Re: New node unable to stream (0.8.5)
> > > Cool. We've deactivated all tasks against these nodes and will scrub them > all in parallel, apply the encryption options you specified, and see where > that gets us. Thanks for the assistance. > To follow up: * We scrubbed all the nodes * We applied the encryption options specified * A repair is continuing (for about an hour so far, perhaps more) on the new, problematic node; it's successfully streaming data from its neighbors and has built up a roughly equivalent data volume on disk We'll see if the data is fully restored once this process completes. Even if it isn't, it seems likely that the cluster will be in a healthy state soon, so we can reimport as necessary and we'll be out of the woods. Now that I've said all that, something will inevitably go wrong, but until that happens, thanks again for the feedback. - Ethan >> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Ethan Rowe wrote: >> > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Jonathan Ellis >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Where did the data loss come in? >> > >> > The outcome of the analytical jobs run overnight while some of these >> repairs >> > were (not) running is consistent with what I would expect if perhaps >> 20-30% >> > of the source data was missing. Given the strong consistency model >> we're >> > using, this is surprising to me, since the jobs did not report any read >> or >> > write failures. I wonder if this is a consequence of the dead node >> missing >> > and the new node being operational but having received basically none of >> its >> > hinted handoff streams. Perhaps with streaming fixed the data will >> > reappear, which would be a happy outcome, but if not, I can reimport the >> > critical stuff from files. >> >> >> >> Scrub is safe to run in parallel. >> > >> > Is it somewhat analogous to a major compaction in terms of I/O impact, >> with >> > perhaps less greedy use of disk space? >> > >> >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:08 AM, Ethan Rowe >> wrote: >> >> > After further review, I'm definitely going to scrub all the original >> >> > nodes >> >> > in the cluster. >> >> > We've lost some data as a result of this situation. It can be >> restored, >> >> > but >> >> > the question is what to do with the problematic new node first. I >> don't >> >> > particularly care about the data that's on it, since I'm going to >> >> > re-import >> >> > the critical data from files anyway, and then I can recreate >> derivative >> >> > data >> >> > afterwards. So it's purely a matter of getting the cluster healthy >> >> > again as >> >> > quickly as possible so I can begin that import process. >> >> > Any issue with running scrubs on multiple nodes at a time, provided >> they >> >> > aren't replication neighbors? >> >> > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Ethan Rowe >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> I just noticed the following from one of Jonathan Ellis' messages >> >> >> yesterday: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Added to NEWS: >> >> >>> >> >> >>>- After upgrading, run nodetool scrub against each node before >> >> >>> running >> >> >>> repair, moving nodes, or adding new ones. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> We did not do this, as it was not indicated as necessary in the news >> >> >> when >> >> >> we were dealing with the upgrade. >> >> >> So perhaps I need to scrub everything before going any further, >> though >> >> >> the >> >> >> question is what to do with the problematic node. Additionally, it >> >> >> would be >> >> >> helpful to know if scrub will affect the hinted handoffs that have >> >> >> accumulated, as these seem likely to be part of the set of failing >> >> >> streams. >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Ethan Rowe >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Here's a typical log slice (not terribly informative, I fear): >> >> >> >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,106 >> >> AntiEntropyService.java (l >> >> ine 884) Performing streaming repair of 1003 ranges with / >> 10.34.90.8 >> >> for >> >> (299 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 90798416657667504332586989223299634,54296681768153272037430773234349600451] >> >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,427 StreamOut.java >> >> (line >> >> 181) >> >> Stream context metadata >> >> [/mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-1 >> >> 0-Data.db sections=88 progress=0/11707163 - 0%, >> >> /mnt/cassandra/data/events_pr >> >> oduction/FitsByShip-g-11-Data.db sections=169 progress=0/6133240 - >> >> 0%, >> >> /mnt/c >> >> assandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-6-Data.db sections=1 >> >> progress=0/ >> >> 6918814 - 0%, >> >> /mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-12-Data.db s >> >> ections=260 progress=0/9091780 - 0%], 4 sstables. >> >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,428 >> >> StreamOutSession.java >> >> (lin >> >> e 174) Streaming to /10.34.90.8 >> >> ERROR [Thread-56] 2011-09-15 05:41:38,515 >> >> AbstractCassan
Re: New node unable to stream (0.8.5)
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:03 AM, Jonathan Ellis wrote: > If you added the new node as a seed, it would ignore bootstrap mode. > And bootstrap / repair *do* use streaming so you'll want to re-run > repair post-scrub. (No need to re-bootstrap since you're repairing.) > Ah, of course. That's what happened; the chef recipe added the node to its own seed list, which is a problem I thought we'd fixed but apparently not. That definitely explains the bootstrap issue. But no matter, so long as the repairs can eventually run. > Scrub is a little less heavyweight than major compaction but same > ballpark. It runs sstable-at-a-time so (as long as you haven't been > in the habit of forcing majors) space should not be a concern. > Cool. We've deactivated all tasks against these nodes and will scrub them all in parallel, apply the encryption options you specified, and see where that gets us. Thanks for the assistance. - Ethan > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Ethan Rowe wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Jonathan Ellis > wrote: > >> > >> Where did the data loss come in? > > > > The outcome of the analytical jobs run overnight while some of these > repairs > > were (not) running is consistent with what I would expect if perhaps > 20-30% > > of the source data was missing. Given the strong consistency model we're > > using, this is surprising to me, since the jobs did not report any read > or > > write failures. I wonder if this is a consequence of the dead node > missing > > and the new node being operational but having received basically none of > its > > hinted handoff streams. Perhaps with streaming fixed the data will > > reappear, which would be a happy outcome, but if not, I can reimport the > > critical stuff from files. > >> > >> Scrub is safe to run in parallel. > > > > Is it somewhat analogous to a major compaction in terms of I/O impact, > with > > perhaps less greedy use of disk space? > > > >> > >> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:08 AM, Ethan Rowe > wrote: > >> > After further review, I'm definitely going to scrub all the original > >> > nodes > >> > in the cluster. > >> > We've lost some data as a result of this situation. It can be > restored, > >> > but > >> > the question is what to do with the problematic new node first. I > don't > >> > particularly care about the data that's on it, since I'm going to > >> > re-import > >> > the critical data from files anyway, and then I can recreate > derivative > >> > data > >> > afterwards. So it's purely a matter of getting the cluster healthy > >> > again as > >> > quickly as possible so I can begin that import process. > >> > Any issue with running scrubs on multiple nodes at a time, provided > they > >> > aren't replication neighbors? > >> > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Ethan Rowe > wrote: > >> >> > >> >> I just noticed the following from one of Jonathan Ellis' messages > >> >> yesterday: > >> >>> > >> >>> Added to NEWS: > >> >>> > >> >>>- After upgrading, run nodetool scrub against each node before > >> >>> running > >> >>> repair, moving nodes, or adding new ones. