hadoop-common-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Devaraj Das (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Updated: (HADOOP-1027) Fix the RAM FileSystem/Merge problems (reported in HADOOP-1014)
Date Tue, 20 Feb 2007 13:42:06 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-1027?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Devaraj Das updated HADOOP-1027:
--------------------------------

    Attachment: 1027-new.patch

This is the correct patch.

> Fix the RAM FileSystem/Merge problems (reported in HADOOP-1014)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-1027
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-1027
>             Project: Hadoop
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: mapred
>            Reporter: Devaraj Das
>         Assigned To: Devaraj Das
>         Attachments: 1027-new.patch
>
>
> 1) Merge algorithm implementation does not delete empty segments (sequence files with
no key/val data) in cases where single level merges don't happen on those segments (due to
the check "numberOfSegmentsRemaining <= factor" returning true). This affected the in-mem
merge in a subtle way :-
> For the in-mem merge, the merge-spill-file is given the same name as the name of the
0th entry file in the ramfs. If this file was an empty file, then it would not get deleted
from the ramfs, and if the subsequent merge on ramfs chose the same name for the merge-spill-file,
it would overwrite the previously created spill. This led to the inconsistent output sizes.
> 2) The InMemoryFileSystem has a "close" method which is not protected (only method where
pathToFileAttribs map is modified without first locking the InMemoryFileSystem instance) and
that quite likely leads to ConcurrentModificationException if some thread calls InMemoryFileSystem.close
(due to some exception) and some other thread is in the process of doing InMemoryFileSystem.getFiles().
However, this problem will not affect the correctness of the merge process (anyway the task
is going to fail) and the more important thing is that some other exception happened (like
insufficient disk space and so map outputs could not be written) which may not be related
to the merge process at all.
> 3) The number of outputs that is merged at once in RAM should be limited. This is to
prevent OutOfMemory errors. Consider a case where there are 10s of thousands of maps and all
maps generate empty outputs. Given the default size of the RAM FS as 75 MB, we can possibly
accomodate lots of map outputs in RAM without doing any merge but it also results in the various
other data structures exploding in size. We have to do a trade off here especially because
the inmem-merging is done in the TaskTracker process which already is under a good amount
of memory pressure.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


Mime
View raw message