hadoop-mapreduce-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Kartashov, Andy" <Andy.Kartas...@mpac.ca>
Subject RE: Oozie apparent concurrency deadlocking
Date Thu, 15 Nov 2012 15:29:02 GMT

Further to my post below and while searching the web , I believe I found hints to my problem
solution but have no idea how to implement it:

... - are you using FairScheduler? If so and since you mention that
the Sqoop import command is successful, you could be hitting your per
user job limit.

Whenever Oozie launches a job, it requires two job submissions (if not
more) - one being the monitor+launcher, and the subsequent ones being
the ones that do the real logic work. The launcher job is something
that will launch the remaining jobs, and hence sticks around until
they have all ended - taking up one running job slot for the whole
lifetime of the Oozie job.

For example, with a per user job limit of 3, if you were to run 3
Oozie jobs, the 3 slots would be filled with launchers first. These
would submit their real jobs next, and those would end up being in a
queue - thereby forming a resource deadlock.

The solution is to channel Oozie launcher hadoop jobs into a dedicated
launcher pool. This pool can have a running job limit too but won't
cause a deadlock because the pools are now separated.

To do this, you need to pass the config property:
"oozie.launcher.<property that specifies your pool>" via WF
<configuration> elements or <job-xml> files to point to the separate

And also

Harsh J <harsh@cloudera.com> wrote:
>> In a FairScheduler environment, especially where max-running-job
>> limits are configured, it is recommended to override the Oozie
>> launcher job's pool to be different than the actual required working
>> pool (for actions that launch other MR jobs).
>> If your scheduler is configured to pick ${user.name} up automatically,
>> then your Oozie launcher config must use the super-override pool name
>> config:
>> oozie.launcher.mapred.fairscheduler.pool=launcherpoolname
>> Your target pool for launchers can still carry limitations, but it
>> should no longer deadlock your actual MR execution (after which the
>> launcher dies away anyway).


Please help.


From: Kartashov, Andy
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 9:45 AM
To: user@hadoop.apache.org; 'cdh-user@cloudera.org'
Subject: Oozie apparent concurrency deadlocking


Have struggled for the last four days with this and still cannot find an answer even after
hours of searching the web.

I tried oozie workflow to execute my consecutive sqoop jobs in parallel.  I use forking that
executes 9 sqoop-action-nodes.

I had no problem executing the job on a pseudo-distributed cluster but with an added DN/TT
node I ran into (what seems like) deadlocking.  Oozie web interface displays those jobs as
"Running" indefinitely until I eventually kill the workflow.

What I did noticed wasd that if I was to reduce the number of sqoop-action-nodes to 3, all
works fine.

I found somewhere about oozie.service.CallableQueueService.callable.concurrency property to
be set by default to 3 and it hinted me that this must be it them. I tried to over-ride this
property by increasing this number to 5 in oozie-site.xml and restart oozie server and then
run 4 sqoop-action-nodes in fork but the result is the same. 2 out of 4 nodes execute successfully
(not in the same order every time) but the other 2 get hung in indefinite "Running...".

There were some suggestion about changing queue name from default but nothing was clear as
to what it change it to and where.

In case someone found a solution to this please do share. I will greatly appreciate it.

NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments are confidential, subject to copyright and
may be privileged. Any unauthorized use, copying or disclosure is prohibited. If you are not
the intended recipient, please delete and contact the sender immediately. Please consider
the environment before printing this e-mail. AVIS : le pr?sent courriel et toute pi?ce jointe
qui l'accompagne sont confidentiels, prot?g?s par le droit d'auteur et peuvent ?tre couverts
par le secret professionnel. Toute utilisation, copie ou divulgation non autoris?e est interdite.
Si vous n'?tes pas le destinataire pr?vu de ce courriel, supprimez-le et contactez imm?diatement
l'exp?diteur. Veuillez penser ? l'environnement avant d'imprimer le pr?sent courriel

View raw message