[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13273490#comment-13273490
 ] 

David S. Wang commented on HBASE-5973:
--------------------------------------

Sure.  This is what I saw on my local box:

Tests in error:

Tests run: 723, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 9
[INFO] Total time: 1:31:50.066s

Only test that failed was:

Running org.apache.hadoop.hbase.master.TestRestartCluster
Tests run: 2, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 45.891 sec <<< 
FAILURE!

Test seems flaky as it passed just fine when run individually.
                
> Add ability for potentially long-running IPC calls to abort if client 
> disconnects
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-5973
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5973
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: ipc
>    Affects Versions: 0.90.7, 0.92.1, 0.94.0, 0.96.0
>            Reporter: Todd Lipcon
>            Assignee: Todd Lipcon
>             Fix For: 0.92.2, 0.96.0, 0.94.1
>
>         Attachments: HBASE-5973-0.90.txt, hbase-5973-0.92.txt, 
> hbase-5973-0.94.txt, hbase-5973-0.94.txt, hbase-5973.txt, hbase-5973.txt, 
> hbase-5973.txt
>
>
> We recently had a cluster issue where a user was submitting scanners with a 
> very restrictive filter, and then calling next() with a high scanner caching 
> value. The clients would generally time out the next() call and disconnect, 
> but the IPC kept running looking to fill the requested number of rows. Since 
> this was in the context of MR, the tasks making the calls would retry, and 
> the retries wuld be more likely to time out due to contention with the 
> previous still-running scanner next() call. Eventually, the system spiraled 
> out of control.
> We should add a hook to the IPC system so that RPC calls can check if the 
> client has already disconnected. In such a case, the next() call could abort 
> processing, given any further work is wasted. I imagine coprocessor 
> endpoints, etc, could make good use of this as well.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

Reply via email to