Christopher, I am not sure if this issue is related to 3042 or not.
On the client side it does look like TConfiguration ends up being called with the default constructor. I am not sure if this is intentional or not. On the server side I see this stack, so it also looks like: at org.apache.thrift.TConfiguration.<init>(TConfiguration.java:36) at org.apache.thrift.TConfiguration$Builder.build(TConfiguration.java:99) at org.apache.thrift.TConfiguration.<clinit>(TConfiguration.java:65) at org.apache.thrift.transport.TNonblockingSocket.<init>(TNonblockingSocket.java:74) at org.apache.thrift.transport.TNonblockingSocket.<init>(TNonblockingSocket.java:68) at org.apache.thrift.transport.TNonblockingServerSocket.accept(TNonblockingServerSocket.java:135) at org.apache.thrift.transport.TNonblockingServerSocket.accept(TNonblockingServerSocket.java:36) at org.apache.thrift.server.TNonblockingServer$SelectAcceptThread.handleAccept(TNonblockingServer.java:218) at org.apache.thrift.server.TNonblockingServer$SelectAcceptThread.select(TNonblockingServer.java:186) at org.apache.thrift.server.TNonblockingServer$SelectAcceptThread.run(TNonblockingServer.java:142) I see this in the server log so it does look like it should be using 1G: 2022-09-01 16:59:41 INFO [org.apache.accumulo.tserver.TabletServer] ServerUtil:124 - general.server.message.size.max = 1G Thanks, Vincent On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 12:26 PM Vincent Russell <vincent.russ...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I had to make a stack trace with hacking together a remote debug instance: > > at > org.apache.thrift.server.AbstractNonblockingServer$FrameBuffer.read(AbstractNonblockingServer.java:334) > at > org.apache.accumulo.server.rpc.CustomNonBlockingServer$CustomFrameBuffer.read(CustomNonBlockingServer.java:134) > at > org.apache.thrift.server.AbstractNonblockingServer$AbstractSelectThread.handleRead(AbstractNonblockingServer.java:187) > at > org.apache.thrift.server.TNonblockingServer$SelectAcceptThread.select(TNonblockingServer.java:189) > at > org.apache.thrift.server.TNonblockingServer$SelectAcceptThread.run(TNonblockingServer.java:142) > > On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 12:52 AM Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> wrote: > >> From the numbers in the message, it looks like you're sending an 18MB >> payload but something in Thrift is limiting things to 16384000 >> (16000KB). I doubt you've overridden the default >> general.server.message.size.max to be anything that low (the default >> is 1G). Unless you're flushing after every mutation, it would not be >> surprising to exceed the 16MB max frame size indicated in the error >> message quite quickly. >> >> This value of 16384000 seemed weird. It looks like it's not using our >> configuration, but using the built-in default value of >> org.apache.thrift.TConfiguration.DEFAULT_MAX_FRAME_SIZE. It looks like >> this can happen whenever `new TConfiguration()` is called without >> parameters... and there's a fair amount of internal code, mostly in >> libthrift itself, that does that. It's a bit tricky to track down the >> one causing this particular issue. If you have a full stack trace, it >> could help. >> >> Also, this might be the same issue seen reported in >> https://github.com/apache/accumulo/issues/3042 >> >> On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 8:53 PM Vincent Russell >> <vincent.russ...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > I was able to work out all of my compilation issues; however when I run >> an >> > integration test with the Mini Accumulo Cluster that tests writing >> > mutations with values of 5mb the flush hangs forever >> > and I see the following logs in the TabletServer logs: >> > >> > 20:41:02.306 [Thread-7] ERROR >> > o.a.a.s.r.CustomNonBlockingServer$CustomFrameBuffer - Read a frame size >> of >> > 18874697, which is bigger than the maximum allowable frame size 16384000 >> > for ALL connections. >> > 20:41:03.582 [Thread-7] ERROR >> > o.a.a.s.r.CustomNonBlockingServer$CustomFrameBuffer - Read a frame size >> of >> > 18874697, which is bigger than the maximum allowable frame size 16384000 >> > for ALL connections. >> > 20:41:05.079 [Thread-7] ERROR >> > o.a.a.s.r.CustomNonBlockingServer$CustomFrameBuffer - Read a frame size >> of >> > 18874697, which is bigger than the maximum allowable frame size 16384000 >> > for ALL connections. >> > >> > Other tests that write smaller amounts of data appear to work fine. >> > >> > Any idea what the issue might be? >> > >> > Thank you, >> > Vincent >> > >> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 4:43 PM Vincent Russell < >> vincent.russ...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Thank you both for your responses. >> > > >> > > We are using an event store library from a sister project that was >> written >> > > for accumulo 1.10., which I have already upgraded to 2.0. >> > > >> > > I'll spend some time investigating how bad the usage of the internal >> > > packages are and get back to you. >> > > >> > > Thanks again, >> > > >> > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 3:20 PM Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> > > >> > >> To add to Dave's answer, the public API is defined at >> > >> https://accumulo.apache.org/api/ >> > >> Anything else is not public and is subject to change without notice >> on >> > >> any release without any attempt to retain compatibility. >> > >> >> > >> On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 3:10 PM Dave Marion <dmario...