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> We did not do this, as it was not indicated as necessary in the news > >> >> when > >> >> we were dealing with the upgrade. > >> >> So perhaps I need to scrub everything before going any further, > though > >> >> the > >> >> question is what to do with the problematic node. Additionally, it > >> >> would be > >> >> helpful to know if scrub will affect the hinted handoffs that have > >> >> accumulated, as these seem likely to be part of the set of failing > >> >> streams. > >> >> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Ethan Rowe > >> >> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> Here's a typical log slice (not terribly informative, I fear): > >> > >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,106 > >> AntiEntropyService.java (l > >> ine 884) Performing streaming repair of 1003 ranges with / > 10.34.90.8 > >> for > >> (299 > >> > >> > >> > 90798416657667504332586989223299634,54296681768153272037430773234349600451] > >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,427 StreamOut.java > >> (line > >> 181) > >> Stream context metadata > >> [/mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-1 > >> 0-Data.db sections=88 progress=0/11707163 - 0%, > >> /mnt/cassandra/data/events_pr > >> oduction/FitsByShip-g-11-Data.db sections=169 progress=0/6133240 - > >> 0%, > >> /mnt/c > >> assandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-6-Data.db sections=1 > >> progress=0/ > >> 6918814 - 0%, > >> /mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-12-Data.db s > >> ections=260 progress=0/9091780 - 0%], 4 sstables. > >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,428 > >> StreamOutSession.java > >> (lin > >> e 174) Streaming to /10.34.90.8 > >> ERROR [Thread-56] 2011-09-15 05:41:38,515 > >> AbstractCassandraDaemon.java > >>
Re: New node unable to stream (0.8.5)
If you added the new node as a seed, it would ignore bootstrap mode. And bootstrap / repair *do* use streaming so you'll want to re-run repair post-scrub. (No need to re-bootstrap since you're repairing.) Scrub is a little less heavyweight than major compaction but same ballpark. It runs sstable-at-a-time so (as long as you haven't been in the habit of forcing majors) space should not be a concern. On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Ethan Rowe wrote: > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Jonathan Ellis wrote: >> >> Where did the data loss come in? > > The outcome of the analytical jobs run overnight while some of these repairs > were (not) running is consistent with what I would expect if perhaps 20-30% > of the source data was missing. Given the strong consistency model we're > using, this is surprising to me, since the jobs did not report any read or > write failures. I wonder if this is a consequence of the dead node missing > and the new node being operational but having received basically none of its > hinted handoff streams. Perhaps with streaming fixed the data will > reappear, which would be a happy outcome, but if not, I can reimport the > critical stuff from files. >> >> Scrub is safe to run in parallel. > > Is it somewhat analogous to a major compaction in terms of I/O impact, with > perhaps less greedy use of disk space? > >> >> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:08 AM, Ethan Rowe wrote: >> > After further review, I'm definitely going to scrub all the original >> > nodes >> > in the cluster. >> > We've lost some data as a result of this situation. It can be restored, >> > but >> > the question is what to do with the problematic new node first. I don't >> > particularly care about the data that's on it, since I'm going to >> > re-import >> > the critical data from files anyway, and then I can recreate derivative >> > data >> > afterwards. So it's purely a matter of getting the cluster healthy >> > again as >> > quickly as possible so I can begin that import process. >> > Any issue with running scrubs on multiple nodes at a time, provided they >> > aren't replication neighbors? >> > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Ethan Rowe wrote: >> >> >> >> I just noticed the following from one of Jonathan Ellis' messages >> >> yesterday: >> >>> >> >>> Added to NEWS: >> >>> >> >>> - After upgrading, run nodetool scrub against each node before >> >>> running >> >>> repair, moving nodes, or adding new ones. >> >> >> >> >> >> We did not do this, as it was not indicated as necessary in the news >> >> when >> >> we were dealing with the upgrade. >> >> So perhaps I need to scrub everything before going any further, though >> >> the >> >> question is what to do with the problematic node. Additionally, it >> >> would be >> >> helpful to know if scrub will affect the hinted handoffs that have >> >> accumulated, as these seem likely to be part of the set of failing >> >> streams. >> >> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Ethan Rowe >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Here's a typical log slice (not terribly informative, I fear): >> >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,106 >> AntiEntropyService.java (l >> ine 884) Performing streaming repair of 1003 ranges with /10.34.90.8 >> for >> (299 >> >> >> 90798416657667504332586989223299634,54296681768153272037430773234349600451] >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,427 StreamOut.java >> (line >> 181) >> Stream context metadata >> [/mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-1 >> 0-Data.db sections=88 progress=0/11707163 - 0%, >> /mnt/cassandra/data/events_pr >> oduction/FitsByShip-g-11-Data.db sections=169 progress=0/6133240 - >> 0%, >> /mnt/c >> assandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-6-Data.db sections=1 >> progress=0/ >> 6918814 - 0%, >> /mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-12-Data.db s >> ections=260 progress=0/9091780 - 0%], 4 sstables. >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,428 >> StreamOutSession.java >> (lin >> e 174) Streaming to /10.34.90.8 >> ERROR [Thread-56] 2011-09-15 05:41:38,515 >> AbstractCassandraDaemon.java >> (line >> 139) Fatal exception in thread Thread[Thread-56,5,main] >> java.lang.NullPointerException >> at >> org.apache.cassandra.net.IncomingTcpConnection.stream(IncomingTcpC >> onnection.java:174) >> at >> org.apache.cassandra.net.IncomingTcpConnection.run(IncomingTcpConn >> ection.java:114) >> >>> >> >>> Not sure if the exception is related to the outbound streaming above; >> >>> other nodes are actively trying to stream to this node, so perhaps it >> >>> comes >> >>> from those and temporal adjacency to the outbound stream is just >> >>> coincidental. I have other snippets that look basically identical to >> >>> the >> >>> above, except if I look at the logs to which this node is tr
