tajo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Azuryy Yu <azury...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Some Tajo-0.9.0 questions
Date Fri, 23 Jan 2015 01:52:37 GMT
Hi Hyunsik,

I appreciate your detail explanation,  It' very helpful. Thanks.


On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 10:47 PM, Hyunsik Choi <hyunsik@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi Azuryy,
>
> I just know more the best practices. Since the resource model of Tajo
> is being evolved rapidly, the current model is not completed and is
> not intuitive in my opinion. So, you may be hard to set the best
> resources configs to Tajo.
>
> Even though the resource model includes the number of CPU cores,
> memory size, and disk resources, its essential thing is to determine
> the number of concurrent tasks in each machine.
>
> The proper number of concurrent tasks can be derived from hardware
> resource capacity. The followings come from my experiences:
>
>  * (Disk) Performance has been the best when each SATA disk takes 2
> concurrent tasks at the same time.
>  * (CPU) Performance has been the best in most cases when the
> concurrent tasks = the number of cores
>  * (Memory) Each task consumes 2 ~ 4 GB. Memory consumption for each
> task varies in workloads. More than 2 GB has been showed stable and
> efficient performance even in heavy workloads and long time workloads.
>
> Note that the smallest number of concurrent tasks derived from tree
> kinds of hardware capacity determines the best concurrent tasks in the
> machine. For example, consider one machine which is equipped with 2
> CPU cores and 12 disks. In this cases, 2 CPU will determine the best
> number of concurrent tasks in the machine because 2 concurrent tasks
> of CPU cores is fewer than 24 concurrent tasks of 12 disks.
>
> Let's get back to the discussion of your machine. If we assume that
> the entire resources of your physical node (24cpu, 64G mem,  4T*12
> HDD) are used for a Tajo, I would think as follows:
>
>  * 24 concurrent tasks is the best in 24 cores.
>  * 24 tasks would be the best in 12 disks if the disks are SATA. If
> they are SAS disks, each disk can accept more than 2. 36 may be the
> best for 12 disks.
>  * Memory seems to be most scarce resource in all resources. OS and
> other daemons should use few GBs. So, I assume only 60 GBs may be
> available for Tajo. I think that 3GB seems to be the best for each
> task. In terms of memory size, 20 concurrent tasks (60 GB / 3GB) in
> the machine seems to be proper number.
>
> The lowest concurrency number is 20 by 64GB memory. So, the following
> configs may be proper to your physical node.
>
> tajo-site.xml
> <!--  worker  -->
> <property>
>   <name>tajo.worker.resource.memory-mb</name>
>   <value>60512</value> <!--  20 tasks + 1 qm (i.e, 3000 * 20 + 512 * 1)
> -->
> </property>
> <property>
>   <name>tajo.worker.resource.disks</name>
>   <value>20</value> <!--  20 tasks (20 * 1.0f)  -->
> </property>
>
> <property>
>   <name>tajo.task.memory-slot-mb.default</name>
>   <value>3000</value> <!--  default 512 -->
> </property>
> <property>
>   <name>tajo.task.disk-slot.default</name>
>   <value>1.0f</value> <!--  default 0.5 -->
> </property>
>
>
> tajo-env.sh
> TAJO_WORKER_HEAPSIZE=60000
>
> The above config is for a single physical node dedicated for a Tajo
> worker. The configs for virtual machine may be different because each
> of them use OS and other daemons.
>
> I hope that my suggestion would be helpful to you.
>
> Best regards,
> Hyunsik
>
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Azuryy Yu <azuryyyu@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yes Hyunsik,
> >
> > but that's all I know from the Tajo website. I guess there are more
> default
> > configurations but not showed on the Tajo wiki, right?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Hyunsik Choi <hyunsik@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Thank you for sharing the machine information.
> >>
> >> In my opinion, we can boost up Tajo performance very much in the
> >> machine with proper configuration if the server is dedicated for Tajo.
> >> I think that the configuration that we mentioned above only uses some
> >> of the physical resources in the machine :)
> >>
> >> Warm regards,
> >> Hyunsik
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Azuryy Yu <azuryyyu@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Thanks Tyunsik.
