[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-3654?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15859942#comment-15859942
]
Josh Elser commented on PHOENIX-3654:
-------------------------------------
Copying some of that "internal" discussion I was privvy to:
bq. The load load balancer will embedded within the app server client.
Avatica as project has (thus far) made a conscious decision to be "dumb". It
has a single resource it will communicate with (a URL) and that is what it
uses. This will be a pretty big shift. To be quite honest, I'm not a big fan of
encapsulating this logic into the thin client because it's less code to worry
about.
bq. Thin client will find out PQS location using zookeeper.
There are security concerns with doing this to keep in mind. It will require
ops teams to make sure that only PQS instances which are allowed to registered
to register themselves there in ZK. On some shared cluster, what prevents me
from setting up a malicious PQS instance that always returns no results? ZK
ACLs do allow this, but we should put in thought ahead of time as to how this
will work.
> Load Balancer for thin client
> -----------------------------
>
> Key: PHOENIX-3654
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-3654
> Project: Phoenix
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Affects Versions: 4.8.0
> Environment: Linux 3.13.0-107-generic kernel, v4.9.0-HBase-0.98
> Reporter: Rahul Shrivastava
> Fix For: 4.9.0
>
> Original Estimate: 240h
> Remaining Estimate: 240h
>
> We have been having internal discussion on load balancer for thin client for
> PQS. The general consensus we have is to have an embedded load balancer with
> the thin client instead of using external load balancer such as haproxy. The
> idea is to not to have another layer between client and PQS. This reduces
> operational cost for system, which currently leads to delay in executing
> projects.
> But this also comes with challenge of having an embedded load balancer which
> can maintain sticky sessions, do fair load balancing knowing the load
> downstream of PQS server. In addition, load balancer needs to know location
> of multiple PQS server. Now, the thin client needs to keep track of PQS
> servers via zookeeper ( or other means).
> In the new design, the client ( PQS client) , it is proposed to have an
> embedded load balancer.
> Where will the load Balancer sit ?
> The load load balancer will embedded within the app server client.
> How will the load balancer work ?
> Load balancer will contact zookeeper to get location of PQS. In this case,
> PQS needs to register to ZK itself once it comes online. Zookeeper location
> is in hbase-site.xml. It will maintain a small cache of connection to the
> PQS. When a request comes in, it will check for an open connection from the
> cache.
> How will load balancer know load on PQS ?
> To start with, it will pick a random open connection to PQS. This means that
> load balancer does not know PQS load. Later , we can augment the code so that
> thin client can receive load info from PQS and make intelligent decisions.
> How will load balancer maintain sticky sessions ?
> While we still need to investigate how to implement sticky sessions. We can
> look for some open source implementation for the same.
> How will PQS register itself to service locator ?
> PQS will have location of zookeeper in hbase-site.xml and it would register
> itself to the zookeeper. Thin client will find out PQS location using
> zookeeper.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
