[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-17302?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jian Zhang updated HDFS-17302:
------------------------------
    Description: 
[HDFS-14090|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14090] provides a 
StaticRouterRpcFairnessPolicyController to support configuring different 
handlers for different ns. Using the StaticRouterRpcFairnessPolicyController 
allows the router to isolate different ns, and the ns with a higher load will 
not affect the router's access to the ns with a normal load. But the 
StaticRouterRpcFairnessPolicyController still falls short in many ways, such as:

1. Configuration is inconvenient and error-prone: When I use 
StaticRouterRpcFairnessPolicyController, I first need to know how many handlers 
the router has in total, then I have to know how many nameservices the router 
currently has, and then carefully calculate how many handlers to allocate to 
each ns so that the sum of handlers for all ns will not exceed the total 
handlers of the router, and I also need to consider how many handlers to 
allocate to each ns to achieve better performance. Therefore, I need to be very 
careful when configuring. Even if I configure only one more handler for a 
certain ns, the total number is more than the number of hadnlers owned by the 
router, which will also cause the router to fail to start. At this time, I had 
to investigate the reason why the router failed to start. After finding the 
reason, I had to reconsider the number of handlers for each ns.

2. Extension ns is not supported: During the running of the router, if a new ns 
is added to the cluster and a mount is added for the ns, but because no handler 
is allocated for the ns, the ns cannot be accessed through the router. We must 
reconfigure the number of handlers and then refresh the configuration. At this 
time, the router can access the ns normally. When we reconfigure the number of 
handlers, we have to face disadvantage 1: Configuration is inconvenient and 
error-prone.

3. Cannot share handlers: 



  was:
[HDFS-14090|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14090] provides a 
StaticRouterRpcFairnessPolicyController to support configuring different 
handlers for different ns. Using the StaticRouterRpcFairnessPolicyController 
allows the router to isolate different ns, and the ns with a higher load will 
not affect the router's access to the ns with a normal load. But the 
StaticRouterRpcFairnessPolicyController still falls short in many ways, such as:
1. Configuration is inconvenient and error-prone: When I use 
StaticRouterRpcFairnessPolicyController, I first need to know how many handlers 
the router has in total, then I have to know how many nameservices the router 
currently has, and then carefully calculate how many handlers to allocate to 
each ns so that the sum of handlers for all ns will not exceed the total 
handlers of the router, and I also need to consider how many handlers to 
allocate to each ns to achieve better performance. Therefore, I need to be very 
careful when configuring. Even if I configure only one more handler for a 
certain ns, the total number is more than the number of hadnlers owned by the 
router, which will also cause the router to fail to start. At this time, I had 
to investigate the reason why the router failed to start. After finding the 
reason, I had to reconsider the number of handlers for each ns.

2. Extension ns is not supported: During the running of the router, if a new ns 
is added to the cluster and a mount is added for the ns, but because no handler 
is allocated for the ns, the ns cannot be accessed through the router. We must 
reconfigure the number of handlers and then refresh the configuration. At this 
time, the router can access the ns normally. When we reconfigure the number of 
handlers, we have to face disadvantage 1: Configuration is inconvenient and 
error-prone.

3. Cannot share handlers: 




> RBF: ProportionRouterRpcFairnessPolicyController-support proportional 
> allocation of semaphores
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDFS-17302
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-17302
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: rbf
>            Reporter: Jian Zhang
>            Assignee: Jian Zhang
>            Priority: Major
>              Labels: pull-request-available
>         Attachments: HDFS-17302.001.patch, HDFS-17302.002.patch
>
>
> [HDFS-14090|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14090] provides a 
> StaticRouterRpcFairnessPolicyController to support configuring different 
> handlers for different ns. Using the StaticRouterRpcFairnessPolicyController 
> allows the router to isolate different ns, and the ns with a higher load will 
> not affect the router's access to the ns with a normal load. But the 
> StaticRouterRpcFairnessPolicyController still falls short in many ways, such 
> as:
> 1. Configuration is inconvenient and error-prone: When I use 
> StaticRouterRpcFairnessPolicyController, I first need to know how many 
> handlers the router has in total, then I have to know how many nameservices 
> the router currently has, and then carefully calculate how many handlers to 
> allocate to each ns so that the sum of handlers for all ns will not exceed 
> the total handlers of the router, and I also need to consider how many 
> handlers to allocate to each ns to achieve better performance. Therefore, I 
> need to be very careful when configuring. Even if I configure only one more 
> handler for a certain ns, the total number is more than the number of 
> hadnlers owned by the router, which will also cause the router to fail to 
> start. At this time, I had to investigate the reason why the router failed to 
> start. After finding the reason, I had to reconsider the number of handlers 
> for each ns.
> 2. Extension ns is not supported: During the running of the router, if a new 
> ns is added to the cluster and a mount is added for the ns, but because no 
> handler is allocated for the ns, the ns cannot be accessed through the 
> router. We must reconfigure the number of handlers and then refresh the 
> configuration. At this time, the router can access the ns normally. When we 
> reconfigure the number of handlers, we have to face disadvantage 1: 
> Configuration is inconvenient and error-prone.
> 3. Cannot share handlers: 



--
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