Re: New node unable to stream (0.8.5)
Hinted handoff doesn't use streaming mode, so it doesn't care. ("Streaming" to Cassandra means sending raw sstable file ranges to another node. HH just uses the normal column-based write path.) On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:24 AM, Ethan Rowe wrote: > Thanks, Jonathan. I'll try the workaround and see if that gets the streams > flowing properly. > As I mentioned before, we did not run scrub yet. What is the consequence of > letting the streams from the hinted handoffs complete if scrub hasn't been > run on these nodes? > I'm currently running scrub on one node to get a sense of the time frame. > Thanks again. > - Ethan > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Jonathan Ellis wrote: >> >> That means we missed a place we needed to special-case for backwards >> compatibility -- the workaround is, add an empty encryption_options >> section >> to cassandra.yaml: >> >> encryption_options: >> internode_encryption: none >> keystore: conf/.keystore >> keystore_password: cassandra >> truststore: conf/.truststore >> truststore_password: cassandra >> >> Created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-3212 to fix this. >> >> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 7:13 AM, Ethan Rowe wrote: >> > Here's a typical log slice (not terribly informative, I fear): >> >> >> >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,106 >> >> AntiEntropyService.java >> >> (l >> >> ine 884) Performing streaming repair of 1003 ranges with /10.34.90.8 >> >> for >> >> (299 >> >> >> >> >> >> 90798416657667504332586989223299634,54296681768153272037430773234349600451] >> >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,427 StreamOut.java (line >> >> 181) >> >> Stream context metadata >> >> [/mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-1 >> >> 0-Data.db sections=88 progress=0/11707163 - 0%, >> >> /mnt/cassandra/data/events_pr >> >> oduction/FitsByShip-g-11-Data.db sections=169 progress=0/6133240 - 0%, >> >> /mnt/c >> >> assandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-6-Data.db sections=1 >> >> progress=0/ >> >> 6918814 - 0%, >> >> /mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-12-Data.db s >> >> ections=260 progress=0/9091780 - 0%], 4 sstables. >> >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,428 >> >> StreamOutSession.java >> >> (lin >> >> e 174) Streaming to /10.34.90.8 >> >> ERROR [Thread-56] 2011-09-15 05:41:38,515 AbstractCassandraDaemon.java >> >> (line >> >> 139) Fatal exception in thread Thread[Thread-56,5,main] >> >> java.lang.NullPointerException >> >> at >> >> org.apache.cassandra.net.IncomingTcpConnection.stream(IncomingTcpC >> >> onnection.java:174) >> >> at >> >> org.apache.cassandra.net.IncomingTcpConnection.run(IncomingTcpConn >> >> ection.java:114) >> > >> > Not sure if the exception is related to the outbound streaming above; >> > other >> > nodes are actively trying to stream to this node, so perhaps it comes >> > from >> > those and temporal adjacency to the outbound stream is just >> > coincidental. I >> > have other snippets that look basically identical to the above, except >> > if I >> > look at the logs to which this node is trying to stream, I see that it >> > has >> > concurrently opened a stream in the other direction, which could be the >> > one >> > that the exception pertains to. >> > >> > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Sylvain Lebresne >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Ethan Rowe >> >> wrote: >> >> > Hi. >> >> > >> >> > We've been running a 7-node cluster with RF 3, QUORUM reads/writes in >> >> > our >> >> > production environment for a few months. It's been consistently >> >> > stable >> >> > during this period, particularly once we got out maintenance strategy >> >> > fully >> >> > worked out (per node, one repair a week, one major compaction a week, >> >> > the >> >> > latter due to the nature of our data model and usage). While this >> >> > cluster >> >> > started, back in June or so, on the 0.7 series, it's been running >> >> > 0.8.3 >> >> > for >> >> > a while now with no issues. We upgraded to 0.8.5 two days ago, >> >> > having >> >> > tested the upgrade in our staging cluster (with an otherwise >> >> > identical >> >> > configuration) previously and verified that our application's various >> >> > use >> >> > cases appeared successful. >> >> > >> >> > One of our nodes suffered a disk failure yesterday. We attempted to >> >> > replace >> >> > the dead node by placing a new node at OldNode.initial_token - 1 with >> >> > auto_bootstrap on. A few things went awry from there: >> >> > >> >> > 1. We never saw the new node in bootstrap mode; it became available >> >> > pretty >> >> > much immediately upon joining the ring, and never reported a >> >> > "joining" >> >> > state. I did verify that auto_bootstrap was on. >> >> > >> >> > 2. I mistakenly ran repair on the new node rather than removetoken on >> >> > the >> >> > old node, due to a delightful mental error. The repair got nowhere >> >> > fast, as >> >> > it attempts to repair against the down
Re: New node unable to stream (0.8.5)
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Jonathan Ellis wrote: > Where did the data loss come in? > The outcome of the analytical jobs run overnight while some of these repairs were (not) running is consistent with what I would expect if perhaps 20-30% of the source data was missing. Given the strong consistency model we're using, this is surprising to me, since the jobs did not report any read or write failures. I wonder if this is a consequence of the dead node missing and the new node being operational but having received basically none of its hinted handoff streams. Perhaps with streaming fixed the data will reappear, which would be a happy outcome, but if not, I can reimport the critical stuff from files. Scrub is safe to run in parallel. > Is it somewhat analogous to a major compaction in terms of I/O impact, with perhaps less greedy use of disk space? > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:08 AM, Ethan Rowe wrote: > > After further review, I'm definitely going to scrub all the original > nodes > > in the cluster. > > We've lost some data as a result of this situation. It can be restored, > but > > the question is what to do with the problematic new node first. I don't > > particularly care about the data that's on it, since I'm going to > re-import > > the critical data from files anyway, and then I can recreate derivative > data > > afterwards. So it's purely a matter of getting the cluster healthy again > as > > quickly as possible so I can begin that import process. > > Any issue with running scrubs on multiple nodes at a time, provided they > > aren't replication neighbors? > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Ethan Rowe wrote: > >> > >> I just noticed the following from one of Jonathan Ellis' messages > >> yesterday: > >>> > >>> Added to NEWS: > >>> > >>>- After upgrading, run nodetool scrub against each node before > running > >>> repair, moving nodes, or