[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6435?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13438599#comment-13438599
]
Hudson commented on HBASE-6435:
-------------------------------
Integrated in HBase-TRUNK #3247 (See
[https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase-TRUNK/3247/])
HBASE-6435 Reading WAL files after a recovery leads to time lost in HDFS
timeouts when using dead datanodes - addendum TestBlockReorder.java (Revision
1375454)
HBASE-6435 Reading WAL files after a recovery leads to time lost in HDFS
timeouts when using dead datanodes (Revision 1375451)
Result = FAILURE
nkeywal :
Files :
* /hbase/trunk/hbase-server/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/fs
*
/hbase/trunk/hbase-server/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/fs/TestBlockReorder.java
nkeywal :
Files :
*
/hbase/trunk/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/ServerName.java
*
/hbase/trunk/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/fs/HFileSystem.java
*
/hbase/trunk/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/master/MasterFileSystem.java
*
/hbase/trunk/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/wal/HLog.java
*
/hbase/trunk/hbase-server/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/HBaseTestingUtility.java
*
/hbase/trunk/hbase-server/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/MiniHBaseCluster.java
*
/hbase/trunk/hbase-server/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/wal/TestHLog.java
> Reading WAL files after a recovery leads to time lost in HDFS timeouts when
> using dead datanodes
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-6435
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6435
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: master, regionserver
> Affects Versions: 0.96.0
> Reporter: nkeywal
> Assignee: nkeywal
> Fix For: 0.96.0
>
> Attachments: 6435.unfinished.patch, 6435.v10.patch, 6435.v10.patch,
> 6435.v12.patch, 6435.v12.patch, 6435.v12.patch, 6435-v12.txt, 6435.v13.patch,
> 6435.v14.patch, 6435.v2.patch, 6435.v7.patch, 6435.v8.patch, 6435.v9.patch,
> 6435.v9.patch, 6535.v11.patch
>
>
> HBase writes a Write-Ahead-Log to revover from hardware failure. This log is
> written on hdfs.
> Through ZooKeeper, HBase gets informed usually in 30s that it should start
> the recovery process.
> This means reading the Write-Ahead-Log to replay the edits on the other
> servers.
> In standards deployments, HBase process (regionserver) are deployed on the
> same box as the datanodes.
> It means that when the box stops, we've actually lost one of the edits, as we
> lost both the regionserver and the datanode.
> As HDFS marks a node as dead after ~10 minutes, it appears as available when
> we try to read the blocks to recover. As such, we are delaying the recovery
> process by 60 seconds as the read will usually fail with a socket timeout. If
> the file is still opened for writing, it adds an extra 20s + a risk of losing
> edits if we connect with ipc to the dead DN.
> Possible solutions are:
> - shorter dead datanodes detection by the NN. Requires a NN code change.
> - better dead datanodes management in DFSClient. Requires a DFS code change.
> - NN customisation to write the WAL files on another DN instead of the local
> one.
> - reordering the blocks returned by the NN on the client side to put the
> blocks on the same DN as the dead RS at the end of the priority queue.
> Requires a DFS code change or a kind of workaround.
> The solution retained is the last one. Compared to what was discussed on the
> mailing list, the proposed patch will not modify HDFS source code but adds a
> proxy. This for two reasons:
> - Some HDFS functions managing block orders are static
> (MD5MD5CRC32FileChecksum). Implementing the hook in the DFSClient would
> require to implement partially the fix, change the DFS interface to make this
> function non static, or put the hook static. None of these solution is very
> clean.
> - Adding a proxy allows to put all the code in HBase, simplifying dependency
> management.
> Nevertheless, it would be better to have this in HDFS. But this solution
> allows to target the last version only, and this could allow minimal
> interface changes such as non static methods.
> Moreover, writing the blocks to the non local DN would be an even better
> solution long term.
--
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
