[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14579?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16867902#comment-16867902
 ] 

He Xiaoqiao commented on HDFS-14579:
------------------------------------

Sorry for the late comments.
To [~sodonnell]
{quote}Can you confirm if it was block reading the file and the namenode was 
able to process other requests at this time, or was it blocking all other 
requests due to holding the write lock?{quote}
Sorry that I meet times that block NameNode but I am not keep the jstack 
information, and I try to reprod this issue, but unfortunately it does not 
appear. I will attach the field information once I meet again.
I would like to offer another situation, in our scenario, we often add nodes to 
exclude file but not clean in time, and there are some nodes that could not 
resolve the hostname/ip.

To [~csun], Thanks for your valuable comments.
{quote}HDFS-13924 addresses this but ideally all NNs should see the same 
picture (perhaps by having another implementation of HostConfigManager).{quote}
I am trying to provide decommision/maintenance interface to admin and refactor 
the HostConfigManager in HDFS-14563. welcome to any suggestions. Thanks again.

> In refreshNodes, avoid performing a DNS lookup while holding the write lock
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDFS-14579
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14579
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>    Affects Versions: 3.3.0
>            Reporter: Stephen O'Donnell
>            Assignee: Stephen O'Donnell
>            Priority: Major
>         Attachments: HDFS-14579.001.patch
>
>
> When refreshNodes is called on a large cluster, or a cluster where DNS is not 
> performing well, it can cause the namenode to hang for a long time. This is 
> because the refreshNodes operation holds the global write lock while it is 
> running. Most of refreshNodes code is simple and hence fast, but 
> unfortunately it performs a DNS lookup for each host in the cluster while the 
> lock is held. 
> Right now, it calls:
> {code}
>   public void refreshNodes(final Configuration conf) throws IOException {
>     refreshHostsReader(conf);
>     namesystem.writeLock();
>     try {
>       refreshDatanodes();
>       countSoftwareVersions();
>     } finally {
>       namesystem.writeUnlock();
>     }
>   }
> {code}
> The line refreshHostsReader(conf); reads the new config file and does a DNS 
> lookup on each entry - the write lock is not held here. Then the main work is 
> done here:
> {code}
>   private void refreshDatanodes() {
>     final Map<String, DatanodeDescriptor> copy;
>     synchronized (this) {
>       copy = new HashMap<>(datanodeMap);
>     }
>     for (DatanodeDescriptor node : copy.values()) {
>       // Check if not include.
>       if (!hostConfigManager.isIncluded(node)) {
>         node.setDisallowed(true);
>       } else {
>         long maintenanceExpireTimeInMS =
>             hostConfigManager.getMaintenanceExpirationTimeInMS(node);
>         if (node.maintenanceNotExpired(maintenanceExpireTimeInMS)) {
>           datanodeAdminManager.startMaintenance(
>               node, maintenanceExpireTimeInMS);
>         } else if (hostConfigManager.isExcluded(node)) {
>           datanodeAdminManager.startDecommission(node);
>         } else {
>           datanodeAdminManager.stopMaintenance(node);
>           datanodeAdminManager.stopDecommission(node);
>         }
>       }
>       node.setUpgradeDomain(hostConfigManager.getUpgradeDomain(node));
>     }
>   }
> {code}
> All the isIncluded(), isExcluded() methods call node.getResolvedAddress() 
> which does the DNS lookup. We could probably change things to perform all the 
> DNS lookups outside of the write lock, and then take the lock and process the 
> nodes. Also change or overload isIncluded() etc to take the inetAddress 
> rather than the datanode descriptor.
> It would not shorten the time the operation takes to run overall, but it 
> would move the long duration out of the write lock and avoid blocking the 
> namenode for the entire time.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org

Reply via email to