> >> >
> >> > I asked our infra team, my 6 nodes Tajo cluster were visulized from
> one
> >> > host. that's mean I run 6 nodes Tajo cluster on one phisical
> host.(24cpu,
> >> > 64G mem,  4T*12 HDD)
> >> >
> >> > so I think this was the real performance bottle neck.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 11:12 AM, Hyunsik Choi <hyunsik@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi Azuryy,
> >> >>
> >> >> Tajo automatically rewrites distinct aggregation queries into
> >> >> multi-level aggregations. The query rewrite that Jinho suggested may
> >> >> be already involved.
> >> >>
> >> >> I think that your query response times (12 ~ 15 secs) for distinct
> >> >> count seems to be reasonable because just count aggregation takes 5
> >> >> secs. Usually, distinct aggregation queries are much more slower than
> >> >> just aggregation queries because distinct aggregation involves sort,
> >> >> large intermediate data, and only distinct value handling.
> >> >>
> >> >> In addition, I have a question for more better configuration guide.
> >> >> Could you share available CPU, memory and disks for Tajo?
> >> >>
> >> >> Even though Jinho suggested one, there is still room to set exact and
> >> >> better configurations. Since the resource configuration determines
> the
> >> >> number of concurrent tasks, it may be main cause of your performance
> >> >> problem.
> >> >>
> >> >> Best regards,
> >> >> Hyunsik
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 6:54 PM, Jinho Kim <jhkim@apache.org>
wrote:
> >> >> >  Sorry for my mistake example query.
> >> >> > Can you change to “select count(a.auid) from ( select auid from
> >> >> > test_pl_00_0 group by auid ) a;” ?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > -Jinho
> >> >> > Best regards
> >> >> >
> >> >> > 2015-01-19 11:44 GMT+09:00 Azuryy Yu <azuryyyu@gmail.com>:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Sorry for no response during weekend.
> >> >> >> I changed hdfs-site.xml and restart hdfs and tajo.but  It's
more
> slow
> >> >> than
> >> >> >> before.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> default> select count(a.auid) from ( select auid from
> test_pl_00_0 )
> >> a;
> >> >> >> Progress: 0%, response time: 1.132 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 0%, response time: 1.134 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 0%, response time: 1.536 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 0%, response time: 2.338 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 0%, response time: 3.341 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 3%, response time: 4.343 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 4%, response time: 5.346 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 9%, response time: 6.35 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 11%, response time: 7.352 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 16%, response time: 8.354 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 18%, response time: 9.362 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 24%, response time: 10.364 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 27%, response time: 11.366 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 29%, response time: 12.368 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 32%, response time: 13.37 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 37%, response time: 14.373 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 40%, response time: 15.377 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 42%, response time: 16.379 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 42%, response time: 17.382 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 43%, response time: 18.384 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 43%, response time: 19.386 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 45%, response time: 20.388 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 45%, response time: 21.391 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 46%, response time: 22.393 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 46%, response time: 23.395 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 48%, response time: 24.398 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 48%, response time: 25.401 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 50%, response time: 26.403 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 100%, response time: 26.95 sec
> >> >> >> ?count
> >> >> >> -------------------------------
> >> >> >> 4487999
> >> >> >> (1 rows, 26.95 sec, 8 B selected)
> >> >> >> default> select count(distinct auid) from test_pl_00_0;
> >> >> >> Progress: 0%, response time: 0.88 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 0%, response time: 0.881 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 0%, response time: 1.283 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 0%, response time: 2.086 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 0%, response time: 3.088 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 0%, response time: 4.09 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 25%, response time: 5.092 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 33%, response time: 6.094 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 50%, response time: 7.096 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 50%, response time: 8.098 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 50%, response time: 9.099 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 66%, response time: 10.101 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 66%, response time: 11.103 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 83%, response time: 12.105 sec
> >> >> >> Progress: 100%, response time: 12.268 sec
> >> >> >> ?count
> >> >> >> -------------------------------
> >> >> >> 1222356
> >> >> >> (1 rows, 12.268 sec, 8 B selected)
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 11:00 PM, Jinho Kim <jhkim@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >  Thank you for your sharing
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Can you enable the dfs.datanode.hdfs-blocks-metadata.enabled
in
> >> >> >> > hdfs-site.xml ?