adding new ones. > >> > >> > >> We did not do this, as it was not indicated as necessary in the news > when > >> we were dealing with the upgrade. > >> So perhaps I need to scrub everything before going any further, though > the > >> question is what to do with the problematic node. Additionally, it > would be > >> helpful to know if scrub will affect the hinted handoffs that have > >> accumulated, as these seem likely to be part of the set of failing > streams. > >> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Ethan Rowe > wrote: > >>> > >>> Here's a typical log slice (not terribly informative, I fear): > > INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,106 > AntiEntropyService.java (l > ine 884) Performing streaming repair of 1003 ranges with /10.34.90.8for > (299 > > > 90798416657667504332586989223299634,54296681768153272037430773234349600451] > INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,427 StreamOut.java > (line > 181) > Stream context metadata > [/mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-1 > 0-Data.db sections=88 progress=0/11707163 - 0%, > /mnt/cassandra/data/events_pr > oduction/FitsByShip-g-11-Data.db sections=169 progress=0/6133240 - 0%, > /mnt/c > assandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-6-Data.db sections=1 > progress=0/ > 6918814 - 0%, > /mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-12-Data.db s > ections=260 progress=0/9091780 - 0%], 4 sstables. > INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,428 > StreamOutSession.java > (lin > e 174) Streaming to /10.34.90.8 > ERROR [Thread-56] 2011-09-15 05:41:38,515 AbstractCassandraDaemon.java > (line > 139) Fatal exception in thread Thread[Thread-56,5,main] > java.lang.NullPointerException > at > org.apache.cassandra.net.IncomingTcpConnection.stream(IncomingTcpC > onnection.java:174) > at > org.apache.cassandra.net.IncomingTcpConnection.run(IncomingTcpConn > ection.java:114) > >>> > >>> Not sure if the exception is related to the outbound streaming above; > >>> other nodes are actively trying to stream to this node, so perhaps it > comes > >>> from those and temporal adjacency to the outbound stream is just > >>> coincidental. I have other snippets that look basically identical to > the > >>> above, except if I look at the logs to which this node is trying to > stream, > >>> I see that it has concurrently opened a stream in the other direction, > which > >>> could be the one that the exception pertains to. > >>> > >>> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Sylvain Lebresne < > sylv...@datastax.com> > >>> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Ethan Rowe > wrote: > > Hi. > > > > We've been running a 7-node cluster with RF 3, QUORUM reads/writes > in > > our > > production environment for a few months. It's been consistently > > stable > > during this period, particularly once we got out maintenance > strategy > > fully > > worked out (per
Re: New node unable to stream (0.8.5)
Thanks, Jonathan. I'll try the workaround and see if that gets the streams flowing properly. As I mentioned before, we did not run scrub yet. What is the consequence of letting the streams from the hinted handoffs complete if scrub hasn't been run on these nodes? I'm currently running scrub on one node to get a sense of the time frame. Thanks again. - Ethan On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Jonathan Ellis wrote: > That means we missed a place we needed to special-case for backwards > compatibility -- the workaround is, add an empty encryption_options section > to cassandra.yaml: > > encryption_options: >internode_encryption: none >keystore: conf/.keystore >keystore_password: cassandra >truststore: conf/.truststore >truststore_password: cassandra > > Created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-3212 to fix this. > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 7:13 AM, Ethan Rowe wrote: > > Here's a typical log slice (not terribly informative, I fear): > >> > >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,106 > AntiEntropyService.java > >> (l > >> ine 884) Performing streaming repair of 1003 ranges with /10.34.90.8for > >> (299 > >> > >> > 90798416657667504332586989223299634,54296681768153272037430773234349600451] > >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,427 StreamOut.java (line > >> 181) > >> Stream context metadata > >> [/mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-1 > >> 0-Data.db sections=88 progress=0/11707163 - 0%, > >> /mnt/cassandra/data/events_pr > >> oduction/FitsByShip-g-11-Data.db sections=169 progress=0/6133240 - 0%, > >> /mnt/c > >> assandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-6-Data.db sections=1 > >> progress=0/ > >> 6918814 - 0%, > >> /mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-12-Data.db s > >> ections=260 progress=0/9091780 - 0%], 4 sstables. > >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,428 StreamOutSession.java > >> (lin > >> e 174) Streaming to /10.34.90.8 > >> ERROR [Thread-56] 2011-09-15 05:41:38,515 AbstractCassandraDaemon.java > >> (line > >> 139) Fatal exception in thread Thread[Thread-56,5,main] > >> java.lang.NullPointerException > >> at > >> org.apache.cassandra.net.IncomingTcpConnection.stream(IncomingTcpC > >> onnection.java:174) > >> at > >> org.apache.cassandra.net.IncomingTcpConnection.run(IncomingTcpConn > >> ection.java:114) > > > > Not sure if the exception is related to the outbound streaming above; > other > > nodes are actively trying to stream to this node, so perhaps it comes > from > > those and temporal adjacency to the outbound stream is just coincidental. > I > > have other snippets that look basically identical to the above, except if > I > > look at the logs to which this node is trying to stream, I see that it > has > > concurrently opened a stream in the other direction, which could be the > one > > that the exception pertains to. > > > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Sylvain Lebresne > > wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Ethan Rowe > wrote: > >> > Hi. > >> > > >> > We've been running a 7-node cluster with RF 3, QUORUM reads/writes in > >> > our > >> > production environment for a few months. It's been consistently > stable > >> > during this period, particularly once we got out maintenance strategy > >> > fully > >> > worked out (per node, one repair a week, one major compaction a week, > >> > the > >> > latter due to the nature of our data model and usage). While this > >> > cluster > >> > started, back in June or so, on the 0.7 series, it's been running > 0.8.3 > >> > for > >> > a while now with no issues. We upgraded to 0.8.5 two days ago, having > >> > tested the upgrade in our staging cluster (with an otherwise identical > >> > configuration) previously and verified that our application's various > >> > use > >> > cases appeared successful. > >> > > >> > One of our nodes suffered a disk failure yesterday. We attempted to > >> > replace > >> > the dead node by placing a new node at OldNode.initial_token - 1 with > >> > auto_bootstrap on. A few things went awry from there: > >> > > >> > 1. We never saw the new node in bootstrap mode; it became available > >> > pretty > >> > much immediately upon joining the ring, and never reported a "joining" > >> > state. I did verify that auto_bootstrap was on. > >> > > >> > 2. I mistakenly ran repair on the new node rather than removetoken on > >> > the > >> > old node, due to a delightful mental error. The repair got nowhere > >> > fast, as > >> > it attempts to repair against the down node which throws an exception. > >> > So I > >> > interrupted the repair, restarted the node to clear any pending > >> > validation > >> > compactions, and... > >> > > >> > 3. Ran removetoken for the old node. > >> > > >> > 4. We let this run for some time and saw eventually that all the nodes > >> > appeared to be done various compactions and were stuck at streaming. > >> > Many > >> > streams listed as open, none making any progress. >
