accumulo-notifications mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "ASF subversion and git services (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (ACCUMULO-2519) FATE operation failed across upgrade
Date Sat, 05 Apr 2014 01:02:56 GMT


ASF subversion and git services commented on ACCUMULO-2519:

Commit 5a504b311c0e5f59ff5b14221c6bf61f43b4d093 in accumulo's branch refs/heads/1.5.2-SNAPSHOT
from [~busbey]
[;h=5a504b3 ]

ACCUMULO-2519 Aborts upgrade if there are Fate transactions from an old version.

> FATE operation failed across upgrade
> ------------------------------------
>                 Key: ACCUMULO-2519
>                 URL:
>             Project: Accumulo
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 1.5.0, 1.5.1
>            Reporter: Keith Turner
>            Assignee: Sean Busbey
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 1.5.2, 1.6.0
> While running the new upgrade script I noticed that a FATE operation failed. I think
this was caused by the package name changes in 1.6.  However executing FATE ops across an
upgrade is probably not safe, its certainly not tested or easy to test.   Discussed this on
IRC, should probably refuse to upgrade if FATE stack is not empty. 
> {noformat}
> 2014-03-20 18:20:40,724 [fate.Fate] ERROR: Thread "Repo runner 0" died java.lang.RuntimeException:
java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: org.apache.accumulo.server.master.tableOps.TraceRepo
> java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException:
>         at
>         at
>         at org.apache.accumulo.fate.Fate$
>         at
>         at
> Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: org.apache.accumulo.server.master.tableOps.TraceRepo
>         at org.apache.accumulo.fate.ZooStore.deserialize(
>         at
>         ... 4 more
> Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: org.apache.accumulo.server.master.tableOps.TraceRepo
>         at$
>         at Method)
>         at
>         at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(
>         at org.apache.accumulo.start.classloader.AccumuloClassLoader$2.loadClass(
>         at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(
>         at java.lang.Class.forName0(Native Method)
>         at java.lang.Class.forName(
>         at
>         at
>         at
>         at
>         at
>         at
>         at org.apache.accumulo.fate.ZooStore.deserialize(
>         ... 5 more
> {noformat}
> IRC converstation :
> {noformat}
> <busbey> hurm. so how useful would a test set that injects faults into the !METADATA
table be?
> <busbey> or into FATE
> <busbey> for that matter
> <busbey> to make sure that we have sufficient failure handling to avoid catastrophic
> <kturner> I think I saw a FATE related bug in the logs also
> <kturner> FATE serializes classes and pushes them on a stack in zookeeper
> <kturner> in 1.6 package names were changed, so things could not deserialize
> <busbey> oh boy
> <busbey> that's not good
> <busbey> so like they were serialized while the cluster was 1.5?
> <busbey> and then post upgrade explosions?
> <elserj> sounds like it
> <busbey> were package names changed 1.4 -> 1.5 related to fate?
> <kturner> yep
> <busbey> because in theory
> <busbey> I could have a 1.4 cluster
> <elserj> almost want to preserve classes which were renamed as deprecated
> <busbey> that I upgrade to 1.5 and then 1.6
> <busbey> and I could, in theory not allow enough time for FATE to clear out in
the mean
> <busbey> well, or provide some kind of transition jar
> <busbey> that includes classes to allow for burn off
> <busbey> that you could later remove
> <busbey> this sounds like a blocker
> <busbey> barring some kind of documentation we could do
> <busbey> for safely shutting down a cluster in prep for an upgrade
> <busbey> the monitor doesn't show any indicators for waiting FATE operations, does
> <kturner> no
> <kturner> maybe 1.6 could refuse to upgrade if the FATE queue is not empty
> <busbey> filed CCUMULO-2517
> <busbey> well
> <busbey> 1) was this also a problem doing 1.4 -> 1.5?
> <busbey> and we just haven't had anyone hit it yet?
> <elserj> do you have an idea of how many renames this introduces, keith?
> <busbey> 2) that sounds like a good idea
> <busbey> as a first check, then just say "please start up the master under PREV_VERSION"
and wait for FATE to clear
> <kturner> we could do the same thing for 1.5
> <busbey> with a ref to upgrade notes that explain how to check if FATE is clear?
> <kturner> yeah
> <busbey> that will require we finish ACCUMULO-2469, I presume?
> <busbey> (that's the ticket for documenting how to access zookeeper)
> <busbey> two additional tickets or one?
> <elserj> there's a class that will print fate ops
> <busbey> 1) upgrade instructions should include how to check if there are fate
operations pending
> <busbey> 2) upgrade code should refuse to upgrade if there are fae operations pending
> <busbey> nice! we could use that and leave 2469 for later, then?
> <ctubbsii_bot>
> <elserj> ctubbsii_bot you need to trim punctuation
> * murraju ( has joined #accumulo
> <busbey> do those two sound like they cover the FATE bug?
> <busbey> I presume we don't know enough yet to make a call on the delete marker
> <busbey> and that any additional guards on the GC should be aiming for post-1.6?
> <kturner> I am creating a ticket, any problem w/ me just plopping this conversation
onto the ticket?
> <busbey> sounds good
> <kturner> elserj?
> <elserj> oh, sure
> {noformat}

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

View raw message