Hi All,

We are currently running Hadoop 0.20.X version of hadoop cluster in our 
environment. We have been recently observing slow down of datanodes and 
DFSClient times out. Looking at the logs in the data nodes we noticed that 
there were quite a bit of Max DataXceiver exceeded exception messages of 
following format.

java.io.IOException: xceiverCount 4114 exceeds the limit of concurrent xcievers
4096

Our cluster configuration allows max of 4096 DataXceiver. And due to this 
exception our  dfs clients are getting blocked slowing down DFS Performance 
from Client prespective.

When JStack of the datanode process was checked, it showed that out of 4166 
Active threads in the JVM 1336 threads were of DataXceiver. 2796 threads were 
PacketResponder threads. Shouldn't DataNode spawn 2760 more DataXceiver before 
throwing the IOException?

Also looking at the code, it seems that we are not setting different thread 
group for BlockReceiver which causes the thread pool to be split between 
BlockReceiver and DataXceiver. Is this intentional?

Are there are any work arounds to see to that max allocation of threads are 
allocated to DataXceiver?

Or should I go ahead and file a JIRA regarding this issue? 





Sreekanth Ramakrishnan


-- 
_____________________________________________________________
The information contained in this communication is intended solely for the 
use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others 
authorized to receive it. It may contain confidential or legally privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified 
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in reliance 
on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be 
unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify 
us immediately by responding to this email and then delete it from your 
system. The firm is neither liable for the proper and complete transmission 
of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its 
receipt.

Reply via email to