Re: New node unable to stream (0.8.5)
Where did the data loss come in? Scrub is safe to run in parallel. On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:08 AM, Ethan Rowe wrote: > After further review, I'm definitely going to scrub all the original nodes > in the cluster. > We've lost some data as a result of this situation. It can be restored, but > the question is what to do with the problematic new node first. I don't > particularly care about the data that's on it, since I'm going to re-import > the critical data from files anyway, and then I can recreate derivative data > afterwards. So it's purely a matter of getting the cluster healthy again as > quickly as possible so I can begin that import process. > Any issue with running scrubs on multiple nodes at a time, provided they > aren't replication neighbors? > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Ethan Rowe wrote: >> >> I just noticed the following from one of Jonathan Ellis' messages >> yesterday: >>> >>> Added to NEWS: >>> >>> - After upgrading, run nodetool scrub against each node before running >>> repair, moving nodes, or adding new ones. >> >> >> We did not do this, as it was not indicated as necessary in the news when >> we were dealing with the upgrade. >> So perhaps I need to scrub everything before going any further, though the >> question is what to do with the problematic node. Additionally, it would be >> helpful to know if scrub will affect the hinted handoffs that have >> accumulated, as these seem likely to be part of the set of failing streams. >> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Ethan Rowe wrote: >>> >>> Here's a typical log slice (not terribly informative, I fear): INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,106 AntiEntropyService.java (l ine 884) Performing streaming repair of 1003 ranges with /10.34.90.8 for (299 90798416657667504332586989223299634,54296681768153272037430773234349600451] INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,427 StreamOut.java (line 181) Stream context metadata [/mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-1 0-Data.db sections=88 progress=0/11707163 - 0%, /mnt/cassandra/data/events_pr oduction/FitsByShip-g-11-Data.db sections=169 progress=0/6133240 - 0%, /mnt/c assandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-6-Data.db sections=1 progress=0/ 6918814 - 0%, /mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-12-Data.db s ections=260 progress=0/9091780 - 0%], 4 sstables. INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,428 StreamOutSession.java (lin e 174) Streaming to /10.34.90.8 ERROR [Thread-56] 2011-09-15 05:41:38,515 AbstractCassandraDaemon.java (line 139) Fatal exception in thread Thread[Thread-56,5,main] java.lang.NullPointerException at org.apache.cassandra.net.IncomingTcpConnection.stream(IncomingTcpC onnection.java:174) at org.apache.cassandra.net.IncomingTcpConnection.run(IncomingTcpConn ection.java:114) >>> >>> Not sure if the exception is related to the outbound streaming above; >>> other nodes are actively trying to stream to this node, so perhaps it comes >>> from those and temporal adjacency to the outbound stream is just >>> coincidental. I have other snippets that look basically identical to the >>> above, except if I look at the logs to which this node is trying to stream, >>> I see that it has concurrently opened a stream in the other direction, which >>> could be the one that the exception pertains to. >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Sylvain Lebresne >>> wrote: On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Ethan Rowe wrote: > Hi. > > We've been running a 7-node cluster with RF 3, QUORUM reads/writes in > our > production environment for a few months. It's been consistently > stable > during this period, particularly once we got out maintenance strategy > fully > worked out (per node, one repair a week, one major compaction a week, > the > latter due to the nature of our data model and usage). While this > cluster > started, back in June or so, on the 0.7 series, it's been running > 0.8.3 for > a while now with no issues. We upgraded to 0.8.5 two days ago, having > tested the upgrade in our staging cluster (with an otherwise identical > configuration) previously and verified that our application's various > use > cases appeared successful. > > One of our nodes suffered a disk failure yesterday. We attempted to > replace > the dead node by placing a new node at OldNode.initial_token - 1 with > auto_bootstrap on. A few things went awry from there: > > 1. We never saw the new node in bootstrap mode; it became available > pretty > much immediately upon joining the ring, and never reported a "joining" > state. I did verify that auto_bootstrap was on. > > 2. I mistakenly ran repair on the new n
Re: New node unable to stream (0.8.5)
That means we missed a place we needed to special-case for backwards compatibility -- the workaround is, add an empty encryption_options section to cassandra.yaml: encryption_options: internode_encryption: none keystore: conf/.keystore keystore_password: cassandra truststore: conf/.truststore truststore_password: cassandra Created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-3212 to fix this. On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 7:13 AM, Ethan Rowe wrote: > Here's a typical log slice (not terribly informative, I fear): >> >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,106 AntiEntropyService.java >> (l >> ine 884) Performing streaming repair of 1003 ranges with /10.34.90.8 for >> (299 >> >> 90798416657667504332586989223299634,54296681768153272037430773234349600451] >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,427 StreamOut.java (line >> 181) >> Stream context metadata >> [/mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-1 >> 0-Data.db sections=88 progress=0/11707163 - 0%, >> /mnt/cassandra/data/events_pr >> oduction/FitsByShip-g-11-Data.db sections=169 progress=0/6133240 - 0%, >> /mnt/c >> assandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-6-Data.db sections=1 >> progress=0/ >> 6918814 - 0%, >> /mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-12-Data.db s >> ections=260 progress=0/9091780 - 0%], 4 sstables. >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,428 StreamOutSession.java >> (lin >> e 174) Streaming to /10.34.90.8 >> ERROR [Thread-56] 2011-09-15 05:41:38,515 AbstractCassandraDaemon.java >> (line >> 139) Fatal exception in thread Thread[Thread-56,5,main] >> java.lang.NullPointerException >> at >> org.apache.cassandra.net.IncomingTcpConnection.stream(IncomingTcpC >> onnection.java:174) >> at >> org.apache.cassandra.net.IncomingTcpConnection.run(IncomingTcpConn >> ection.java:114) > > Not sure if the exception is related to the outbound streaming above; other > nodes are actively trying to stream to this node, so perhaps it comes from > those and temporal adjacency to the outbound stream is just coincidental. I > have other snippets that look basically identical to the above, except if I > look at the logs to which this node is trying to stream, I see that it has > concurrently opened a stream in the other direction, which could be the one > that the exception pertains to. > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Sylvain Lebresne > wrote: >> >> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Ethan Rowe wrote: >> > Hi. >> > >> > We've been running a 7-node cluster with RF 3, QUORUM reads/writes in >> > our >> > production environment for a few months. It's been consistently stable >> > during this period, particularly once we got out maintenance strategy >> > fully >> > worked out (per node, one repair a week, one major compaction a week, >> > the >> > latter due to the nature of our data model and usage). While this >> > cluster >> > started, back in June or so, on the 0.7 series, it's been running 0.8.3 >> > for >> > a while now with no issues. We upgraded to 0.8.5 two days ago, having >> > tested the upgrade in our staging cluster (with an otherwise identical >> > configuration) previously and verified that our application's various >> > use >> > cases appeared successful. >> > >> > One of our nodes suffered a disk failure yesterday. We attempted to >> > replace >> > the dead node by placing a new node at OldNode.initial_token - 1 with >> > auto_bootstrap on. A few things went awry from there: >> > >> > 1. We never saw the new node in bootstrap mode; it became available >> > pretty >> > much immediately upon joining the ring, and never reported a "joining" >> > state. I did verify that auto_bootstrap was on. >> > >> > 2. I mistakenly ran repair on the new node rather than removetoken on >> > the >> > old node, due to a delightful mental error. The repair got nowhere >> > fast, as >> > it attempts to repair against the down node which throws an exception. >> > So I >> > interrupted the repair, restarted the node to clear any pending >> > validation >> > compactions, and... >> > >> > 3. Ran removetoken for the old node. >> > >> > 4. We let this run for some time and saw eventually that all the nodes >> > appeared to be done various compactions and were stuck at streaming. >> > Many >> > streams listed as open, none making any progress. >> > >> > 5. I observed an Rpc-related exception on the new node (where the >> > removetoken was launched) and concluded that the streams were broken so >> > the >> > process wouldn't ever finish. >> > >> > 6. Ran a "removetoken force" to get the dead node out of the mix. No >> > problems. >> > >> > 7. Ran a repair on the new node. >> > >> > 8. Validations ran, streams opened up, and again things got stuck in >> > streaming, hanging for over an hour with no progress. >> > >> > 9. Musing that lingering tasks from the removetoken could be a factor, I >> > performed a rolling restart and attempted a repair again. >> > >> > 10. Same problem.
Re: New node unable to stream (0.8.5)
After further review, I'm definitely going to scrub all the original nodes in the cluster. We've lost some data as a result of this situation. It can be restored, but the question is what to do with the problematic new node first. I don't particularly care about the data that's on it, since I'm going to re-import the critical data from files anyway, and then I can recreate derivative data afterwards. So it's purely a matter of getting the cluster healthy again as quickly as possible so I can begin that import process. Any issue with running scrubs on multiple nodes at a time, provided they aren't replication neighbors? On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Ethan Rowe wrote: > I just noticed the following from one of Jonathan Ellis' messages > yesterday: > >> Added to NEWS: >> >>- After upgrading, run nodetool scrub against each node before running >> repair, moving nodes, or adding new ones. > > > We did not do this, as it was not indicated as necessary in the news when > we were dealing with the upgrade. > > So perhaps I need to scrub everything before going any further, though the > question is what to do with the problematic node. Additionally, it would be > helpful to know if scrub will affect the hinted handoffs that have > accumulated, as these seem likely to be part of the set of failing streams. > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Ethan Rowe wrote: > >> Here's a typical log slice (not terribly informative, I fear): >> >>> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,106 >>> AntiEntropyService.java (l >>> ine 884) Performing streaming repair of 1003 ranges with /10.34.90.8 for >>> (299 >>> >>> 90798416657667504332586989223299634,54296681768153272037430773234349600451] >>> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,427 StreamOut.java (line >>> 181) >>> Stream context metadata >>> [/mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-1 >>> 0-Data.db sections=88 progress=0/11707163 - 0%, >>> /mnt/cassandra/data/events_pr >>> oduction/FitsByShip-g-11-Data.db sections=169 progress=0/6133240 - 0%, >>> /mnt/c >>> assandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-6-Data.db sections=1 >>> progress=0/ >>> 6918814 - 0%, >>> /mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-12-Data.db s >>> ections=260 progress=0/9091780 - 0%], 4 sstables. >>> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,428 StreamOutSession.java >>> (lin >>> e 174) Streaming to /10.34.90.8 >>> ERROR [Thread-56] 2011-09-15 05:41:38,515 AbstractCassandraDaemon.java >>> (line >>> 139) Fatal exception in thread Thread[Thread-56,5,main] >>> java.lang.NullPointerException >>> at >>> org.apache.cassandra.net.IncomingTcpConnection.stream(IncomingTcpC >>> onnection.java:174) >>> at >>> org.apache.cassandra.net.IncomingTcpConnection.run(IncomingTcpConn >>> ection.java:114) >> >> >> >> Not sure if the exception is related to the outbound streaming above; >> other nodes are actively trying to stream to this node, so perhaps it comes >> from those and temporal adjacency to the outbound stream is just >> coincidental. I have other snippets that look basically identical to the >> above, except if I look at the logs to which this node is trying to stream, >> I see that it has concurrently opened a stream in the other direction, which >> could be the one that the exception pertains to. >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Sylvain Lebresne >> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Ethan Rowe wrote: >>> > Hi. >>> > >>> > We've been running a 7-node cluster with RF 3, QUORUM reads/writes in >>> our >>> > production environment for a few months. It's been consistently stable >>> > during this period, particularly once we got out maintenance strategy >>> fully >>> > worked out (per node, one repair a week, one major compaction a week, >>> the >>> > latter due to the nature of our data model and usage). While this >>> cluster >>> > started, back in June or so, on the 0.7 series, it's been running 0.8.3 >>> for >>> > a while now with no issues. We upgraded to 0.8.5 two days ago, having >>> > tested the upgrade in our staging cluster (with an otherwise identical >>> > configuration) previously and verified that our application's various >>> use >>> > cases appeared successful. >>> > >>> > One of our nodes suffered a disk failure yesterday. We attempted to >>> replace >>> > the dead node by placing a new node at OldNode.initial_token - 1 with >>> > auto_bootstrap on. A few things went awry from there: >>> > >>> > 1. We never saw the new node in bootstrap mode; it became available >>> pretty >>> > much immediately upon joining the ring, and never reported a "joining" >>> > state. I did verify that auto_bootstrap was on. >>> > >>> > 2. I mistakenly ran repair on the new node rather than removetoken on >>> the >>> > old node, due to a delightful mental error. The repair got nowhere >>> fast, as >>> > it attempts to repair against the down node which throws an exception. >>> So I >>> > interrupted the repair, restart
