[improve][broker] Allow to use io_uring instead of epoll - #18385
Conversation
8893ffa to
c115cad
Compare
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #18385 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 45.61% 45.14% -0.48%
+ Complexity 10728 10604 -124
============================================
Files 752 752
Lines 72521 72523 +2
Branches 7791 7791
============================================
- Hits 33083 32738 -345
- Misses 35769 36147 +378
+ Partials 3669 3638 -31
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
| @Slf4j | ||
| public class EventLoopUtil { | ||
|
|
||
| private static final String ENABLE_IO_URING = "enable.io_uring"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm wondering whether we need a prefix here, or if it's the same as how netty does it.
That said, if it's a Pulsar specific property, name it as:
private static final String ENABLE_IO_URING_KEY = "pulsar.enableUring";can avoid accidental conflicts.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry for missing this comment. This is a good idea, so like: pulsar.enable.io_uring.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I learn more properties don't separate enable and the target with a .. But it can be a style preference :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good suggestion, I will push a new PR to improve it.
|
@nodece Please also help to add labels and milestone. |
|
@coderzc Since 2.11 has been released, now it's good timing to start adding the docs for this feature to the next version of docs. Feel free to share your plans and anything I can help with. Thank you. |
Motivation & Modifications
Allow users to enable IO_uring for BK network transport for broker/proxy/client, similar to apache/bookkeeper#3595
Documentation
docdoc-requireddoc-not-neededdoc-completeMatching PR in forked repository
PR in forked repository: coderzc#28