> >> >> >> > If you enable the block-metadata, tajo-cluster can use
the
> volume
> >> load
> >> >> >> > balancing. You should restart the datanode and tajo cluster.
I
> will
> >> >> >> > investigate performance of count-distinct operator. and
You can
> >> >> change to
> >> >> >> > “select count(a.auid) from ( select auid from test_pl_00_0
) a”
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > -Jinho
> >> >> >> > Best regards
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > 2015-01-16 18:05 GMT+09:00 Azuryy Yu <azuryyyu@gmail.com>:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > > default> select count(*) from test_pl_00_0;
> >> >> >> > > Progress: 0%, response time: 0.718 sec
> >> >> >> > > Progress: 0%, response time: 0.72 sec
> >> >> >> > > Progress: 0%, response time: 1.121 sec
> >> >> >> > > Progress: 12%, response time: 1.923 sec
> >> >> >> > > Progress: 28%, response time: 2.925 sec
> >> >> >> > > Progress: 41%, response time: 3.927 sec
> >> >> >> > > Progress: 50%, response time: 4.931 sec
> >> >> >> > > Progress: 100%, response time: 5.323 sec
> >> >> >> > > 2015-01-16T17:04:41.116+0800: [GC2015-01-16T17:04:41.116+0800:
> >> >> [ParNew:
> >> >> >> > > 26543K->6211K(31488K), 0.0079770 secs] 26543K->6211K(115456K),
> >> >> >> 0.0080700
> >> >> >> > > secs] [Times: user=0.02 sys=0.00, real=0.01 secs]
> >> >> >> > > 2015-01-16T17:04:41.303+0800: [GC2015-01-16T17:04:41.303+0800:
> >> >> [ParNew:
> >> >> >> > > 27203K->7185K(31488K), 0.0066950 secs] 27203K->7185K(115456K),
> >> >> >> 0.0068130
> >> >> >> > > secs] [Times: user=0.02 sys=0.00, real=0.01 secs]
> >> >> >> > > 2015-01-16T17:04:41.504+0800: [GC2015-01-16T17:04:41.504+0800:
> >> >> [ParNew:
> >> >> >> > > 28177K->5597K(31488K), 0.0091630 secs] 28177K->6523K(115456K),
> >> >> >> 0.0092430
> >> >> >> > > secs] [Times: user=0.02 sys=0.00, real=0.01 secs]
> >> >> >> > > 2015-01-16T17:04:41.778+0800: [GC2015-01-16T17:04:41.778+0800:
> >> >> [ParNew:
> >> >> >> > > 26589K->6837K(31488K), 0.0067280 secs] 27515K->7764K(115456K),
> >> >> >> 0.0068160
> >> >> >> > > secs] [Times: user=0.02 sys=0.00, real=0.01 secs]
> >> >> >> > > ?count
> >> >> >> > > -------------------------------
> >> >> >> > > 4487999
> >> >> >> > > (1 rows, 5.323 sec, 8 B selected)
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> > > On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Azuryy Yu <
> azuryyyu@gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> > > > Hi,
> >> >> >> > > > There is no big improvement, sometimes more
slower than
> >> before. I
> >> >> >> also
> >> >> >> > > try
> >> >> >> > > > to increase worker's heap size and parallel,
nothing
> improve.
> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> > > > default> select count(distinct auid) from
test_pl_00_0;
> >> >> >> > > > Progress: 0%, response time: 0.963 sec
> >> >> >> > > > Progress: 0%, response time: 0.964 sec
> >> >> >> > > > Progress: 0%, response time: 1.366 sec
> >> >> >> > > > Progress: 0%, response time: 2.168 sec
> >> >> >> > > > Progress: 0%, response time: 3.17 sec
> >> >> >> > > > Progress: 0%, response time: 4.172 sec
> >> >> >> > > > Progress: 16%, response time: 5.174 sec
> >> >> >> > > > Progress: 16%, response time: 6.176 sec
> >> >> >> > > > Progress: 16%, response time: 7.178 sec
> >> >> >> > > > Progress: 33%, response time: 8.18 sec
> >> >> >> > > > Progress: 50%, response time: 9.181 sec
> >> >> >> > > > Progress: 50%, response time: 10.183 sec
> >> >> >> > > > Progress: 50%, response time: 11.185 sec
> >> >> >> > > > Progress: 50%, response time: 12.187 sec
> >> >> >> > > > Progress: 66%, response time: 13.189 sec
> >> >> >> > > > Progress: 66%, response time: 14.19 sec
> >> >> >> > > > Progress: 100%, response time: 15.003 sec
> >> >> >> > > > 2015-01-16T17:00:56.410+0800:
> [GC2015-01-16T17:00:56.410+0800:
> >> >> >> [ParNew:
> >> >> >> > > > 26473K->6582K(31488K), 0.0105030 secs]
> 26473K->6582K(115456K),
> >> >> >> > 0.0105720
> >> >> >> > > > secs] [Times: user=0.04 sys=0.00, real=0.01
secs]
> >> >> >> > > > 2015-01-16T17:00:56.593+0800:
> [GC2015-01-16T17:00:56.593+0800:
> >> >> >> [ParNew:
> >> >> >> > > > 27574K->6469K(31488K), 0.0086300 secs]
> 27574K->6469K(115456K),
> >> >> >> > 0.0086940
> >> >> >> > > > secs] [Times: user=0.02 sys=0.00, real=0.01
secs]
> >> >> >> > > > 2015-01-16T17:00:56.800+0800:
> [GC2015-01-16T17:00:56.800+0800:
> >> >> >> [ParNew:
> >> >> >> > > > 27461K->5664K(31488K), 0.0122560 secs]
> 27461K->6591K(115456K),
> >> >> >> > 0.0123210
> >> >> >> > > > secs] [Times: user=0.02 sys=0.01, real=0.01
secs]
> >> >> >> > > > 2015-01-16T17:00:57.065+0800:
> [GC2015-01-16T17:00:57.065+0800:
> >> >> >> [ParNew:
> >> >> >> > > > 26656K->6906K(31488K), 0.0070520 secs]
> 27583K->7833K(115456K),
> >> >> >> > 0.0071470
> >> >> >> > > > secs] [Times: user=0.03 sys=0.00, real=0.01
secs]
> >> >> >> > > > ?count
> >> >> >> > > > -------------------------------
> >> >> >> > > > 1222356
> >> >> >> > > > (1 rows, 15.003 sec, 8 B selected)
> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> > > > On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Azuryy Yu
<
> azuryyyu@gmail.com
> >> >
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >> Thanks Kim, I'll try and post back.
> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> > > >> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Jinho
Kim <
> jhkim@apache.org>
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> > > >>> Thanks Azuryy Yu
> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> > > >>> Your parallel running tasks of tajo-worker
is 10 but heap
> >> >> memory is
> >> >> >> > > 3GB.
> >> >> >> > > >>> It
> >> >> >> > > >>> cause a long JVM pause
> >> >> >> > > >>> I recommend following :
> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> > > >>> tajo-env.sh
> >> >> >> > > >>> TAJO_WORKER_HEAPSIZE=3000 or more
> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> > > >>> tajo-site.xml
> >> >> >> > > >>> <!--  worker  -->
> >> >> >> > > >>> <property>
> >> >> >> > > >>>   <name>tajo.worker.resource.memory-mb</name>
> >> >> >> > > >>>   <value>3512</value> <!--
 3 tasks + 1 qm task  -->
> >> >> >> > > >>> </property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> <property>
> >> >> >> > > >>>   <name>tajo.task.memory-slot-mb.default</name>
> >> >> >> > > >>>   <value>1000</value> <!--
 default 512 -->
> >> >> >> > > >>> </property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> <property>
> >> >> >> > > >>>    <name>tajo.worker.resource.dfs-dir-aware</name>
> >> >> >> > > >>>    <value>true</value>
> >> >> >> > > >>> </property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> <!--  end  -->
> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> http://tajo.apache.org/docs/0.9.0/configuration/worker_configuration.html
> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> > > >>> -Jinho
> >> >> >> > > >>> Best regards
> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> > > >>> 2015-01-16 16:02 GMT+09:00 Azuryy Yu
<azuryyyu@gmail.com
> >:
> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> > > >>> > Thanks Kim.
