stratos-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Reka Thirunavukkarasu <r...@wso2.com>
Subject Re: Problem with Stratos 4.1 autohealing (was RE: Problems with Stratos 4.1 failover and autohealing)
Date Mon, 13 Jul 2015 11:15:48 GMT
Hi Shaheed,

As i went though the logs "*duplicated cartridges*" case, the observation
is actually correct and it is what expected from stratos side as well. The
expected flow is as below currently as Akila explained. I have added a
point where the termination and spawning can happen at the same time:

1. Faulty member is detected and received by autoscaler
2. Autoscaler immediately move this from active list to obsolete list
3. Cluster monitor periodic task executes minimum drool, then scaling drool
and obsolete drool as parallel to other drools.
4. There is a chance that while obsolete drool is terminating the instance,
minimum drool can start a new instance as both are executed in two
different thread.
5. After minimum drool got executed, scaling drool will get executed. In
that according to the cluster based stats, it can take any decision to
scaleup/down.

Please let us know whether this behavior has any impact on your scenarios.

Thanks,
Reka





On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 4:39 PM, Shaheedur Haque (shahhaqu) <
shahhaqu@cisco.com> wrote:

>  I met with several of the wso2 team, and we agreed the following next
> steps:
>
>
>
> 1.      Treat the “Stratos failover” issue as separate from the
> “duplicate instances” issue, and use a new thread for the former, keeping
> this thread for the latter.
>
> 2.      The lack of synchronisation between the cleanup of the faulty VMs
> and the startup of the replacement VMs was noted.
>
> a.      It was mentioned that the period of overlap should be seconds,
> perhaps upto 60s.
>
> b.      I noted that for many of our scenarios, where the hardware is 1:1
> mapped to VMs (i.e. neither over-subscribed nor under-subscribed), the
> overlap may be a problem. I will consult with others and confirm. Imesh
> ack’d this point.
>
> c.      I will provide the wso2 logs for my test case (summarised below).
>
> d.      I will check with the test team where the problem was originally
> detected if this is a transient  (upto 60s) or long-lived, and gather logs
> as needed.
>
>
>
> *From:* Imesh Gunaratne [mailto:imesh@apache.org]
> *Sent:* 06 July 2015 17:11
> *To:* dev
> *Subject:* Re: Problems with Stratos 4.1 failover and autohealing
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 8:13 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <ravihansa@wso2.com
> > wrote:
>
>
>
>  If it detects that cartridge agent has not published any health event
> within the given time window (60mins), it will publish the MemberFault
> event.
>
>
>
>  This should be 60 seconds.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 8:13 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <ravihansa@wso2.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Shaheed,
>
>
> Regarding Stratos fail-over scenario, by looking at the logs it seems that
> there are multiple member fault cases detected by CEP. This
> FaultHandlingWindowProcessor [1] running inside CEP is implemented to check
> for health stats published by cartridge agents. It does not check whether
> actual VM or processes running inside the VM is active or not. If it
> detects that cartridge agent has not published any health event within the
> given time window (60mins), it will publish the MemberFault event.
>
> Ideally this should not happen regardless of whether the deployment is HA
> or not. Because FaultHandlingWindowProcessor will count the 60mins interval
> from the point Stratos server started. Only reason I could think of which
> may have caused these faulty member logs is Stratos (or external CEP) did
> not receive health stats published by cartridge agents on time.
>
>
>
