eventcollector: refactor event handle logic #1421
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Summary of Changes
Hello @lidezhu, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
This pull request undertakes significant internal refactoring within the eventcollector component. The changes aim to improve the architecture by separating concerns related to log coordinator communication, enhancing the management of dispatcher connection states, and adding retry capabilities for outgoing requests to event services. This restructuring should lead to a more modular and resilient event collection and dispatching system.
Highlights
- Refactored Dispatcher State Management: Introduced a dedicated
dispatcherConnStatestruct withindispatcherStatto encapsulate and manage the connection state to event services, improving clarity and thread safety. - Enhanced Request Reliability: Implemented a retry mechanism for sending dispatcher requests (register, reset, remove, pause, resume) to event services, making the communication more robust against transient network issues.
- Separated Log Coordinator Communication: Extracted the logic for interacting with the log coordinator into a new
LogCoordinatorClient, improving the separation of concerns within theeventcollectorpackage. - Simplified Event Handling Logic: Removed the direct dependency on
EventCollectorfrom theEventsHandler, pushing state-specific actions and calls down to thedispatcherStatitself.
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
| Feature | Command | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
| Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
| Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
| Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist is currently in preview and may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments to provide feedback.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configureGemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request refactors the event collector and dispatcher state management, introducing a dedicated dispatcherConnState and extracting log coordinator communication into a new LogCoordinatorClient. The changes improve code organization and introduce a basic retry mechanism for dispatcher requests. Several TODOs highlight areas for future improvement, particularly around state transitions and retry logic robustness.
downstreamadapter/eventcollector/dispatcher_stat.go
Outdated
10000
| if d.connState.isCurrentEventService(*event.From) { | ||
| candidate := d.connState.getNextRemoteCandidate() | ||
| if candidate != "" { | ||
| msg := messaging.NewSingleTargetMessage(candidate, eventServiceTopic, newDispatcherRegisterRequest(d.target, true)) | ||
| d.eventCollector.enqueueMessageForSend(msg) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The handleNotReusableEvent logic attempts to register with the next remote candidate if the event is from the current event service. If the event is from a different event service, it seems to be ignored. Is this the intended behavior?
| c.dispatcherHeartbeatChan.In() <- heartbeatWithTarget | ||
| for serverID, heartbeat := range groupedHeartbeats { | ||
| msg := messaging.NewSingleTargetMessage(serverID, messaging.EventServiceTopic, heartbeat) | ||
| c.enqueueMessageForSend(msg) | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // TODO(dongmen): add unit test for this function. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This TODO indicates a missing unit test. Adding a unit test for groupHeartbeat would improve code coverage.
| // TODO: requests can to different EventService, so we should improve the logic here. | ||
| time.Sleep(10 * time.Millisecond) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This TODO highlights a potential area for improvement in the retry logic, especially when sending requests to different EventServices. Consider implementing a more sophisticated backoff strategy.
|
/retest |
1 similar comment
|
/retest |
|
@lidezhu: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: asddongmen The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
[LGTM Timeline notifier]Timeline:
|
What problem does this PR solve?
Issue Number: ref #1328
What is changed and how it works?
LogCoordinatorClientcomponent to handle all communication withLogCoordinator, serving as a dedicated proxy forEventCollector.EventServiceinteractions withindispatcherStat.Check List
Tests
Questions
Will it cause performance regression or break compatibility?
Do you need to update user documentation, design documentation or monitoring documentation?
Release note