[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6721?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14223835#comment-14223835
]
Enis Soztutar commented on HBASE-6721:
--------------------------------------
I left some comments in RB, but I wanted to comment on high level things here.
I think this is generally a useful feature, since we are seeing more and more
multi-tenant use cases, and without really good isolation rs groups allow the
cluster to be shared more easily.
- I was reading up on the recent YARN label feature (YARN-796), since the
ideas are very similar. However, in YARN labels, a node can have multiple
labels, versus here, a server can only have one group. Will it be better to
have one-to-many relationship from servers to groups? All servers will have the
default group, as well as any more groups that it is assigned. We can do the
same thing for tables as well. By default, tables will belong to group default,
but can be added more. For assignment, we just look at all the cumulative list
of servers that this region will be assignable to. Will this complicate
assignment?
- Alternatively we can also name this labels (just a suggestion).
- For all new features, I think it is fair to request one single source of
truth and also some more transactional guarantees for operations. If possible,
we should not use zk at all (for caching as done in patch). Instead we can just
open the region from master. This is different than the co-location discussion
for master and meta. This table is tiny, and not query'able from clients. The
data is just there for the master to access. If we do this, we do not even have
to have a cache.
- I am ok with bringing this as a core functionality rather than CP + LB. The
reasoning is that as clusters grow bigger, more users might be interested in
this for better isolation.
> RegionServer Group based Assignment
> -----------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-6721
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6721
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Francis Liu
> Assignee: Vandana Ayyalasomayajula
> Attachments: 6721-master-webUI.patch, HBASE-6721-DesigDoc.pdf,
> HBASE-6721-DesigDoc.pdf, HBASE-6721-DesigDoc.pdf, HBASE-6721-DesigDoc.pdf,
> HBASE-6721_10.patch, HBASE-6721_8.patch, HBASE-6721_9.patch,
> HBASE-6721_9.patch, HBASE-6721_94.patch, HBASE-6721_94.patch,
> HBASE-6721_94_2.patch, HBASE-6721_94_3.patch, HBASE-6721_94_3.patch,
> HBASE-6721_94_4.patch, HBASE-6721_94_5.patch, HBASE-6721_94_6.patch,
> HBASE-6721_94_7.patch, HBASE-6721_trunk.patch, HBASE-6721_trunk.patch,
> HBASE-6721_trunk.patch, HBASE-6721_trunk1.patch, HBASE-6721_trunk2.patch
>
>
> In multi-tenant deployments of HBase, it is likely that a RegionServer will
> be serving out regions from a number of different tables owned by various
> client applications. Being able to group a subset of running RegionServers
> and assign specific tables to it, provides a client application a level of
> isolation and resource allocation.
> The proposal essentially is to have an AssignmentManager which is aware of
> RegionServer groups and assigns tables to region servers based on groupings.
> Load balancing will occur on a per group basis as well.
> This is essentially a simplification of the approach taken in HBASE-4120. See
> attached document.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
