accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From William Slacum <wilhelm.von.cl...@accumulo.net>
Subject Re: Running Accumulo on the IBM JVM
Date Mon, 23 Jun 2014 12:46:16 GMT
Work on the oldest branch possible and merge forward, please.


On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 6:00 AM, Hayden Marchant <HAYDEN@il.ibm.com> wrote:

> Josh (and all who commented),
>
> Thanks for the comments. I'll take them into account, and will create the
> JIRAs.
>
> I was not intending on removing the CMS options, but rather only including
> them in the JVM in which they are relevant, and including the equivalent
> in different JVMs (i.e. IBM ) - all through the bootstrap_config.sh.
>
> Here's my newbie question: Should I be making this patch based on 1.6.1,
> or should I always be working against the 'master' branch, and then
> backport the fix(es) to any desired older version?
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Hayden
>
>
>
> From:   Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com>
> To:     dev@accumulo.apache.org,
> Date:   19/06/2014 06:43 PM
> Subject:        Re: Running Accumulo on the IBM JVM
>
>
>
> <snip/>
>
> >>>          b.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
> org.apache.accumulo.core.security.crypto.BlockedIOStreamTest.testGiantWrite.
> >>>          This test assumes a max heap of about 1GB. This fails on IBM
> JRE,
> >>> since the default max heap is not specified, and on IBM JRE this
> depends
> >>> on the OS (see
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
> http://www-01.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSYKE2_6.0.0/com.ibm.java.doc.diagnostics.60/diag/appendixes/defaults.html?lang=en
>
> >>> ).
> >>>          Proposal: add -Xmx1g to the surefire maven plugin reference
> in
> >>> parent maven pom.
> >>>
> >>
> > This might be https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-2774
>
> Yup! I actually bumped this up to 1G already after I started seeing
> failures (again) from the ACCUMULO-2774 patch which set a 768M heap.
> Pull the upstream changes and feel free to submit something to address
> any problem you still have.
>
> >
> >
> >>   >         c. Both org.apache.accumulo.core.security.crypto.CrypoTest
> &
> >>> org.apache.accumulo.core.file.rfile.RFileTest have lots of failures
> due
> >> to
> >>> calls to SEcureRandom with Random Number Generator Provider hard-coded
> as
> >>> Sun. The IBM JRE has it's own built in RNG Provider called IBMJCE. 2
> >>> issues - hard-coded calls to SecureRandom.getInstance(<algo>,"SUN")
> and
> >>> also default value in Property class is "SUN".
> >>>          Proposal: Add mechanism to override default Property through
> >>> System property through new annotator in Property class. Only usage
> will
> >>> be by Property.CRYPTO_SECURE_RNG_PROVIDER
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > I'm not sure about adding new annotators to Property. However, the
> > CryptoTest should be getting the value from the conf instead of
> hard-coding
> > it. Then you can specify the correct value in accumulo-site.xml
> >
> > I think another part of the issue is in
> > CryptoModuleFactory::fillParamsObjectFromStringMap because it looks like
> > that ignores the default setting.
> >
> >>   >
> >>> 2. Environment/Configuration
> >>>          a. The generated configuration files contain references to GC
> >>> params that are specific to Sun JVM. In accumulo-env.sh, the
> >>> ACCUMULO_TSERVER_OPTS contains -XX:NewSize and -XX:MaxNewSize , and
> also
> >>> in ACCUMULO_GENERAL_OPTS,
> >>> -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC -XX:CMSInitiatingOccupancyFraction=75 are
> used.
> >>>          b. in bin/accumulo, get ClassNotFoundException due to
> >>> specification of JAXP Doc Builder:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
> -Djavax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilderFactory=com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.jaxp.DocumentBuilderFactoryImpl
> >>> .
> >>>          The Sun implementation of Document Builder Factory does not
> >> exists
> >>> in IBM JDK, so a ClassNotFoundException is thrown on running accumulo
> >>> script
> >>>
> >>>          c. MiniAccumuloCluster - in the MiniAccumuloClusterImpl,
> >>> Sun-speciifc GC params are passed as params to the java process
> (similar
> >>> to section a. )
> >>>
> >>>          Single proposal for solving all three above issues:
> >>>          Enhance bootstrap_config.sh with request to select Java
> vendor.
> >>> Selecting this will set correct values for GC params (they differ
> between
> >>> IBM and Sun), inclusion/ommision of JAXP setting. The
> >>> MiniAccumuloClusterImpl can read the same env variable that was set in
> >>> code for the GC Params, and use in the exec command.
> >>>
> >>
> > I don't know enough about the IBM JDK to comment on this part
> > intelligently. Go ahead and generate a patch, and we can use that as a
> > starting point for discussion.
>
> I'm a little hesitant to remove the CMS configuration (as it really
> helps). My first thought about how to address this is you can submit
> some example Accumulo configurations that work with IBM JDK or you can
> add something to the configuration template/script (conf/examples and
> conf/templates with bin/bootstrap_config.sh, respectively). I think
> you're on the right path.
>
> >
> >>   >
> >>>   So far, my work has been focused on getting unit tests working for
> all
> >>> Java vendors in a clean manner. I have not yet run intensive testing
> of
> >>> real clusters following these changes, and would be happy to get
> pointers
> >>> to what else might need treatment.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > Unit tests is a good first pass. Integration tests (mvn verify) is
> probably
> > the minimum that you want on your continuous integration once you have
> > things set up.
> >
> > Accumulo also comes with a set of longer running, cluster based tests,
> > since we know that there are some pieces too complex for unit tests to
> > catch. have a look in the test module for the Continuous Ingest test.
> Once
> > you get to that point, we can help you set it up if the README is
> unclear.
> >
> >>   I would also like to hear if these changes make sense, and if so,
> should
> >>> I go ahead and create some JIRAs, and attach my patches for commit
> >>> approval?
> >>>
> >>
> > Filing JIRAs is going to be the most straightforward path, yes.
> >
> >   >  Looking forward to hearing feedback!
>
> Likewise. Looking forward to applying some patches!
>
>
>

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