hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: HBCK options to disable master maintenance threads
Date Mon, 20 Jun 2016 21:50:57 GMT
Is this change for 2.0 ?

For 1.x, this would be incompatible change, right ?

On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Enis Söztutar <enis@apache.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Stephen Jiang <syuanjiangdev@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Enis, what I suggested was that even no repair is suggested, we still
> > should disable master maint tasks in online check for more deterministic
> > result.
> >
>
> I see, makes sense as long as we are finished with HBASE-16008.
>
>
> >
> > Thanks
> > Stephen
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Enis Söztutar <enis.soz@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > check out the corresponding shouldXXX commands:
> > >
> > >   public boolean shouldDisableBalancer() {
> > >
> > >     return fixAny || disableBalancer;
> > >
> > >   }
> > > If fixAny which is true if any of the -fix is run, we disable the
> master
> > > chores.
> > >
> > > For -fixHdfsOverlaps and -fixHdfsHoles, I've mentioned this in the
> jira I
> > > think, but we should deprecate those, and do -fixOverlaps and -fixHoles
> > > separately. These two new commands will look at BOTH hdfs and meta to
> > > decide on what to do.
> > >
> > > Enis
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Stephen Jiang <
> syuanjiangdev@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >       } else if (cmd.equals("-disableBalancer")) {
> > > >
> > > >         setDisableBalancer();
> > > >
> > > >       }  else if (cmd.equals("-disableSplitAndMerge")) {
> > > >
> > > >         setDisableSplitAndMerge();
> > > >
> > > > In HBCK, we will either use the options to disable master maintenance
> > > work
> > > > (see above) or the master maintenance are disabled during repair.
> > > >
> > > > I think we should always disable master maintenance work during
> online
> > > > HBCK, because balancer moving regions around during online check; or
> > > > split/merge regions during online check would have unexpected side
> > > effect.
> > > >
> > > > How do you think?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Stephen
> > > >
> > > > Also, I think we have too many options.  We really should reduce
> > options
> > > in
> > > > hbck so that it is more user friendly (eg. currently implementation
> of
> > > > -fixHdfsOverlaps would almost 100% create hole, it does not make
> sense
> > to
> > > > run it alone, it should always run with -fixHdfsHoles option; and
> very
> > > > likely with -fixMeta option)
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message