zookeeper-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Norbert Kalmar <nkal...@cloudera.com.INVALID>
Subject Re: JAVA 11 build is broken on 3.5
Date Fri, 04 Jan 2019 15:46:17 GMT
+1 for Netty 4 in 3.5

Pretty much all the pros and cons has been said before me.
I would only add that this is not a new functionality that we wan't to
backport. It's a criticall(ish?) bugfix, which requires quite a bit of
change unfortunately.

Regards,
Norbert

On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 4:36 PM Andor Molnar <andor@apache.org> wrote:

> What are those patches exactly?
>
> Comparing the ported version of 3.5 with master I’ve only found 2 patches
> which are missing:
>
> ZOOKEEPER-3146 Limit the maximum client connections per IP in
> NettyServerCnxnFactory
> ZOOKEEPER-3177 Refactor request throttle logic in NIO and Netty to keep
> the same behavior and make the code easier to maintain
>
> None of them are critical I would say.
> Is there anything else I’m missing?
>
> Andor
>
>
>
>
> > On 2019. Jan 4., at 16:27, Enrico Olivelli <eolivelli@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Il giorno ven 4 gen 2019 alle ore 14:23 Andor Molnar
> > <andor@apache.org <mailto:andor@apache.org>> ha scritto:
> >>
> >> Hi team / Enrico,
> >>
> >> I’d like to get feedback from the community on the following patch
> (moving the discussion from GitHub to here):
> >>
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-3204 <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-3204>
> >> https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/753 <
> https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/753>
> >>
> >> In a nutshell: looks like that Netty 3.10 is broken under Java 11: it
> doesn’t properly close the underlying socket (probably not closing the
> registered NIO selectors) and reconfig tests are unable to re-bind the
> ports. This problem is similar that we already fixed in NIO with the
> following patch:
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/commit/c3babb94275ad667dc71c10dcb08a383a3c154c2
> <
> https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/commit/c3babb94275ad667dc71c10dcb08a383a3c154c2
> >
> >> The problem doesn’t show up on trunk which has been recently upgraded
> to Netty 4.
> >>
> >> Repro:
> >> - Start embedded ZK, stop it and try to restart on the same port, or
> >> - Start normal ensemble and reconfig to use different (client) port.
> Then reconfig back to the original port which should fail. (that’s the
> scenario which is covered in ReconfigTest)
> >>
> >> I created the above patch (#753) to backport Netty 4 upgrade to 3.5 and
> it fixes the problem with Java 11 (it doesn’t cause regression in the
> pre-commit build either), but Enrico is having concerns about making such
> big change before the release.
> >>
> >> I tend to agree, but let’s see what are the options.
> >>
> >> Thoughts:
> >> - Do we have to fix this? - Yes. Java 11 is LTS and I the bug is
> critical.
> >> - Can we fix Netty 3? - Maybe. Let’s say we find the bug in Netty 3,
> what can we do?
> >>       a) We cannot workaround from ZooKeeper itself and have to submit
> a pull request for Netty. I think it’s quite unlikely that they will accept
> the change given it’s not a security bug, but even if they did, only the
> upgraded version of Netty 3 would work properly with ZooKeeper. Err.
> >>       b) We can workaround it from ZooKeeper: that could be option #1,
> but I have a strong feeling about it’s not going to be the case.
> >> - Shall we upgrade to Netty 4? - this is option #2
> >>
> >> Please share your thoughts, maybe you know about an option #3.
> >
> > Thank you Andor
> >
> > I have thought more about this problem, and I have checked that Netty
> > 3 is really dead/unmantained (last release in 2016).
> > If I understand correctly there is no easy workaround (nothing without
> > hacking Netty 3 internals)
> >
> > As soon as we will declare 3.5.5 "stable" the world will hopefully
> > abandon 3.4 and switch to 3.5 + Netty (because of SSL support).
> > The network stack is very important so it is better to have Netty 4 as
> > foundation, I am thinking about security issues, we won't make an
> > "hotfix" release with the switch to Netty 4 because there is a bad bug
> > in Netty 3.
> > So better to switch now.
> >
> > But Facebooks friends, expecially @ivmaykov did a lot of bugfixes
> > around Netty on master branch, we must be sure that what we are
> > delivering in 3.5.5 is stable.
> >
> > We will also have to state clearly in the "release notes" that Netty
> > version is changed, as this may have a non trivial impact to memory
> > usage (i.e. Netty 4 uses more Direct memory by default)
> >
> > So to recap my final opinion: +1 to switch to Netty 4 if we take care
> > of port all of the fixes around Netty 4 from master branch and we
> > state the switch clearly in the release notes
> >
> > Enrico
> >
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Andor
>
>

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