[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10566?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13910954#comment-13910954 ]
stack commented on HBASE-10566: ------------------------------- Fix javadoc warning on commit? This is a a great comment: "We're spending a lot of time wrapping the exceptions, and then unwrapping them to discover what really happened." File an issue for this one when you get a chance. Patch looks great to me. Commit. > cleanup rpcTimeout in the client > -------------------------------- > > Key: HBASE-10566 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10566 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Client > Affects Versions: 0.99.0 > Reporter: Nicolas Liochon > Assignee: Nicolas Liochon > Fix For: 0.99.0 > > Attachments: 10566.sample.patch, 10566.v1.patch, 10566.v2.patch > > > There are two issues: > 1) A confusion between the socket timeout and the call timeout > Socket timeouts should be minimal: a default like 20 seconds, that could be > lowered to single digits timeouts for some apps: if we can not write to the > socket in 10 second, we have an issue. This is different from the total > duration (send query + do query + receive query), that can be longer, as it > can include remotes calls on the server and so on. Today, we have a single > value, it does not allow us to have low socket read timeouts. > 2) The timeout can be different between the calls. Typically, if the total > time, retries included is 60 seconds but failed after 2 seconds, then the > remaining is 58s. HBase does this today, but by hacking with a thread local > storage variable. It's a hack (it should have been a parameter of the > methods, the TLS allowed to bypass all the layers. May be protobuf makes this > complicated, to be confirmed), but as well it does not really work, because > we can have multithreading issues (we use the updated rpc timeout of someone > else, or we create a new BlockingRpcChannelImplementation with a random > default timeout). > Ideally, we could send the call timeout to the server as well: it will be > able to dismiss alone the calls that it received but git stick in the request > queue or in the internal retries (on hdfs for example). > This will make the system more reactive to failure. > I think we can solve this now, especially after 10525. The main issue is to > something that fits well with protobuf... > Then it should be easy to have a pool of thread for writers and readers, w/o > a single thread per region server as today. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.1.5#6160)