hadoop-hdfs-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Eli Collins (Commented) (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HDFS-3148) The client should be able to use multiple local interfaces for data transfer
Date Tue, 03 Apr 2012 20:20:22 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-3148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13245686#comment-13245686

Eli Collins commented on HDFS-3148:

Hey Suresh,

This feature is actually independent of all the other hdfs-3140 sub-tasks, and multihoming
in general, and therefore does not require any further jiras. It covers using multiple interfaces
on the *client* side, the others are all about using multiple jiras on the *server* side.
These can both be used independently, eg it's just as valuable to use multiple local interfaces
on the client side even if you  don't use multihoming on the server side. Happy to pull it
out to it's own top-level jira if that's more clear. Ditto, lemme know if you think the other
HDFS-3140 jiras should be in a branch. Just enabling multihoming requires HDFS-3146 and HDFS-3147
and a branch for a couple jiras felt like overkill.  Much of the work has been in the cleanup
of DatanodeID and friends.


> The client should be able to use multiple local interfaces for data transfer
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: HDFS-3148
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-3148
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: hdfs client
>            Reporter: Eli Collins
>            Assignee: Eli Collins
>             Fix For: 1.1.0, 2.0.0
>         Attachments: hdfs-3148-b1.txt, hdfs-3148-b1.txt, hdfs-3148.txt, hdfs-3148.txt,
> HDFS-3147 covers using multiple interfaces on the server (Datanode) side. Clients should
also be able to utilize multiple *local* interfaces for outbound connections instead of always
using the interface for the local hostname. This can be accomplished with a new configuration
parameter ({{dfs.client.local.interfaces}}) that accepts a list of interfaces the client should
use. Acceptable configuration values are the same as the {{dfs.datanode.available.interfaces}}
parameter. The client binds its socket to a specific interface, which enables outbound traffic
to use that interface. Binding the client socket to a specific address is not sufficient to
ensure egress traffic uses that interface. Eg if multiple interfaces are on the same subnet
the host requires IP rules that use the source address (which bind sets) to select the destination
interface. The SO_BINDTODEVICE socket option could be used to select a specific interface
for the connection instead, however it requires JNI (is not in Java's SocketOptions) and root
access, which we don't want to require clients have.
> Like HDFS-3147, the client can use multiple local interfaces for data transfer. Since
the client already cache their connections to DNs choosing a local interface at random seems
like a good policy. Users can also pin a specific client to a specific interface by specifying
just that interface in dfs.client.local.interfaces.
> This change was discussed in HADOOP-6210 a while back, and is actually useful/independent
of the other HDFS-3140 changes.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira


View raw message