gchaplik at redhat.com
>     <mailto:gchaplik at redhat.com>>
>      > > *Cc: *"Omer Frenkel" <ofrenkel at redhat.com
>     <mailto:ofrenkel at redhat.com>>, "Eli Mesika" <
>      > > emesika at redhat.com <mailto:emesika at redhat.com>>, "engine-devel"
>     <engine-devel at ovirt.org <mailto:engine-devel at ovirt.org>>
>      > > *Sent: *Thursday, April 3, 2014 5:27:56 PM
>      > > *Subject: *Re: [Engine-devel] vds_dynamic refactor
>      > >
>      > > True but that's no reason to have a bad schema
>      > >
>      > > I'm open to new ideas and truly want to understand what is bad?
>      > >
>      > The problem is with both updates and selects.
>      > For selects - to get all the information for the VDS we have multiple
>      > joins. Adding another one will hurt performance even more.
>
>     What about creating the VDS list in the db. i.e. your patch [1]
>     about constructing VDS objects in the engine, should occur in the db
>     within a SP, and should be transparent to the server. that will
>     solve the multiple table join.
>
>
> The joins are happening on the server. We have a VDS view that brings in
> information from many tables and we retrieve rows from it all the time.
> Just run an explain on a select * from vds and see for yourself.

thought the distinction was vds_static is updated by user 
(configuration), where as vds_dyanmic/statistics is reported from vdsm 
(slow/fast updates).

please remember joining them to one table, also means DWH will ETA all 
of data each time. today it will only copy statistics if dynamic did not 
change.




More information about the Engine-devel mailing list