[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-9640?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14733724#comment-14733724
]
Ajith S commented on HADOOP-9640:
---------------------------------
I missed checking the sub-tasks. Will like to update documentation for
FairCallQueue as it has lot of configuration introduced. It will be better if
we can explain it briefly similar to
http://hadoop.apache.org/docs/current/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-site/FairScheduler.html.
Added a sub-task for it.
> RPC Congestion Control with FairCallQueue
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: HADOOP-9640
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-9640
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 2.2.0, 3.0.0
> Reporter: Xiaobo Peng
> Assignee: Chris Li
> Labels: hdfs, qos, rpc
> Attachments: FairCallQueue-PerformanceOnCluster.pdf,
> MinorityMajorityPerformance.pdf, NN-denial-of-service-updated-plan.pdf,
> faircallqueue.patch, faircallqueue2.patch, faircallqueue3.patch,
> faircallqueue4.patch, faircallqueue5.patch, faircallqueue6.patch,
> faircallqueue7_with_runtime_swapping.patch,
> rpc-congestion-control-draft-plan.pdf
>
>
> For an easy-to-read summary see:
> http://www.ebaytechblog.com/2014/08/21/quality-of-service-in-hadoop/
> Several production Hadoop cluster incidents occurred where the Namenode was
> overloaded and failed to respond.
> We can improve quality of service for users during namenode peak loads by
> replacing the FIFO call queue with a [Fair Call
> Queue|https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12616864/NN-denial-of-service-updated-plan.pdf].
> (this plan supersedes rpc-congestion-control-draft-plan).
> Excerpted from the communication of one incident, “The map task of a user was
> creating huge number of small files in the user directory. Due to the heavy
> load on NN, the JT also was unable to communicate with NN...The cluster
> became responsive only once the job was killed.”
> Excerpted from the communication of another incident, “Namenode was
> overloaded by GetBlockLocation requests (Correction: should be getFileInfo
> requests. the job had a bug that called getFileInfo for a nonexistent file in
> an endless loop). All other requests to namenode were also affected by this
> and hence all jobs slowed down. Cluster almost came to a grinding
> halt…Eventually killed jobtracker to kill all jobs that are running.”
> Excerpted from HDFS-945, “We've seen defective applications cause havoc on
> the NameNode, for e.g. by doing 100k+ 'listStatus' on very large directories
> (60k files) etc.”
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
