Hi Chris,

Attachments are filtered out by the mail server. Can you pastebin it some
place?

Thanks,
Nick


On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:56 PM, Chris Tarnas <[email protected]>wrote:

> Hello,
>
> We set the HBase RegionServer Handler to 10 (it appears to have been set
> to 60 by Ambari during install process). Now we have narrowed down what
> causes the CPU to increase and have some detailed logs:
>
> If we connect using sqlline.py and execute a select that selects one row
> using the primary_key, no increate in CPU is observed and the number of RPC
> threads in a RUNNABLE state remains the same.
>
> If we execute a select that scans the table such as "select count(*) from
> TABLE" or where the "where" clause only limits on non-primary key
> attributes, then the number of RUNNABLE RpcServer.handler threads increases
> and the CPU utilization of the regionserver increases by ~105%.
>
> Disconnecting the client does not have an effect and the RpcServer.handler
> thread is left RUNNABLE and the CPU stays at the higher usage.
>
> Checking the Web Console for the Regionserver just shows 10
> RpcServer.reader tasks, all in a WAITING state, no other monitored tasks
> are happening. The regionserver has a Max Heap of 10G and a Used heap of
> 445.2M.
>
> I've attached the regionserver log with IPC debug logging turned on right
> when one of the Phoenix statements is executed (this statement actually
> used up the last available handler).
>
> thanks,
> -chris
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On May 12, 2014, at 5:32 PM, Jeffrey Zhong <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> > From the stack, it seems you increase the default rpc handler number to
> > about 60. All handlers are serving Get request(You can search
> >
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.HRegionServer.get(HRegionServer.java:2
> > 841).
> >
> > You can check why there are so many get requests by adding some log info
> > or enable hbase rpc trace. I guess if you decrease the number of rpc
> > handlers per region server, it will mitigate your current issue.
> >
> >
> > On 5/12/14 2:28 PM, "Chris Tarnas" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> We have hit a problem with Phoenix and regionservers CPU usage spiking
> up
> >> to use all available CPU and becoming unresponsive.
> >>
> >> After HDP 2.1 was released we setup a 4 compute node cluster (with 3
> >> VMWare "master" nodes) to test out Phoenix on it. It is a plain Ambari
> >> 1.5/HDP 2.1 install and we added the HDP Phoenix RPM release and hand
> >> linked in the jar files to the hadoop lib. Everything was going well and
> >> we were able to load in ~30k records into several tables. What happened
> >> was after about 3-4 days of being up the regionservers became
> >> unresponsive and started to use most of the available CPU (12 core
> >> boxes). Nothing terribly informative was in the logs (initially we saw
> >> some flush messages that seemed excessive, but that was not all of the
> >> time and we changed back to the standard HBase WAL codec). We are able
> to
> >> kill the unresponsive regionservers and then restart them, the cluster
> >> will be fine for a day or so but will start to lock up again.
> >>
> >> We've dropped the entire HBase and zookeper information and started from
> >> scratch, but that has not helped.
> >>
> >> James Taylor suggested I send this off here. I've attached a jstack
> >> report of a locked up regionserver in hopes that someone can shed some
> >> light.
> >>
> >> thanks,
> >> -chris
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity
> to
> > which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
> > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> that
> > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately
> > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>
>
>

Reply via email to