Memoize isOnRemoteNode in index settings and refactor as well

[gbbafna]

Description

Memoize isOnRemoteNode in index settings and refactor as well

Related Issues

Resolves #[Issue number to be closed when this PR is merged]

Check List

• New functionality includes testing.
  • All tests pass
• New functionality has been documented.
  • New functionality has javadoc added
• Failing checks are inspected and point to the corresponding known issue(s) (See: Troubleshooting Failing Builds)
• Commits are signed per the DCO using --signoff
• Commit changes are listed out in CHANGELOG.md file (See: Changelog)
• Public documentation issue/PR created

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.

[github-actions]

Compatibility status:

Checks if related components are compatible with change 6b86f24

Incompatible components

Skipped components

Compatible components

Compatible components: [https://github.com/opensearch-project/custom-codecs.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/flow-framework.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/observability.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/job-scheduler.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/cross-cluster-replication.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/opensearch-oci-object-storage.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/geospatial.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/sql.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/k-nn.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/neural-search.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/asynchronous-search.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/security-analytics.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/reporting.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/ml-commons.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/notifications.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/common-utils.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/anomaly-detection.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/index-management.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/alerting.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/performance-analyzer-rca.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/security.git, https://github.com/opensearch-project/performance-analyzer.git]

[github-actions]

✅ Gradle check result for bab1201: SUCCESS

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 36.36364% with 14 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 71.37%. Comparing base (b15cb0c) to head (6b86f24).
Report is 108 commits behind head on main.

Files	Patch %	Lines
...in/java/org/opensearch/index/shard/IndexShard.java	30.76%	2 Missing and 7 partials ⚠️
.../opensearch/index/engine/NRTReplicationEngine.java	0.00%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...h/index/remote/RemoteStoreStatsTrackerFactory.java	0.00%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...rc/main/java/org/opensearch/index/store/Store.java	0.00%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...in/java/org/opensearch/indices/IndicesService.java	0.00%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...ch/indices/recovery/PeerRecoveryTargetService.java	0.00%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main   #12994      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     71.42%   71.37%   -0.05%     
- Complexity    59978    60304     +326     
============================================
  Files          4985     5021      +36     
  Lines        282275   284068    +1793     
  Branches      40946    41151     +205     
============================================
+ Hits         201603   202750    +1147     
- Misses        63999    64465     +466     
- Partials      16673    16853     +180     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[github-actions]

✅ Gradle check result for 6b86f24: SUCCESS

[stephen-crawford]

Hi @gbbafna,

Thanks for putting this together.

The changes all look pretty straightforward but I am not sure how much impact this caching will have. I see how you are checking whether the settings is present on the remote node but I don't see where that logic is used.

Since you swapped

 public boolean isRemoteNode() {
        return RemoteStoreNodeAttribute.isRemoteDataAttributePresent(this.getNodeSettings());

for

public boolean isAssignedOnRemoteNode() {
        return assignedOnRemoteNode;

It seems like the change of

return ReplicationType.SEGMENT.equals(replicationType) || isRemoteNode();

for

return ReplicationType.SEGMENT.equals(replicationType) || isAssignedOnRemoteNode();

maintains the same behavior but is reading from the variable. Presumably this would show some speed up but it is not clear to me how much of a difference this would make. Is this the extent of the intended speed up or are there further changes you had in mind?

Do you have any testing to compare the results with/without the change?

[ashking94]

LGTM, this should reduce the unnecessary look ups as well.

[gbbafna]

Is this the extent of the intended speed up or are there further changes you had in mind?

I don't have extent of the intended speed up . This is because remote store migration is a new feature under development and is experimental . We have reduced the unnecessary map look ups , similar to other index settings as well .