> >> >> >> > > >>> >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > The following is my tajo-env and
tajo-site
> >> >> >> > > >>> >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > *tajo-env.sh:*
> >> >> >> > > >>> > export HADOOP_HOME=/usr/local/hadoop
> >> >> >> > > >>> > export JAVA_HOME=/usr/local/java
> >> >> >> > > >>> > _TAJO_OPTS="-server -verbose:gc
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:+PrintGCDateStamps
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:+PrintGCDetails
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:+UseGCLogFileRotation
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:NumberOfGCLogFiles=9
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:GCLogFileSize=256m
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:+DisableExplicitGC
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:+UseCompressedOops
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:SoftRefLRUPolicyMSPerMB=0
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:+UseFastAccessorMethods
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:+UseParNewGC
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:+CMSParallelRemarkEnabled
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:CMSInitiatingOccupancyFraction=70
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:+UseCMSCompactAtFullCollection
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:CMSFullGCsBeforeCompaction=0
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:+CMSClassUnloadingEnabled
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:CMSMaxAbortablePrecleanTime=300
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:+CMSScavengeBeforeRemark
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:PermSize=160m
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:GCTimeRatio=19
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:SurvivorRatio=2
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   -XX:MaxTenuringThreshold=60"
> >> >> >> > > >>> > _TAJO_MASTER_OPTS="$_TAJO_OPTS
-Xmx512m -Xms512m
> -Xmn256m"
> >> >> >> > > >>> > _TAJO_WORKER_OPTS="$_TAJO_OPTS
-Xmx3g -Xms3g -Xmn1g"
> >> >> >> > > >>> > _TAJO_QUERYMASTER_OPTS="$_TAJO_OPTS
-Xmx512m -Xms512m
> >> >> -Xmn256m"
> >> >> >> > > >>> > export TAJO_OPTS=$_TAJO_OPTS
> >> >> >> > > >>> > export TAJO_MASTER_OPTS=$_TAJO_MASTER_OPTS
> >> >> >> > > >>> > export TAJO_WORKER_OPTS=$_TAJO_WORKER_OPTS
> >> >> >> > > >>> > export TAJO_QUERYMASTER_OPTS=$_TAJO_QUERYMASTER_OPTS
> >> >> >> > > >>> > export TAJO_LOG_DIR=${TAJO_HOME}/logs
> >> >> >> > > >>> > export TAJO_PID_DIR=${TAJO_HOME}/pids
> >> >> >> > > >>> > export TAJO_WORKER_STANDBY_MODE=true
> >> >> >> > > >>> >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > *tajo-site.xml:*
> >> >> >> > > >>> >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > <configuration>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   <property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >     <name>tajo.rootdir</name>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >     <value>hdfs://test-cluster/tajo</value>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   </property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   <property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >     <name>tajo.master.umbilical-rpc.address</name>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >     <value>10-0-86-51:26001</value>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   </property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   <property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >     <name>tajo.master.client-rpc.address</name>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >     <value>10-0-86-51:26002</value>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   </property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   <property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >     <name>tajo.resource-tracker.rpc.address</name>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >     <value>10-0-86-51:26003</value>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   </property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   <property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >     <name>tajo.catalog.client-rpc.address</name>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >     <value>10-0-86-51:26005</value>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   </property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   <property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >     <name>tajo.worker.tmpdir.locations</name>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >     <value>/test/tajo1,/test/tajo2,/test/tajo3</value>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   </property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   <!--  worker  -->
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   <property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >
> >> >> >> >
> <name>tajo.worker.resource.tajo.worker.resource.cpu-cores</name>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >     <value>4</value>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   </property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >  <property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >    <name>tajo.worker.resource.memory-mb</name>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >    <value>5120</value>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >  </property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   <property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >     <name>tajo.worker.resource.dfs-dir-aware</name>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >     <value>true</value>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   </property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   <property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >     <name>tajo.worker.resource.dedicated</name>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >     <value>true</value>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   </property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   <property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >
> >>  <name>tajo.worker.resource.dedicated-memory-ratio</name>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >     <value>0.6</value>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >   </property>
> >> >> >> > > >>> > </configuration>
> >> >> >> > > >>> >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 2:50 PM,
Jinho Kim <
> >> jhkim@apache.org>
> >> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >> > > >>> >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > Hello Azuyy yu
> >> >> >> > > >>> > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > I left some comments.