> Are you running Stratos in single-JVM mode? If so, I'd highly recommend
> that you deploy the CEP profile separately. Please refer to [2] for
> reference deployment architecture of Stratos HA setup.
>
>
>
> Regarding your second concern; Kill multiple Cartridges, I believe your
> concern is that the first message relating to recovery of the CPS came
> 66s after faulty member detection and recovery of other VMs started before
> that. I'd like to summarize few points regarding Stratos recovery process
> which I think will explain that behavior.
>
>
>
>  - Stratos detects faulty members only by checking the health stats
> published by cartridge agent and not by checking the existence of the
> actual VM.
>
>  - Upon detecting such faulty member, CEP will publish a faulty member
> event and after receiving such event AS will move that instance to obsolete
> list. AS will iterate over this obsolete list and try to terminate those
> instances via CC. When the termination is complete, CC will publish member
> terminated event, upon receiving that AS will remove that member from
> obsolete list.
>
>  - If CC fails to terminate the instance, it will keep retrying until a
> obsolete member timeout interval has passed. When the timeout expires, AS
> will forcefully remove that member from obsolete list.
>
>  - Stratos will not try to re-spawn the faulty instance right after
> detecting it. This recovery process is triggered by the Cluster monitor
> object. There is a Drools logic which gets executed periodically (monitor
> interval is configurable, default is 90s) which will execute the min-check
> rule, scale-up rule and scale-down rule and decide whether to spawn new
> instances. So this recovery process could take some time depending on your
> monitor interval.
>
>
>
>
>
> So in retrospect;
>
> - There is no way to control which cluster monitor gets executed first, so
> therefore it is possible that CPS recovery takes place after other VMs.
>
> - The reason for seeing lot of termination logs is because
> Stratos continuously tries to terminate those faulty members until obsolete
> member timeout has expired. This could occur if the actual VM was killed
> manually or by other means.
>
>
>
> However, we need to figure out why you got these faulty member events.
> Could you send us the CEP trace log for further analysis? Also you can
> enable debug logs for FaultHandlingWindowProcessor class to get more
> insights as to what's going on.
>
>
>
> I hope this would explain your concerns. We can have a Hangout session to
> discuss this further.
>
>
>
> [1]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/STRATOS/4.1.0+Configuring+HA+in+Single+JVM+Mode+on+EC2
>
> [2]
> https://github.com/apache/stratos/blob/master/extensions/cep/stratos-cep-extension/src/main/java/org/apache/stratos/cep/extension/FaultHandlingWindowProcessor.java
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 5:00 PM, Shaheedur Haque (shahhaqu) <
> shahhaqu@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I am seeing some issues around Stratos 4.1 around failover on the one hand
> (i.e. stop one running instance of Startos, start another as a
> replacement), and autohealing (i.e. a Cartridge dies and need to be
> replaced by Stratos) which feel as though they might have a common cause,
> so I am lumping them together for now. I’ll explain the two scenarios as I
> can…and the attach some logs explaining one scenario in detail.
>
>
>
> *Failover of Stratos*
>
>
>
> The situation here is that I have 3 servers, all running MySQL in
> active-active mode, and Stratos running on at most one of them under
> Pacemaker control. The test case is that I kill the server (actually a VM)
> running Stratos, and Pacemaker responds by starting Stratos on one of the
> remaining servers. Around the time of the action, there is no ongoing REST
> activity in terms of defining new Cartridges, or Applications or anything
