On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 7:34 AM, Ravikumar Govindarajan <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Just one more observation here...
>
> Even if readerPooling is set to true, lucene has 2 readers (One for search
> & one updates/deletes)
>
> But the reader for updates/deletes is not opened/closed for every commit
> call which is the default behavior as of today. It is opened only once
> (During first update/delete call)
>

I will take a closer look at the code for this one.  Likely when I wrote
this code I didn't fully understand the underlying Lucene reader, writer,
open, close semantics.  Thank you for pointing this out!

Aaron


>
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Ravikumar Govindarajan <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > In newer versions of the code there are multiple streams involved.  One
> for
> >> each open file handle plus if a sequential read is detected a new stream
> >> is
> >> created for the instance for better performance
> >
> >
> > Great. We just patched up our Blur version with this code.
> >
> > While I was digging at the reader-closed issue, was quite surprised to
> > observe the following behavior
> >
> >    - Issue a commit
> >    - Lucene opens a new reader via IndexWriter. (Doesn't re-use our
> >    already opened DirectoryReader)
> >    - Processes all updates/deletes/merges
> >    - Closes the new reader
> >    - Complete commit
> >
> > For a big index & lots of commits, opening a new-reader for every commit
> > is prohibitively expensive.
> >
> >
> > Here is the JIRA for it...
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2297
> >
> > All we need to do is just set "readerPooling=true" in IndexWriterConfig
> > class
> >
> > Please do explore this option when you find time.
> >
> > --
> > Ravi
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 7:48 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 6:06 AM, Ravikumar Govindarajan <
> >> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > We have solved it temporarily by using a KeepLastTwoCommits del
> policy.
> >> We
> >> > don't get these exceptions now!!!
> >> >
> >>
> >> Great!
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Btw, I see that pread calls in FSDataInputStream.java are
> synchronized.
> >> Is
> >> > it possible that merge DFS read calls could potentially block search
> DFS
> >> > read calls?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Yes.
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Would it be a good idea to have 2 DFSInputStreams for every file, one
> >> for
> >> > merge & another for search?
> >> >
> >>
> >> In newer versions of the code there are multiple streams involved.  One
> >> for
> >> each open file handle plus if a sequential read is detected a new stream
> >> is
> >> created for the instance for better performance.  Checkout the
> >> HdfsDirectory class.
> >>
> >> Aaron
> >>
> >>
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Ravikumar Govindarajan <
> >> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Sorry, I mis-understood the code.
> >> > > I see that it has 2 locks IndexRefreshWriteLock &
> >> IndexRefreshReadLock.
> >> > > They look to be separate
> >> > >
> >> > > On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 7:16 PM, Ravikumar Govindarajan <
> >> > > [email protected]> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> Thanks a lot Aaron.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> I guess we took a commit of 0.2.2 that doesn't have the
> >> > >> IndexRefreshWriteLock (IRWL). It looks like it co-ordinates between
> >> > >> searches & incoming mutation commits. If so, then it will likely
> >> solve
> >> > the
> >> > >> first issue for us (AlreadyClosedException)
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Can you recollect if that was the reason IRWL was introduced?
> >> > >>
> >> > >> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 6:40 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]
> >
> >> > >> wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >>> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 2:30 AM, Ravikumar Govindarajan <
> >> > >>> [email protected]> wrote:
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> > Actually there are 2 issues...
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> > 1. IndexReaderClosedException
> >> > >>> > 2. HDFS Stream Closed
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> Likely when the index is closed it closes the underlying
> >> indexinputs as
> >> > >>> well causing the HDFS Stream closed exception.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> > Merge completion results in File Deletion & ultimately HDFS
> Stream
> >> > >>> Closed
> >> > >>> > during Search....
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> > I use IndexFileDeleter with KeepOnlyLastCommitDeletionPolicy.
> This
> >> > >>> blindly
> >> > >>> > deletes the file, without bothering to cross-check
> >> > >>> IndexReader.RefCount >
> >> > >>> > 0.
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> Hmm.  You can see here:
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-blur/blob/release-0.2.2-incubating/blur-core/src/main/java/org/apache/blur/manager/writer/BlurIndexSimpleWriter.java#L303
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> That once the new index is available it is swapped into the index
> >> ref
> >> > >>> object and the old one is sent to the index closer.  Once the ref
> to
> >> > the
> >> > >>> index are low enough it closes the index.  Or at least it should.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> I will continue looking into the problem but I don't have a
> solution
> >> > for
> >> > >>> you yet.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> Aaron
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> > *Exception(message:Unknown error during rewrite,
> >> > >>> > stackTraceStr:java.io.IOException: Stream closed*
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>>
> >> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.DFSInputStream.pread(DFSInputStream.java:1385)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.DFSInputStream.read(DFSInputStream.java:1374)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>>