Re: New node unable to stream (0.8.5)
I just noticed the following from one of Jonathan Ellis' messages yesterday: > Added to NEWS: > >- After upgrading, run nodetool scrub against each node before running > repair, moving nodes, or adding new ones. We did not do this, as it was not indicated as necessary in the news when we were dealing with the upgrade. So perhaps I need to scrub everything before going any further, though the question is what to do with the problematic node. Additionally, it would be helpful to know if scrub will affect the hinted handoffs that have accumulated, as these seem likely to be part of the set of failing streams. On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Ethan Rowe wrote: > Here's a typical log slice (not terribly informative, I fear): > >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,106 AntiEntropyService.java >> (l >> ine 884) Performing streaming repair of 1003 ranges with /10.34.90.8 for >> (299 >> >> 90798416657667504332586989223299634,54296681768153272037430773234349600451] >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,427 StreamOut.java (line >> 181) >> Stream context metadata >> [/mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-1 >> 0-Data.db sections=88 progress=0/11707163 - 0%, >> /mnt/cassandra/data/events_pr >> oduction/FitsByShip-g-11-Data.db sections=169 progress=0/6133240 - 0%, >> /mnt/c >> assandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-6-Data.db sections=1 >> progress=0/ >> 6918814 - 0%, >> /mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-12-Data.db s >> ections=260 progress=0/9091780 - 0%], 4 sstables. >> INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,428 StreamOutSession.java >> (lin >> e 174) Streaming to /10.34.90.8 >> ERROR [Thread-56] 2011-09-15 05:41:38,515 AbstractCassandraDaemon.java >> (line >> 139) Fatal exception in thread Thread[Thread-56,5,main] >> java.lang.NullPointerException >> at >> org.apache.cassandra.net.IncomingTcpConnection.stream(IncomingTcpC >> onnection.java:174) >> at >> org.apache.cassandra.net.IncomingTcpConnection.run(IncomingTcpConn >> ection.java:114) > > > > Not sure if the exception is related to the outbound streaming above; other > nodes are actively trying to stream to this node, so perhaps it comes from > those and temporal adjacency to the outbound stream is just coincidental. I > have other snippets that look basically identical to the above, except if I > look at the logs to which this node is trying to stream, I see that it has > concurrently opened a stream in the other direction, which could be the one > that the exception pertains to. > > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Sylvain Lebresne wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Ethan Rowe wrote: >> > Hi. >> > >> > We've been running a 7-node cluster with RF 3, QUORUM reads/writes in >> our >> > production environment for a few months. It's been consistently stable >> > during this period, particularly once we got out maintenance strategy >> fully >> > worked out (per node, one repair a week, one major compaction a week, >> the >> > latter due to the nature of our data model and usage). While this >> cluster >> > started, back in June or so, on the 0.7 series, it's been running 0.8.3 >> for >> > a while now with no issues. We upgraded to 0.8.5 two days ago, having >> > tested the upgrade in our staging cluster (with an otherwise identical >> > configuration) previously and verified that our application's various >> use >> > cases appeared successful. >> > >> > One of our nodes suffered a disk failure yesterday. We attempted to >> replace >> > the dead node by placing a new node at OldNode.initial_token - 1 with >> > auto_bootstrap on. A few things went awry from there: >> > >> > 1. We never saw the new node in bootstrap mode; it became available >> pretty >> > much immediately upon joining the ring, and never reported a "joining" >> > state. I did verify that auto_bootstrap was on. >> > >> > 2. I mistakenly ran repair on the new node rather than removetoken on >> the >> > old node, due to a delightful mental error. The repair got nowhere >> fast, as >> > it attempts to repair against the down node which throws an exception. >> So I >> > interrupted the repair, restarted the node to clear any pending >> validation >> > compactions, and... >> > >> > 3. Ran removetoken for the old node. >> > >> > 4. We let this run for some time and saw eventually that all the nodes >> > appeared to be done various compactions and were stuck at streaming. >> Many >> > streams listed as open, none making any progress. >> > >> > 5. I observed an Rpc-related exception on the new node (where the >> > removetoken was launched) and concluded that the streams were broken so >> the >> > process wouldn't ever finish. >> > >> > 6. Ran a "removetoken force" to get the dead node out of the mix. No >> > problems. >> > >> > 7. Ran a repair on the new node. >> > >> > 8. Validations ran, streams opened up, and again things got stuck in >> > streaming, hanging for over an hour with no prog
Re: New node unable to stream (0.8.5)
Here's a typical log slice (not terribly informative, I fear): > INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,106 AntiEntropyService.java > (l > ine 884) Performing streaming repair of 1003 ranges with /10.34.90.8 for > (299 > 90798416657667504332586989223299634,54296681768153272037430773234349600451] > INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,427 StreamOut.java (line > 181) > Stream context metadata > [/mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-1 > 0-Data.db sections=88 progress=0/11707163 - 0%, > /mnt/cassandra/data/events_pr > oduction/FitsByShip-g-11-Data.db sections=169 progress=0/6133240 - 0%, > /mnt/c > assandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-6-Data.db sections=1 > progress=0/ > 6918814 - 0%, /mnt/cassandra/data/events_production/FitsByShip-g-12-Data.db > s > ections=260 progress=0/9091780 - 0%], 4 sstables. > INFO [AntiEntropyStage:2] 2011-09-15 05:41:36,428 StreamOutSession.java > (lin > e 174) Streaming to /10.34.90.8 > ERROR [Thread-56] 2011-09-15 05:41:38,515 AbstractCassandraDaemon.java > (line > 139) Fatal exception in thread Thread[Thread-56,5,main] > java.lang.NullPointerException > at > org.apache.cassandra.net.IncomingTcpConnection.stream(IncomingTcpC > onnection.java:174) > at > org.apache.cassandra.net.IncomingTcpConnection.run(IncomingTcpConn > ection.java:114) Not sure if the exception is related to the outbound streaming above; other nodes are actively trying to stream to this node, so perhaps it comes from those and temporal adjacency to the outbound stream is just