-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 818
Make the max grpc receive message size configurable, in Bigtable client #1138
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
I feel like we need a "generic" gRPC client config struct to unify the frontend client, the ingester client and the bigtable client with the same options, as we're hitting these problems again and again. WDYT? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm ok with adding this; also ok with generalising the gRPC options.
Going to have a stab at this now. |
Signed-off-by: Goutham Veeramachaneni <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tom Wilkie <[email protected]>
cfg.GRPCClientConfig.RegisterFlags("ingester.client", f) | ||
|
||
// Deprecated. | ||
f.Int("ingester.client.max-recv-message-size", 64*1024*1024, "DEPRECATED. Maximum message size, in bytes, this client will receive.") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
These options don't do anything as of now. Is it not better to fail when these are specified rather than silently not set them at all?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is currently "the way we do things" - we don't want an upgrade to fail because flags changed or went away. I think there is a discussion coming up about what our backwards compatibility guarantees will be, so let not do this now?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In the case of the compression options I would have preferred an outright failure.
What is the precedent in Cortex to leave an option doing nothing?
LGTM from me |
We're hitting this limit and
100 << 20
is the default in the bigtable SDK anyways.