[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17852?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16273568#comment-16273568
 ] 

Mike Drob commented on HBASE-17852:
-----------------------------------

Thank you for pointing at the parent ticket, I missed that there was design doc 
in there.

I'm worried about our current design choices for future concurrent backup 
design. Please correct my gaps in understanding here:

Current approach, which is limited to single backup operation involves snapshot 
the backup state table (what you refer to as backup system table, but I think 
state is more appropriate term) and then if failure then we restore the state? 
In future are we going to have multiple tables in backup namespace for each 
table to be backed up so that we can have concurrent approaches? Otherwise the 
concurrent backup solution will be a complete rewrite I expect.

Do backup operations have timeouts? I don't see them in the code, but could be 
looking at the wrong place.

> Add Fault tolerance to HBASE-14417 (Support bulk loaded files in incremental 
> backup)
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-17852
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17852
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>            Reporter: Vladimir Rodionov
>            Assignee: Vladimir Rodionov
>             Fix For: 2.0.0
>
>         Attachments: HBASE-17852-v1.patch, HBASE-17852-v2.patch, 
> HBASE-17852-v3.patch, HBASE-17852-v4.patch, HBASE-17852-v5.patch, 
> HBASE-17852-v6.patch, HBASE-17852-v7.patch, HBASE-17852-v8.patch, 
> HBASE-17852-v9.patch
>
>
> Design approach rollback-via-snapshot implemented in this ticket:
> # Before backup create/delete/merge starts we take a snapshot of the backup 
> meta-table (backup system table). This procedure is lightweight because meta 
> table is small, usually should fit a single region.
> # When operation fails on a server side, we handle this failure by cleaning 
> up partial data in backup destination, followed by restoring backup 
> meta-table from a snapshot. 
> # When operation fails on a client side (abnormal termination, for example), 
> next time user will try create/merge/delete he(she) will see error message, 
> that system is in inconsistent state and repair is required, he(she) will 
> need to run backup repair tool.
> # To avoid multiple writers to the backup system table (backup client and 
> BackupObserver's) we introduce small table ONLY to keep listing of bulk 
> loaded files. All backup observers will work only with this new tables. The 
> reason: in case of a failure during backup create/delete/merge/restore, when 
> system performs automatic rollback, some data written by backup observers 
> during failed operation may be lost. This is what we try to avoid.
> # Second table keeps only bulk load related references. We do not care about 
> consistency of this table, because bulk load is idempotent operation and can 
> be repeated after failure. Partially written data in second table does not 
> affect on BackupHFileCleaner plugin, because this data (list of bulk loaded 
> files) correspond to a files which have not been loaded yet successfully and, 
> hence - are not visible to the system 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

Reply via email to