hbase-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Hadoop QA (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-14893) Race between mutation on region and region closing operation leads to NotServingRegionException
Date Fri, 27 Nov 2015 19:10:10 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14893?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15030168#comment-15030168
] 

Hadoop QA commented on HBASE-14893:
-----------------------------------

{color:red}-1 overall{color}.  Here are the results of testing the latest attachment 
  http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12774640/14893-v1.txt
  against master branch at commit b280a41ba661f205eb5de33bb8e03c33e2b005d6.
  ATTACHMENT ID: 12774640

    {color:green}+1 @author{color}.  The patch does not contain any @author tags.

    {color:red}-1 tests included{color}.  The patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified
tests.
                        Please justify why no new tests are needed for this patch.
                        Also please list what manual steps were performed to verify this patch.

    {color:green}+1 hadoop versions{color}. The patch compiles with all supported hadoop versions
(2.4.0 2.4.1 2.5.0 2.5.1 2.5.2 2.6.0 2.6.1 2.7.0 2.7.1)

    {color:green}+1 javac{color}.  The applied patch does not increase the total number of
javac compiler warnings.

    {color:green}+1 protoc{color}.  The applied patch does not increase the total number of
protoc compiler warnings.

    {color:green}+1 javadoc{color}.  The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages.

    {color:green}+1 checkstyle{color}. The applied patch does not generate new checkstyle
errors.

    {color:green}+1 findbugs{color}.  The patch does not introduce any  new Findbugs (version
2.0.3) warnings.

    {color:green}+1 release audit{color}.  The applied patch does not increase the total number
of release audit warnings.

    {color:green}+1 lineLengths{color}.  The patch does not introduce lines longer than 100

  {color:green}+1 site{color}.  The mvn post-site goal succeeds with this patch.

    {color:green}+1 core tests{color}.  The patch passed unit tests in .

Test results: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/16683//testReport/
Release Findbugs (version 2.0.3) 	warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/16683//artifact/patchprocess/newFindbugsWarnings.html
Checkstyle Errors: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/16683//artifact/patchprocess/checkstyle-aggregate.html

  Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/16683//console

This message is automatically generated.

> Race between mutation on region and region closing operation leads to NotServingRegionException
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-14893
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14893
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Ted Yu
>            Assignee: Ted Yu
>         Attachments: 14893-v1.txt
>
>
> During system test involving Phoenix local index, we observed the following in region
server log:
> {code}
> 2015-11-25 08:20:03,258 DEBUG [B.defaultRpcServer.handler=38,queue=2,port=49524] ipc.RpcServer:
B.defaultRpcServer.handler=38,queue=2,port=49524: callId: 28 service:             ClientService
methodName: Scan size: 277 connection: 100.75.224.9:64138^M
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.NotServingRegionException: GIGANTIC_TABLE,,1448439565197.0dc568cba621f11fd848ef87241d8535.
is closing^M
>   at org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.HRegion.startRegionOperation(HRegion.java:7649)^M
>   at org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.HRegion.batchMutate(HRegion.java:2803)^M
>   at org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.HRegion.batchMutate(HRegion.java:2760)^M
>   at org.apache.phoenix.coprocessor.UngroupedAggregateRegionObserver.commitBatch(UngroupedAggregateRegionObserver.java:140)^M
>   at org.apache.phoenix.coprocessor.UngroupedAggregateRegionObserver.doPostScannerOpen(UngroupedAggregateRegionObserver.java:417)^M
>   at org.apache.phoenix.coprocessor.BaseScannerRegionObserver.postScannerOpen(BaseScannerRegionObserver.java:177)^M
>   at org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.RegionCoprocessorHost$52.call(RegionCoprocessorHost.java:1318)^M
>   at org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.RegionCoprocessorHost$RegionOperation.call(RegionCoprocessorHost.java:1673)^M
>   at org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.RegionCoprocessorHost.execOperation(RegionCoprocessorHost.java:1748)^M
>   at org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.RegionCoprocessorHost.execOperationWithResult(RegionCoprocessorHost.java:1712)^M
>   at org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.RegionCoprocessorHost.postScannerOpen(RegionCoprocessorHost.java:1313)^M
>   at org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.RSRpcServices.scan(RSRpcServices.java:2259)^M
>   at org.apache.hadoop.hbase.protobuf.generated.ClientProtos$ClientService$2.callBlockingMethod(ClientProtos.java:32205)^M
>   at org.apache.hadoop.hbase.ipc.RpcServer.call(RpcServer.java:2114)^M
> {code}
> Here is related code snippet from UngroupedAggregateRegionObserver:
> {code}
>         region.startRegionOperation();
>         try {
> ...
>                             // Commit in batches based on UPSERT_BATCH_SIZE_ATTRIB in
config
>                             if (!indexMutations.isEmpty() && batchSize > 0
&&
>                                     indexMutations.size() % batchSize == 0) {
>                             	commitBatch(region, indexMutations, null);
> {code}
> In startRegionOperation(), read lock on region was obtained. So region close should not
proceed until the operation completes.
> However, we still got region closing because region#closing is set to true before write
lock is taken in region#doClose() :
> {code}
>     this.closing.set(true);
>     status.setStatus("Disabling writes for close");
>     // block waiting for the lock for closing
>     lock.writeLock().lock();
> {code}
> Proposed fix is to obtain write lock first.
> Thanks to Rajeshbabu for offline discussion.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Mime
View raw message