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > There is no guide. You are using implementation classes (see >> clientImpl >> > >> in >> > >> > the package name) vs. using the client api. If you can use the >> client >> > >> api >> > >> > directly, then this should insulate you from changes in the future >> > >> (except >> > >> > during major versions). We can try and find where things might have >> > >> moved, >> > >> > but a class may have been split into multiple pieces. If you could >> > >> provide >> > >> > class and method, that would be easier. >> > >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 2:45 PM Vincent Russell < >> > >> vincent.russ...@gmail.com> >> > >> > wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > > Is there a guide that shows where classes may have been moved >> with >> > >> moving >> > >> > > from 2.0 to 2.1? For instance, I am having issues compiling, >> because >> > >> the >> > >> > > following class doesn't exist: >> > >> > > import org.apache.accumulo.core.clientImpl.Tables; >> > >> > > >> > >> > > I'm just getting started so I'm sure there are others. >> > >> > > >> > >> > > Thanks, >> > >> > > Vincent >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 9:02 AM Vincent Russell < >> > >> vincent.russ...@gmail.com> >> > >> > > wrote: >> > >> > > >> > >> > > > I mean Christopher. >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > Thanks again. >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 9:01 AM Vincent Russell < >> > >> > > vincent.russ...@gmail.com> >> > >> > > > wrote: >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > >> Thank you Chris. >> > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> Will will upgrade to Accumulo 2.1 and ZooKeeper 3.7 or later >> as >> > >> soon as >> > >> > > >> possible. >> > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 8:44 PM Christopher < >> ctubb...@apache.org> >> > >> wrote: >> > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >>> Hi Vincent, >> > >> > > >>> >> > >> > > >>> Version 2.0.1 is end of life as of the 2.1.0 LTM release, >> and 2.0 >> > >> is >> > >> > > >>> not expected to receive any further updates. Version 2.1.0 >> may >> > >> work >> > >> > > >>> with ZooKeeper 3.4, but was developed and tested against 3.5 >> and >> > >> later >> > >> > > >>> versions. I believe the ZooKeeper community is currently >> > >> considering >> > >> > > >>> whether to make 3.6 end-of-life themselves, so I would >> recommend >> > >> using >> > >> > > >>> Accumulo 2.1.0 with the latest ZooKeeper 3.7 or later to >> have the >> > >> best >> > >> > > >>> chance of any kind of support, including JDK 17 support. >> > >> > > >>> >> > >> > > >>> As for your specific issues: >> > >> > > >>> >> > >> > > >>> 1. This is already fixed in 2.1.0 >> > >> > > >>> 2/3. These issues are likely fixed in newer ZooKeeper >> versions. I >> > >> > > >>> haven't seen them anytime recently, anyway. Bugs in ZooKeeper >> > >> itself >> > >> > > >>> are out of scope for the Accumulo developers, but I have >> tried >> > >> > > >>> building Accumulo 2.1.0 with JDK 17 and ZooKeeper 3.8.0 and >> > >> haven't >> > >> > > >>> observed any unresolved issues. However, it's difficult to >> > >> actually >> > >> > > >>> run it because I don't think Hadoop has good JDK 17 support >> yet. >> > >> So, >> > >> > > >>> MiniAccumuloCluster seems to work with JDK 17, as does >> Accumulo >> > >> and ZK >> > >> > > >>> 3.8, but I don't think a full Hadoop cluster would (yet). >> > >> > > >>> >> > >> > > >>> On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 12:28 PM Vincent Russell >> > >> > > >>> <vincent.russ...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > >>> > >> > >> > > >>> > Hello, >> > >> > > >>> > >> > >> > > >>> > We are currently using accumulo 2.0.1. >> > >> > > >>> > >> > >> > > >>> > We are in the process of upgrading our source code to use >> jdk 17 >> > >> > > >>> however we >> > >> > > >>> > are running into some problems with our tests and the >> > >> > > >>> MiniAccumuloCluster. >> > >> > > >>> > >> > >> > > >>> > One of our developer encountered the following issues: >> > >> > > >>> > >> > >> > > >>> > 1. The MiniAccumumluoClusterImpl._exec is hardcoded >> with the >> > >> JVM >> > >> > > arg >> > >> > > >>> > -XX:+IUseConcMarkSweepGC, which is no longer tolerated >> with >> > >> JDK17. >> > >> > > >>> > 2. In Zookeeper 3.4.14, ConetStringParser uses >> > >> createUnresolved to >> > >> > > >>> > make IPAddresses. >> > >> > > >>> SaslServerPrincipal.WrapperInetSocketAddress.getAddress >> > >> > > >>> > uses InetSocketAddess.getAddress, which returns null >> because >> > >> it's >> > >> > > >>> not >> > >> > > >>> > resolved, resulting in a failure to connect to the >> > >> newly-started >> > >> > > >>> zookeeper. >> > >> > > >>> > 3. StaticHostProvider.getHostString() tries to extract >> he >> > >> hostname >> > >> > > >>> by >> > >> > > >>> > calling toString on the address and taking everything >> before >> > >> the >> > >> > > >>> colon, but >> > >> > > >>> > in JDK17, the string format changed to >> > >> > > "localhost/<unresolved->:xx" >> > >> > > >>> (where >> > >> > > >>> > XX is still the port number). That's incorrect and it >> can't >> > >> > > >>> resolve the >> > >> > > >>> > names. >> > >> > > >>> > >> > >> > > >>> > >> > >> > > >>> > Has anyone come across/resolved these kinds of issues? Is >> it >> > >> not >> > >> > > >>> possible >> > >> > > >>> > to use java17 from a client perspective? Will upgrading to >> > >> accumulo >> > >> > > >>> 2.1 >> > >> > > >>> > help? >> > >> > > >>> > >> > >> > > >>> > Thanks, >> > >> > > >>> > Vincent >> > >> > > >>> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> > >> >> > > >> >
