phoenix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William Yang (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (PHOENIX-3360) Secondary index configuration is wrong
Date Sat, 04 Feb 2017 15:10:51 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-3360?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15852818#comment-15852818
] 

William Yang commented on PHOENIX-3360:
---------------------------------------

PHOENIX-3360-v2.patch attached, [~jamestaylor]. In this version, only the mutations originated
from the HTableInterface created by CoprocessorHTableFactory will have high priority. I've
read PHOENIX-3271, unfortunately, this patch will break the assumption that all cross RS calls
are made with higher priority, as we didn't change the coprocessor env's configuration, we
just created a new hbase connection with specific configurations. 

The optimal way to make things right is to use separate handler queues for read and write.
Sharing the same handler queue with index requests might not be the best idea, because if
there are many UPSERT SELECTs, index updates might not have enough threads to be executed.
And this will slow down the mutations of data table. 
 
On the other hand, separate RW handler queues are not always configured and we cannot force
users to config this. In this case, we still have to make UPSERT SELECT's batch mutations
have higher priority. Later I'll attach a V3 patch to fix this. 
WDYT, [~jamestaylor]

> Secondary index configuration is wrong
> --------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: PHOENIX-3360
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-3360
>             Project: Phoenix
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Enis Soztutar
>            Assignee: Rajeshbabu Chintaguntla
>            Priority: Critical
>             Fix For: 4.10.0
>
>         Attachments: PHOENIX-3360.patch, PHOENIX-3360-v2.PATCH
>
>
> IndexRpcScheduler allocates some handler threads and uses a higher priority for RPCs.
The corresponding IndexRpcController is not used by default as it is, but used through ServerRpcControllerFactory
that we configure from Ambari by default which sets the priority of the outgoing RPCs to either
metadata priority, or the index priority.
> However, after reading code of IndexRpcController / ServerRpcController it seems that
the IndexRPCController DOES NOT look at whether the outgoing RPC is for an Index table or
not. It just sets ALL rpc priorities to be the index priority. The intention seems to be the
case that ONLY on servers, we configure ServerRpcControllerFactory, and with clients we NEVER
configure ServerRpcControllerFactory, but instead use ClientRpcControllerFactory. We configure
ServerRpcControllerFactory from Ambari, which in affect makes it so that ALL rpcs from Phoenix
are only handled by the index handlers by default. It means all deadlock cases are still there.

> The documentation in https://phoenix.apache.org/secondary_indexing.html is also wrong
in this sense. It does not talk about server side / client side. Plus this way of configuring
different values is not how HBase configuration is deployed. We cannot have the configuration
show the ServerRpcControllerFactory even only for server nodes, because the clients running
on those nodes will also see the wrong values. 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

Mime
View raw message