[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-11238?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14236035#comment-14236035
]
Chris Li commented on HADOOP-11238:
-----------------------------------
[~benoyantony] I trimmed the length on line 63
Hi [~cmccabe], made those changes to the jira ticket, thanks for the advice.
bq. Do we need to set the ticker here? It seems that the default ticker uses
System.nanoTime, which is the same monotonic time source that Hadoop's Timer
uses.
It's currently like this because the test case uses dependency injection to
test timing. We could use a fake guava timer but I wanted to avoid tight
coupling between hadoop and the guava library. Let me know what you think.
bq. Why don't we use Guava's expireAfterWrite option to remove entries from the
cache after a certain timeout? I guess this could be a separate configuration
option, or we could just use 10 * cacheTimeout.
Good idea. I added this using 10*cacheTimeout, and added some comments
> Group Cache should not cause namenode pause
> -------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HADOOP-11238
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-11238
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 2.5.1
> Reporter: Chris Li
> Assignee: Chris Li
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: HADOOP-11238.patch, HADOOP-11238.patch
>
>
> This patch addresses an issue where the namenode pauses during group
> resolution by only allowing a single group resolution query on expiry. There
> are two scenarios:
> 1. When there is not yet a value in the cache, all threads which make a
> request will block while a single thread fetches the value.
> 2. When there is already a value in the cache and it is expired, the new
> value will be fetched in the background while the old value is used by other
> threads
> This is handled by guava's cache.
> Negative caching is a feature built into the groups cache, and since guava's
> caches don't support different expiration times, we have a separate negative
> cache which masks the guava cache: if an element exists in the negative cache
> and isn't expired, we return it.
> In total the logic for fetching a group is:
> 1. If username exists in static cache, return the value (this was already
> present)
> 2. If username exists in negative cache and negative cache is not expired,
> raise an exception as usual
> 3. Otherwise Defer to guava cache (see two scenarios above)
> Original Issue Below:
> ----------------------------
> Our namenode pauses for 12-60 seconds several times every hour. During these
> pauses, no new requests can come in.
> Around the time of pauses, we have log messages such as:
> 2014-10-22 13:24:22,688 WARN org.apache.hadoop.security.Groups: Potential
> performance problem: getGroups(user=xxxxx) took 34507 milliseconds.
> The current theory is:
> 1. Groups has a cache that is refreshed periodically. Each entry has a cache
> expiry.
> 2. When a cache entry expires, multiple threads can see this expiration and
> then we have a thundering herd effect where all these threads hit the wire
> and overwhelm our LDAP servers (we are using ShellBasedUnixGroupsMapping with
> sssd, how this happens has yet to be established)
> 3. group resolution queries begin to take longer, I've observed it taking 1.2
> seconds instead of the usual 0.01-0.03 seconds when measuring in the shell
> `time groups myself`
> 4. If there is mutual exclusion somewhere along this path, a 1 second pause
> could lead to a 60 second pause as all the threads compete for the resource.
> The exact cause hasn't been established
> Potential solutions include:
> 1. Increasing group cache time, which will make the issue less frequent
> 2. Rolling evictions of the cache so we prevent the large spike in LDAP
> queries
> 3. Gate the cache refresh so that only one thread is responsible for
> refreshing the cache
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
