[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-16659?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17582115#comment-17582115
 ] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on HDFS-16659:
---------------------------------------

ZanderXu commented on PR #4560:
URL: https://github.com/apache/hadoop/pull/4560#issuecomment-1221229781

   > What's the concern with throwing the exception in in the highestTxId + 1
   
   @xkrogen Master, Maybe our understanding of `sinceTxId == highestTxId + 1` 
is a bit ambiguous. Please correct me, if I'm wrong.
   
   - `sinceTxId == highestTxId + 1` is normal case, especially if the 
transaction rate is low. So JournalNode should return one empty  
`GetJournaledEditsResponseProto` to NameNode, not throw `NewerTxnIdException`.
   - Conversely, if Journal throws a `NewerTxnIdException` to namenode, 
namenode will fail back to `selectStreamingInputStreams` with 
`getEditLogManifest` with this `sinceTxId`. Because there is no new edits in 
JournalNodes, so `selectStreamingInputStreams` will get an empty response too.
   
   I try to guess that you mean to use `nextTxId`? If we use `nextTxId`, maybe 
we can change this code as bellow:
   ```
   if (sinceTxId > nextTxId) {
     throw new JournaledEditsCache.NewerTxnIdException(...);
   }
   ```
   Because `sinceTxId == nextTxId` is a normal case, JournalNode should return 
an empty GetJournaledEditsResponseProto.




> JournalNode should throw CacheMissException if SinceTxId is bigger than 
> HighestWrittenTxId
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDFS-16659
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-16659
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: ZanderXu
>            Assignee: ZanderXu
>            Priority: Critical
>              Labels: pull-request-available
>          Time Spent: 1h
>  Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> JournalNode should throw `CacheMissException` if `sinceTxId` is bigger than 
> `highestWrittenTxId` during handling `getJournaledEdits` rpc from NNs. 
> Current logic may cause in-progress EditlogTailer cannot replay any Edits 
> from JournalNodes in some corner cases, resulting in ObserverNameNode cannot 
> handle requests from clients.
> Suppose there are 3 journalNodes, JN0 ~ JN1.
> * JN0 has some abnormal cases when Active Namenode is syncing 10 Edits with 
> first txid 11
> * NameNode just ignore the abnormal JN0 and continue to sync Edits to Journal 
> 1 and 2
> * JN0 backed to health
> * NameNode continue sync 10 Edits with first txid 21.
> * At this point, there are no Edits 11 ~ 30 in the cache of JN0
> * Observer NameNode try to select EditLogInputStream through 
> `getJournaledEdits` with since txId 21
> * Journal 2 has some abnormal cases and caused a slow response
> The expected result is: Response should contain 20 Edits from txId 21 to txId 
> 30 from JN1 and JN2. Because Active NameNode successfully write these Edits 
> to JN1 and JN2 and failed write these edits to JN0.
> But in the current implementation,  the response is [Response(0) from JN0, 
> Response(10) from JN1], because  there are some abnormal cases in  JN2, such 
> as GC, bad network,  cause a slow response. So the `maxAllowedTxns` will be 
> 0, NameNode will not replay any Edits.
> As above, the root case is that JournalNode should throw Miss Cache Exception 
> when `sinceTxid` is more than `highestWrittenTxId`.
> And the bug code as blew:
> {code:java}
> if (sinceTxId > getHighestWrittenTxId()) {
>     // Requested edits that don't exist yet; short-circuit the cache here
>     metrics.rpcEmptyResponses.incr();
>     return 
> GetJournaledEditsResponseProto.newBuilder().setTxnCount(0).build(); 
> }
> {code}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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