hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "stack (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Resolved: (HBASE-1044) Make hbase less of a fainting lily when running beside a hogging tasktracker
Date Wed, 17 Dec 2008 06:58:44 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-1044?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel

stack resolved HBASE-1044.

    Resolution: Invalid

I reviewed datanode and namenode configurations.  It heartbeats every 3 seconds.  Retries
3 times.  Doesn't have notion of shutting down if doesn't connect to master as we do.

Closing as invalid.  When ZK is in the mix, I think we'll be less fragile.

> Make hbase less of a fainting lily when running beside a hogging tasktracker
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: HBASE-1044
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-1044
>             Project: Hadoop HBase
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: stack
>            Assignee: stack
>             Fix For: 0.19.0
> From IRC (with some improving text added -- finishes on a good point made by jgray):
> {code}
> 18:53 < St^Ack> The coupling in a MR cluster is looser than it is in hbase cluster
> 18:53 < St^Ack> TTs only need report in every ten minutes and a task can fail and
be restarted
> 18:54 < St^Ack> Whereas with hbase, it must report in at least every two minutes
(IIRC) and cannot 'redo' lost edit -- no chance of a redo
> 18:54 < St^Ack> So, your MR job can be rougher about getting to the finish line;
> 18:55 < tim_s> yeah. 
> 18:55 < St^Ack> If MR is running on same nodes as those hosting hbase, then it
can rob resources from hbase in a way that damages hbase but not TT
> 18:56 < St^Ack> So, maybe we need to look at the hbase config; make it more tolerant
when its running beside a hogging TT job
> 18:57 < tim_s> hmm, that would be lovely
> 18:57 < St^Ack> Need to look at HDFS; see how 'fragile' it is too; hbase should
be at least that 'fragile'
> 18:57 < jgray> yeah, most issues we see come from resource issues on shared hdfs/tt/rs
> 18:57 < tim_s> so is it common to host hbase elsewhere?
> 18:57 < St^Ack> Let me make an issue on it because this is common failure case
for hbase (Setup hbase then run your old MR job as though nothing has changed -- then surprise
when the little hbase lady faints)
> 18:57 < jgray> tim_s: currently, no.  common practice is shared
> 18:58 < St^Ack> ... and its better if shared -- locality benefits
> 18:58 < tim_s> would that be a good idea though? cause I don't really need to have
hadoop local I guess.
> 18:58 < tim_s> ahh
> 18:58 < apurtell> we share also
> ...
> 18:59 < jgray> beyond locality, sharing makes sense as hdfs and hbase nodes have
different requirements... hdfs being heaviest on io (where hbase has no use), hbase heavy
in memory, TTs vary greatly but most often heavy in cpu/io
> {code}

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

View raw message