hadoop-hdfs-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Konstantin Shvachko (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HDFS-4942) Add retry cache support in Namenode
Date Fri, 12 Jul 2013 22:45:50 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-4942?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13707492#comment-13707492

Konstantin Shvachko commented on HDFS-4942:

I was thinking about it and I feel that adding the retry-related fields and flags in the RPC
layer is not the best way. Mostly because the retry logic is intended for a few HDFS methods
only, while the new field and flag will be serialized and de-serialized by everybody including
DataNodes, Balancers, MapReduce and Yarn.

I think a better way would be to use <clientName + callId> as a key to index the retry
cache entries. This will 
- constrain changes to HDFS only
- avoid incompatible RPC changes that effect sub-projects
- limit serialization overhead to only the methods involved in the retry.

This will require making clientName unique as many recently advocated for.
Would that sound reasonable?
> Add retry cache support in Namenode
> -----------------------------------
>                 Key: HDFS-4942
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-4942
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: ha, namenode
>            Reporter: Suresh Srinivas
>            Assignee: Suresh Srinivas
>         Attachments: HDFSRetryCache.pdf
> In current HA mechanism with FailoverProxyProvider and non HA setups with RetryProxy
retry a request from the RPC layer. If the retried request has already been processed at the
namenode, the subsequent attempts fail for non-idempotent operations such as  create, append,
delete, rename etc. This will cause application failures during HA failover, network issues
> This jira proposes adding retry cache at the namenode to handle these failures. More
details in the comments.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

View raw message