accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sean Busbey" <s...@manvsbeard.com>
Subject Re: Review Request 15650: ACCUMULO-1794 adds hdfs failover to continuous integration test.
Date Mon, 18 Nov 2013 18:51:31 GMT


> On Nov. 18, 2013, 6:33 p.m., Josh Elser wrote:
> > test/system/continuous/hdfs-agitator.pl, line 90
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/15650/diff/1/?file=388001#file388001line90>
> >
> >     It would be nice to default to running as the invoking user instead of forcing
sudo. If I have discrete users set up for each role, I may not always want to have sudoers
set up.
> >     
> >     Having the ability is definitely nice, though.

haadmin is only runnable as an HDFS super user, and AFAICT the continuous integration test
runs as either the accumulo user or root (for its kill stuff to work on the other components).

If people run the agitator script as root, then the sudo is needed to allow the command to
run. If they run the agitator as something other than root, then we need either a sudo to
the accumulo user for the other agitator stuff or one here. Unless the accumulo user is in
the hdfs superuser group. But I don't want to encourage people to add the accumulo user to
the HDFS superuser group.


Maybe a docs update is need too?

I think it'd be simpler to document "run the agitator as root because it's going to need access
to multiple users". Or is it worth the overhead of properly breaking the testing out into
users-per-role?


> On Nov. 18, 2013, 6:33 p.m., Josh Elser wrote:
> > test/system/continuous/hdfs-agitator.pl, line 120
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/15650/diff/1/?file=388001#file388001line120>
> >
> >     Maybe rename this from hdfs-agitator to ha-hdfs-agitator (or similar). agitator.pl
also agitates datanodes so the name is a bit of a misnomer.

I'd rather pull the agitator.pl parts that mess with datanodes here. that way we'd get better
failure testing for when data nodes and tablet servers are not the same set of machines and
we could flex more advanced HDFS failure conditions (like handling rack loss).

Sound good?


- Sean


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15650/#review29059
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Nov. 18, 2013, 5:13 p.m., Sean Busbey wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/15650/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Nov. 18, 2013, 5:13 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for accumulo and Alex Moundalexis.
> 
> 
> Bugs: ACCUMULO-1794
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-1794
> 
> 
> Repository: accumulo
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> ACCUMULO-1794 adds hdfs failover to continuous integration test.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   test/system/continuous/continuous-env.sh.example 830ae86b5bf2398a840b853423755f6dd65f2dc0

>   test/system/continuous/hdfs-agitator.pl PRE-CREATION 
>   test/system/continuous/start-agitator.sh 52e5a4e82a4564fa624a71f73ad29fa20ba23246 
>   test/system/continuous/stop-agitator.sh b853a55b12f8402606af52e0748ca50daf95ed7f 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/15650/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Ran the hdfs agitator on a CDH4 cluster configured for HA. it successfully caused the
active namenode to failover as it went.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Sean Busbey
> 
>


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message