> like that.
>
>
>
> ·        Expected result: the replacement Stratos instance “acquires” the
> running Cartridges, and the system continues without killing/replacing any
> Cartridges.
>
> ·        Actual result: all Cartridges are kill and restarted.
>
>
>
> *Kill multiple Cartridges*
>
>
>
> I have a test where several Cartridges are killed at the same time as
> follows. We have a Cartridge Proxy Server (CPS) that hosts the (Java)
> Cartridge agent for VMs which cannot run one natively. The CPS therefore
> runs N+1 JCAs, one for itself plus N for the Cartridges it is proxying.
> Killing the CPS therefore causes all N+1 JCAs to disappear, and from a
> Startos point of view, all N+1 VMs need to be restarted.
>
>
>
> ·        Expected result: each Cartridges is replaced by Stratos.
>
> ·        Actual result: looking at the Stratos logs, it seems that there
> is a race between the termination logic which cleans up as old cluster
> members dies against the startup logic which is spinning up replacement VMs
> for the terminated ones.
>
>
>
> Both cases previously seemed to work fine, where we **think** previously
> means versions of Stratos 4.1 dating back ~3 weeks or so. I attach a series
> of log extracts for the second scenario; I suspect this also covers the
> first, even if not, at least we can start here.
>
>
>
> 1.      Original spin up of CPS is at 2015-06-11 19:50:20,585. CPS fault
> seen around 2015-06-12 18:54:51, contemporaneously, all the other faults
> are seen:
>
>
>
> ID: [0] [STRATOS] [2015-06-12 18:54:51,788]  INFO
> {org.apache.stratos.cep.extension.FaultHandlingWindowProcessor} -  Faulty
> member detected [member-id]
> di-000-007.di-000-007.cisco-qvpc-sf-0.domain88ef85b5-5ec6-4d4e-b7b2-1ab9d3f7b160
> with [last time-stamp] 1434135185318 [time-out] 60000 milliseconds
>
> ...
>
> TID: [0] [STRATOS] [2015-06-12 18:54:51,803]  INFO
> {org.apache.stratos.cep.extension.FaultHandlingWindowProcessor} -  Faulty
> member detected [member-id]
> di-000-005.di-000-005.cisco-qvpc-sf-0.domain4bcdd49a-985f-4247-a70b-31c8d65153d8
> with [last time-stamp] 1434135192556 [time-out] 60000 milliseconds
>
> ...
>
> TID: [0] [STRATOS] [2015-06-12 18:54:51,837]  INFO
> {org.apache.stratos.cep.extension.FaultHandlingWindowProcessor} -  Faulty
> member detected [member-id]
> cartridge-proxy.cartridge-proxy.cartridge-proxy.domain95a58a3e-e7a9-4071-b42b-3551bad25e6a
> with [last time-stamp] 1434135189149 [time-out] 60000 milliseconds
>
> ...
>
> etc
>
> ...
>
> TID: [0] [STRATOS] [2015-06-12 18:54:51,862]  INFO
> {org.apache.stratos.cep.extension.FaultHandlingWindowProcessor} -  Faulty
> member detected [member-id]
> di-000-010.di-000-010.cisco-qvpc-sf-0.domain2ab24c1d-53cb-452e-8aa2-f02eecf2db78
> with [last time-stamp] 1434135193054 [time-out] 60000 milliseconds
>
> ...
>
> etc
>
> ...
>
>
>
> 2.      The last message relating to the CPS failure is at 18:54:52. The
> first message relating to recovery of the CPS is some 66 seconds later:
>
>
>
> TID: [0] [STRATOS] [2015-06-12 18:55:58,516]  INFO
> {org.apache.stratos.autoscaler.rule.RuleLog} -  [min-check] Partition
> available, hence trying to spawn an instance to fulfil minimum count!
> [cluster] cartridge-proxy.cartridge-proxy.cartridge-proxy.domain
>
>
>
> 3.      However, recovery of other VMs started as much as 54 seconds
> before this point to as much as 26 seconds after:
>
>
>
> TID: [0] [STRATOS] [2015-06-12 18:55:04,564]  INFO
> {org.apache.stratos.autoscaler.client.CloudControllerClient} -  Trying to
> spawn an instance via cloud controller: [cluster]
> di-000-008.di-000-008.cisco-qvpc-sf-0.domain [partition] whole-region
> [network-partition-id] RegionOne
>
> ...
>
> TID: [0] [STRATOS] [2015-06-12 18:56:20,603]  INFO
> {org.apache.stratos.autoscaler.client.CloudControllerClient} -  Trying to
> spawn an instance via cloud controller: [cluster]