coincidental. I have other snippets that look basically identical to the above, except if I look at the logs to which this node is trying to stream, I see that it has concurrently opened a stream in the other direction, which could be the one that the exception pertains to. On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Sylvain Lebresne wrote: > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Ethan Rowe wrote: > > Hi. > > > > We've been running a 7-node cluster with RF 3, QUORUM reads/writes in our > > production environment for a few months. It's been consistently stable > > during this period, particularly once we got out maintenance strategy > fully > > worked out (per node, one repair a week, one major compaction a week, the > > latter due to the nature of our data model and usage). While this > cluster > > started, back in June or so, on the 0.7 series, it's been running 0.8.3 > for > > a while now with no issues. We upgraded to 0.8.5 two days ago, having > > tested the upgrade in our staging cluster (with an otherwise identical > > configuration) previously and verified that our application's various use > > cases appeared successful. > > > > One of our nodes suffered a disk failure yesterday. We attempted to > replace > > the dead node by placing a new node at OldNode.initial_token - 1 with > > auto_bootstrap on. A few things went awry from there: > > > > 1. We never saw the new node in bootstrap mode; it became available > pretty > > much immediately upon joining the ring, and never reported a "joining" > > state. I did verify that auto_bootstrap was on. > > > > 2. I mistakenly ran repair on the new node rather than removetoken on the > > old node, due to a delightful mental error. The repair got nowhere fast, > as > > it attempts to repair against the down node which throws an exception. > So I > > interrupted the repair, restarted the node to clear any pending > validation > > compactions, and... > > > > 3. Ran removetoken for the old node. > > > > 4. We let this run for some time and saw eventually that all the nodes > > appeared to be done various compactions and were stuck at streaming. > Many > > streams listed as open, none making any progress. > > > > 5. I observed an Rpc-related exception on the new node (where the > > removetoken was launched) and concluded that the streams were broken so > the > > process wouldn't ever finish. > > > > 6. Ran a "removetoken force" to get the dead node out of the mix. No > > problems. > > > > 7. Ran a repair on the new node. > > > > 8. Validations ran, streams opened up, and again things got stuck in > > streaming, hanging for over an hour with no progress. > > > > 9. Musing that lingering tasks from the removetoken could be a factor, I > > performed a rolling restart and attempted a repair again. > > > > 10. Same problem. Did another rolling restart and attempted a fresh > repair > > on the most important column family alone. > > > > 11. Same problem. Streams included CFs not specified, so I guess they > must > > be for hinted handoff. > > > > In concluding that streaming is stuck, I've observed: > > - streams will be open to the new node from other nodes, but the new node > > doesn't list them > > - streams will be open to the other nodes from the new node, but the > other > > nodes don't list them > > - the streams reported may make some initial progress, but then they hang > at > > a particular point and do not move on for an hour or more
Re: New node unable to stream (0.8.5)
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Ethan Rowe wrote: > Hi. > > We've been running a 7-node cluster with RF 3, QUORUM reads/writes in our > production environment for a few months. It's been consistently stable > during this period, particularly once we got out maintenance strategy fully > worked out (per node, one repair a week, one major compaction a week, the > latter due to the nature of our data model and usage). While this cluster > started, back in June or so, on the 0.7 series, it's been running 0.8.3 for > a while now with no issues. We upgraded to 0.8.5 two days ago, having > tested the upgrade in our staging cluster (with an otherwise identical > configuration) previously and verified that our application's various use > cases appeared successful. > > One of our nodes suffered a disk failure yesterday. We attempted to replace > the dead node by placing a new node at OldNode.initial_token - 1 with > auto_bootstrap on. A few things went awry from there: > > 1. We never saw the new node in bootstrap mode; it became available pretty > much immediately upon joining the ring, and never reported a "joining" > state. I did verify that auto_bootstrap was on. > > 2. I mistakenly ran repair on the new node rather than removetoken on the > old node, due to a delightful mental error. The repair got nowhere fast, as > it attempts to repair against the down node which throws an exception. So I > interrupted the repair, restarted the node to clear any pending validation > compactions, and... > > 3. Ran removetoken for the old node. > > 4. We let this run for some time and saw eventually that all the nodes > appeared to be done various compactions and were stuck at streaming. Many > streams listed as open, none making any progress. > > 5. I observed an Rpc-related exception on the new node (where the > removetoken was launched) and concluded that the streams were broken so the > process wouldn't ever finish. > > 6. Ran a "removetoken force" to get the dead node out of the mix. No > problems. > > 7. Ran a repair on the new node. > > 8. Validations ran, streams opened up, and again things got stuck in > streaming, hanging for over an hour with no progress. > > 9. Musing that lingering tasks from the removetoken could be a factor, I > performed a rolling restart and attempted a repair again. > > 10. Same problem. Did another rolling restart and attempted a fresh repair > on the most important column family alone. > > 11. Same problem. Streams included CFs not specified, so I guess they must > be for hinted handoff. > > In concluding that streaming is stuck, I've observed: > - streams will be open to the new node from other nodes, but the new node > doesn't list them > - streams will be open to the other nodes from the new node, but the other > nodes don't list them > - the streams reported may make some initial progress, but then they hang at > a particular point and do not move on for an hour or more. > - The logs report repair-related activity, until NPEs on incoming TCP > connections show up, which appear likely to be the culprit. Can you send the stack trace from those NPE. > > I can provide more exact details when I'm done commuting. > > With streaming broken on this node, I'm unable to run repairs, which is > obviously problematic. The application didn't suffer any operational issues > as a consequence of this, but I need to review the overnight results to > verify we're not suffering data loss (I doubt we are). > > At this point, I'm considering a couple options: > 1. Remove the new node and let the adjacent node take over its range > 2. Bring the new node down, add a new one in front of it, and properly > removetoken the problematic one. > 3. Bring the new node down, remove all its data except for the system > keyspace, then bring it back up and repair it. > 4. Revert to 0.8.3 and see if that helps. > > Recommendations? > > Thanks. > - Ethan >