> >> >> >> > > >>> > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > -Jinho
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > Best regards
> >> >> >> > > >>> > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > 2015-01-16 14:37 GMT+09:00
Azuryy Yu <
> azuryyyu@gmail.com
> >> >:
> >> >> >> > > >>> > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > > Hi,
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > > I tested Tajo before
half a year, then not focus on
> >> Tajo
> >> >> >> > because
> >> >> >> > > >>> some
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > other
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > > works.
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > > then I setup a small
dev Tajo cluster this week.(six
> >> >> nodes,
> >> >> >> VM)
> >> >> >> > > >>> based
> >> >> >> > > >>> > on
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > > Hadoop-2.6.0.
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > > so my questions is:
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > > 1) From I know half
a yea ago, Tajo is work on Yarn,
> >> using
> >> >> >> Yarn
> >> >> >> > > >>> > scheduler
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > > to manage  job resources.
but now I found it doesn't
> >> rely
> >> >> on
> >> >> >> > > Yarn,
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > because
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > > I only start HDFS daemons,
no yarn daemons. so Tajo
> has
> >> >> his
> >> >> >> own
> >> >> >> > > job
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > > sheduler ?
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > Now, tajo does using own
task scheduler. and  You can
> >> start
> >> >> >> tajo
> >> >> >> > > >>> without
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > Yarn daemons
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > Please refer to
> >> >> >> > > http://tajo.apache.org/docs/0.9.0/configuration.html
> >> >> >> > > >>> > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > > 2) Does that we need
to put the file replications on
> >> every
> >> >> >> > nodes
> >> >> >> > > on
> >> >> >> > > >>> > Tajo
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > > cluster?
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > No, tajo does not need more
replication.  if you set
> more
> >> >> >> > > >>> replication,
> >> >> >> > > >>> > data
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > locality can be increased
> >> >> >> > > >>> > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > such as I have a six nodes
Tajo cluster, then should I
> >> set
> >> >> HDFS
> >> >> >> > > block
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > > replication to six?
because:
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > > I noticed when I run
Tajo query, some nodes are
> busy,
> >> but
> >> >> >> some
> >> >> >> > is
> >> >> >> > > >>> free.
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > > because the file's blocks
are only located on these
> >> nodes.
> >> >> >> non
> >> >> >> > > >>> others.
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > In my opinion, you need to
run balancer
> >> >> >> > > >>> > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> >
> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> http://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.6.0/hadoop-project-dist/hadoop-hdfs/HDFSCommands.html#balancer
> >> >> >> > > >>> > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > 3)the test data set is 4
million rows. nearly several
> GB.
> >> >> but
> >> >> >> > it's
> >> >> >> > > >>> very
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > > slow when I runing:
select count(distinct ID) from
> >> ****;
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > > Any possible problems
here?
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > Could you share tajo-env.sh,
tajo-site.xml ?
> >> >> >> > > >>> > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > > Thanks
> >> >> >> > > >>> > > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> > >
> >> >> >> > > >>> >
> >> >> >> > > >>>
> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> >> > > >
> >> >> >> > >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message