> di-000-007.di-000-007.cisco-qvpc-sf-0.domain [partition] whole-region
> [network-partition-id] RegionOne
>
>
>
> 4.      Between point 2 and 3 (with fuzz for the races), I see Stratos
> cleaning the old VMs. For example:
>
>
>
> TID: [0] [STRATOS] [2015-06-12 18:55:04,580]  INFO
> {org.apache.stratos.cloud.controller.iaases.JcloudsIaas} -  Starting to
> terminate member: [cartridge-type] cisco-qvpc-sf-0 [member-id]
> di-000-008.di-000-008.cisco-qvpc-sf-0.domaina0f15eed-9599-4f3e-a70a-93ddd02ccf5f
>
>
>
> 5.      However, around that point, look at this:
>
>
>
> TID: [0] [STRATOS] [2015-06-12 18:55:12,835]  INFO
> {org.apache.stratos.autoscaler.rule.RuleLog} -  [scale-up] Trying to scale
> up over max, hence not scaling up cluster itself and
>
>                         notifying to parent for possible group scaling or
> app bursting.
>
>                         [cluster]
> di-000-005.di-000-005.cisco-qvpc-sf-0.domain [instance id]di-000-005-1
> [max] 1
>
>
>
>
>
> 6.      Is it possible that there is a race between the terminates and
> restarts? It certainly seems so, though a detailed knowledge of Startos is
> needed to confirm it:
>
>
>
> TID: [0] [STRATOS] [2015-06-12 18:55:12,798]  INFO
> {org.apache.stratos.autoscaler.rule.RuleLog} -  [min-check] Partition
> available, hence trying to spawn an instance to fulfil minimum count!
> [cluster] di-000-005.di-000-005.cisco-qvpc-sf-0.domain
>
> TID: [0] [STRATOS] [2015-06-12 18:55:12,798]  INFO
> {org.apache.stratos.autoscaler.client.CloudControllerClient} -  Trying to
> spawn an instance via cloud controller: [cluster]
> di-000-005.di-000-005.cisco-qvpc-sf-0.domain [partition] whole-region
> [network-partition-id] RegionOne
>
> TID: [0] [STRATOS] [2015-06-12 18:55:12,799]  INFO
> {org.apache.stratos.common.client.CloudControllerServiceClient} -
> Terminating instance via cloud controller: [member]
> di-000-005.di-000-005.cisco-qvpc-sf-0.domain4bcdd49a-985f-4247-a70b-31c8d65153d8
>
> TID: [0] [STRATOS] [2015-06-12 18:55:12,812]  INFO
> {org.apache.stratos.cloud.controller.messaging.publisher.TopologyEventPublisher}
> -  Publishing member created event: [service-name] cisco-qvpc-sf-0
> [cluster-id] di-000-005.di-000-005.cisco-qvpc-sf-0.domain
> [cluster-instance-id] di-000-005-1 [member-id]
> di-000-005.di-000-005.cisco-qvpc-sf-0.domaine9e4111c-abba-4979-af07-d13d90bbd84d
> [instance-id] null [network-partition-id] RegionOne [partition-id]
> whole-region [lb-cluster-id] null
>
> TID: [0] [STRATOS] [2015-06-12 18:55:12,817]  INFO
> {org.apache.stratos.messaging.message.processor.topology.MemberCreatedMessageProcessor}
> -  Member created: [service-name] cisco-qvpc-sf-0 [cluster-id]
> di-000-005.di-000-005.cisco-qvpc-sf-0.domain [member-id]
> di-000-005.di-000-005.cisco-qvpc-sf-0.domaine9e4111c-abba-4979-af07-d13d90bbd84d
> [cluster-instance-id] di-000-005-1
>
> TID: [0] [STRATOS] [2015-06-12 18:55:12,834] ERROR
> {org.apache.stratos.autoscaler.rule.RuleTasksDelegator} -  Request in
> flight threshold is Zero
>
> TID: [0] [STRATOS] [2015-06-12 18:55:12,835]  INFO
> {org.apache.stratos.autoscaler.rule.RuleLog} -  [scale-up] Trying to scale
> up over max, hence not scaling up cluster itself and
>
>                         notifying to parent for possible group scaling or
> app bursting.
>
>                         [cluster]
> di-000-005.di-000-005.cisco-qvpc-sf-0.domain [instance id]di-000-005-1
> [max] 1
>
>
>
> (I tried to file a JIRA on this, but I’m having a bit of trouble, hence
> posting here to get the ball rolling).
>
>
>
> Thanks, Shaheed
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Akila Ravihansa Perera
> Software Engineer, WSO2
>
> Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Imesh Gunaratne
>
>
>
> Senior Technical Lead, WSO2
>
> Committer & PMC Member, Apache Stratos
>



-- 
Reka Thirunavukkarasu
Senior Software Engineer,
WSO2, Inc.:http://wso2.com,
Mobile: +94776442007

Mime
View raw message