hbase-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ted Yu (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-6435) Reading WAL files after a recovery leads to time lost in HDFS timeouts when using dead datanodes
Date Wed, 26 Sep 2012 11:20:07 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6435?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13463714#comment-13463714

Ted Yu commented on HBASE-6435:

I think we can poll dev@hbase for minimal hadoop version requirement.
If 1.1 passes as the minimal version, we should remove this fix.
> Reading WAL files after a recovery leads to time lost in HDFS timeouts when using dead
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: HBASE-6435
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6435
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: master, regionserver
>    Affects Versions: 0.96.0
>            Reporter: nkeywal
>            Assignee: nkeywal
>             Fix For: 0.96.0
>         Attachments: 6435.unfinished.patch, 6435.v10.patch, 6435.v10.patch, 6435.v12.patch,
6435.v12.patch, 6435.v12.patch, 6435-v12.txt, 6435.v13.patch, 6435.v14.patch, 6435.v2.patch,
6435.v7.patch, 6435.v8.patch, 6435.v9.patch, 6435.v9.patch, 6535.v11.patch
> HBase writes a Write-Ahead-Log to revover from hardware failure. This log is written
on hdfs.
> Through ZooKeeper, HBase gets informed usually in 30s that it should start the recovery
> This means reading the Write-Ahead-Log to replay the edits on the other servers.
> In standards deployments, HBase process (regionserver) are deployed on the same box as
the datanodes.
> It means that when the box stops, we've actually lost one of the edits, as we lost both
the regionserver and the datanode.
> As HDFS marks a node as dead after ~10 minutes, it appears as available when we try to
read the blocks to recover. As such, we are delaying the recovery process by 60 seconds as
the read will usually fail with a socket timeout. If the file is still opened for writing,
it adds an extra 20s + a risk of losing edits if we connect with ipc to the dead DN.
> Possible solutions are:
> - shorter dead datanodes detection by the NN. Requires a NN code change.
> - better dead datanodes management in DFSClient. Requires a DFS code change.
> - NN customisation to write the WAL files on another DN instead of the local one.
> - reordering the blocks returned by the NN on the client side to put the blocks on the
same DN as the dead RS at the end of the priority queue. Requires a DFS code change or a kind
of workaround.
> The solution retained is the last one. Compared to what was discussed on the mailing
list, the proposed patch will not modify HDFS source code but adds a proxy. This for two reasons:
> - Some HDFS functions managing block orders are static (MD5MD5CRC32FileChecksum). Implementing
the hook in the DFSClient would require to implement partially the fix, change the DFS interface
to make this function non static, or put the hook static. None of these solution is very clean.

> - Adding a proxy allows to put all the code in HBase, simplifying dependency management.
> Nevertheless, it would be better to have this in HDFS. But this solution allows to target
the last version only, and this could allow minimal interface changes such as non static methods.
> Moreover, writing the blocks to the non local DN would be an even better solution long

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