> >> org.apache.hadoop.fs.FSDataInputStream.read(FSDataInputStream.java:89)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.blur.store.hdfs.HdfsIndexInput.readInternal(HdfsIndexInput.java:62)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.blur.store.buffer.ReusedBufferedIndexInput.readBytes(ReusedBufferedIndexInput.java:167)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.blur.store.buffer.ReusedBufferedIndexInput.readBytes(ReusedBufferedIndexInput.java:122)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.blur.store.hdfs.MmapCacheIndexInput.readAndcache(MmapCacheIndexInput.java:24)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.blur.store.blockcache_v2.CacheIndexInput.fillNormally(CacheIndexInput.java:354)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.blur.store.blockcache_v2.CacheIndexInput.fill(CacheIndexInput.java:379)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.blur.store.blockcache_v2.CacheIndexInput.tryToFill(CacheIndexInput.java:297)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.blur.store.blockcache_v2.CacheIndexInput.readByte(CacheIndexInput.java:151)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.blur.lucene.warmup.TraceableIndexInput.readByte(TraceableIndexInput.java:62)
> >> > >>> > at
> org.apache.lucene.store.DataInput.readVInt(DataInput.java:108)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.codecs.BlockTreeTermsReader$FieldReader$SegmentTermsEnum$Frame.loadBlock(BlockTreeTermsReader.java:2366)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.codecs.BlockTreeTermsReader$FieldReader$SegmentTermsEnum.seekCeil(BlockTreeTermsReader.java:1949)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.blur.index.ExitableReader$ExitableTermsEnum.seekCeil(ExitableReader.java:250)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.index.FilteredTermsEnum.next(FilteredTermsEnum.java:225)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.search.TermCollectingRewrite.collectTerms(TermCollectingRewrite.java:78)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.search.ConstantScoreAutoRewrite.rewrite(ConstantScoreAutoRewrite.java:95)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.search.MultiTermQuery$ConstantScoreAutoRewrite.rewrite(MultiTermQuery.java:220)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> org.apache.lucene.search.MultiTermQuery.rewrite(MultiTermQuery.java:288)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > org.apache.lucene.search.BooleanQuery.rewrite(BooleanQuery.java:412)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > org.apache.lucene.search.BooleanQuery.rewrite(BooleanQuery.java:412)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > org.apache.lucene.search.BooleanQuery.rewrite(BooleanQuery.java:412)
> >> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Ravikumar Govindarajan <
> >> > >>> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>> > > One extra info we gleaned from the logs...
> >> > >>> > >
> >> > >>> > > 1. Merge Starts & is about to complete
> >> > >>> > > 2. Searcher is opened
> >> > >>> > > 3. Merge Completes
> >> > >>> > > 4. Ref-count drops to 0 in IndexReader
> >> > >>> > > 5. IndexReader closed while Searcher is still open
> >> > >>> > >
> >> > >>> > > This seems to be the main pattern for causing the Exception
> >> > >>> > >
> >> > >>> > > --
> >> > >>> > > Ravi
> >> > >>> > >
> >> > >>> > > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 3:08 PM, Ravikumar Govindarajan <
> >> > >>> > > [email protected]> wrote:
> >> > >>> > >
> >> > >>> > >> Thanks Aaron...
> >> > >>> > >>
> >> > >>> > >> Just a quick question. Lucene itself has ref-counting to
> close
> >> > it's
> >> > >>> > >> readers no? Or Blur has it's own logic to handle it?
> >> > >>> > >>
> >> > >>> > >> --
> >> > >>> > >> Ravi
> >> > >>> > >>
> >> > >>> > >> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 7:56 PM, Aaron McCurry <
> >> [email protected]
> >> > >
> >> > >>> > wrote:
> >> > >>> > >>
> >> > >>> > >>> Likely yes.  If have a few minutes this weekend I can look
> >> > through
> >> > >>> that
> >> > >>> > >>> version and see if I can point you in the right direction.
> >> > >>> > >>>
> >> > >>> > >>> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Ravikumar Govindarajan <
> >> > >>> > >>> [email protected]> wrote:
> >> > >>> > >>>
> >> > >>> > >>> > Sometimes during an ongoing search we receive an
> >> > >>> > >>> > IndexReaderClosedException...
> >> > >>> > >>> >
> >> > >>> > >>> > We are on an older version of Blur (0.2.2). Has this been
> >> fixed
> >> > >>> in
> >> > >>> > >>> newer
> >> > >>> > >>> > versions or we have been using it wrongly?
> >> > >>> > >>> >
> >> > >>> > >>> >
> >> *stackTraceStr:org.apache.lucene.store.AlreadyClosedException:
> >> > >>> this
> >> > >>> > >>> > IndexReader cannot be used anymore as one of its child
> >> readers
> >> > >>> was
> >> > >>> > >>> closed*
> >> > >>> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> >
> >> org.apache.lucene.index.IndexReader.ensureOpen(IndexReader.java:257)
> >> > >>> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> > >>> >
> >> > >>> > >>> >
> >> > >>> > >>>
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.index.FilterAtomicReader.fields(FilterAtomicReader.java:380)
> >> > >>> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> > >>> >
> >> > >>> > >>> >
> >> > >>> > >>>
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.blur.index.ExitableReader$ExitableFilterAtomicReader.fields(ExitableReader.java:81)
> >> > >>> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> > >>> >
> >> > >>> > >>> >
> >> > >>> > >>>
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.search.TermCollectingRewrite.collectTerms(TermCollectingRewrite.java:52)
> >> > >>> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> > >>> >
> >> > >>> > >>> >
> >> > >>> > >>>
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.search.ConstantScoreAutoRewrite.rewrite(ConstantScoreAutoRewrite.java:95)
> >> > >>> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> > >>> >
> >> > >>> > >>> >
> >> > >>> > >>>
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> >>
> org.apache.lucene.search.MultiTermQuery$ConstantScoreAutoRewrite.rewrite(MultiTermQuery.java:220)
> >> > >>> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> > >>>
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> >
> org.apache.lucene.search.MultiTermQuery.rewrite(MultiTermQuery.java:288)
> >> > >>> > >>> > at
> >> > >>> >
> >> org.apache.lucene.search.BooleanQuery.rewrite(BooleanQuery.java:412)
> >> > >>> > >>> >
> >> > >>> > >>>
> >> > >>> > >>
> >> > >>> > >>
> >> > >>> > >
> >> > >>> >
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to