On 9/12/17 2:51 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
making backup working in challenging conditions was not a goal of FT
design, correct failure handling was a goal.
Every real-world production environment has challenging conditions.
That said, making progress in the face of failures is only one aspec
> making backup working in challenging conditions was not a goal of FT
design, correct failure handling was a goal.
Every real-world production environment has challenging conditions.
That said, making progress in the face of failures is only one aspect of
FT, and an equally valid one is that fai
Yes, we have already some IT, so will need to upgrade it for scale testing.
On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Ted Yu wrote:
> bq. we need a test tool similar to ITBLL
>
> How about making the following such a tool ?
>
> hbase-it/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/
> IntegrationTestBackupResto
bq. we need a test tool similar to ITBLL
How about making the following such a tool ?
hbase-it/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/IntegrationTestBackupRestore.java
On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 11:25 AM, Vladimir Rodionov
wrote:
> >> Vlad: I'm obviously curious to see what you think about this st
>> Vlad: I'm obviously curious to see what you think about this stuff, in
addition to what you already had in mind :)
Yes, I think that we need a test tool similar to ITBLL. Btw, making backup
working in challenging conditions was not a goal of FT design, correct
failure handling was a goal.
On T
Thanks for the quick feedback!
On 9/12/17 12:36 PM, Stack wrote:
On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Andrew Purtell
wrote:
I think those are reasonable criteria Josh.
What I would like to see is something like "we ran ITBLL (or custom
generator with similar correctness validation if you prefer)
On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Andrew Purtell
wrote:
> I think those are reasonable criteria Josh.
>
> What I would like to see is something like "we ran ITBLL (or custom
> generator with similar correctness validation if you prefer) on a dev
> cluster (5-10 nodes) for 24 hours with server kill
I think those are reasonable criteria Josh.
What I would like to see is something like "we ran ITBLL (or custom generator
with similar correctness validation if you prefer) on a dev cluster (5-10
nodes) for 24 hours with server killing chaos agents active, attempted 1,440
backups (one per minu
On 9/11/17 11:52 PM, Stack wrote:
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Vladimir Rodionov
wrote:
...
That is mostly it. Yes, We have not done real testing with real data on a
real cluster yet, except QA testing on a small OpenStack
cluster (10 nodes). That is our probably the biggest minus right
