hbase-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Enis Soztutar (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-4755) HBase based block placement in DFS
Date Fri, 15 Mar 2013 23:14:13 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4755?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13603967#comment-13603967
] 

Enis Soztutar commented on HBASE-4755:
--------------------------------------

I like Sanjay's idea in that it is more generic, and can help other users apart from hbase.
It can also be used further to get rid of distributed cache, which is a giant hack, and have
true distributed cache with very high replication from within hdfs. 
Assuming we have that, it is not clear to me how much we can gain by doing HDFS-2576 on top
of this. I think Devaraj lists the pros and cons quite neatly. 
I would say, depending on the plan to implement it, we might as well push for it, and reevaluate
the plans for HDFS-2576. 
                
> HBase based block placement in DFS
> ----------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-4755
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4755
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>    Affects Versions: 0.94.0
>            Reporter: Karthik Ranganathan
>            Assignee: Christopher Gist
>            Priority: Critical
>         Attachments: 4755-wip-1.patch, hbase-4755-notes.txt
>
>
> The feature as is only useful for HBase clusters that care about data locality on regionservers,
but this feature can also enable a lot of nice features down the road.
> The basic idea is as follows: instead of letting HDFS determine where to replicate data
(r=3) by place blocks on various regions, it is better to let HBase do so by providing hints
to HDFS through the DFS client. That way instead of replicating data at a blocks level, we
can replicate data at a per-region level (each region owned by a promary, a secondary and
a tertiary regionserver). This is better for 2 things:
> - Can make region failover faster on clusters which benefit from data affinity
> - On large clusters with random block placement policy, this helps reduce the probability
of data loss
> The algo is as follows:
> - Each region in META will have 3 columns which are the preferred regionservers for that
region (primary, secondary and tertiary)
> - Preferred assignment can be controlled by a config knob
> - Upon cluster start, HMaster will enter a mapping from each region to 3 regionservers
(random hash, could use current locality, etc)
> - The load balancer would assign out regions preferring region assignments to primary
over secondary over tertiary over any other node
> - Periodically (say weekly, configurable) the HMaster would run a locality checked and
make sure the map it has for region to regionservers is optimal.
> Down the road, this can be enhanced to control region placement in the following cases:
> - Mixed hardware SKU where some regionservers can hold fewer regions
> - Load balancing across tables where we dont want multiple regions of a table to get
assigned to the same regionservers
> - Multi-tenancy, where we can restrict the assignment of the regions of some table to
a subset of regionservers, so an abusive app cannot take down the whole HBase cluster.

--
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

Mime
View raw message