Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Plain View
HBase >> mail # user >> Heterogeneous cluster


+
Jean-Marc Spaggiari 2012-12-08, 03:32
+
Asaf Mesika 2012-12-09, 10:08
+
James Chang 2012-12-08, 15:17
+
Robert Dyer 2012-12-08, 18:38
+
Jean-Marc Spaggiari 2012-12-08, 19:34
+
Michael Segel 2012-12-08, 23:45
+
Robert Dyer 2012-12-08, 23:50
+
Michael Segel 2012-12-09, 08:27
Copy link to this message
-
Re: Heterogeneous cluster
@Asaf & Robert: I have posted the code here. But be careful with it.
Read Mike's comment above.
http://www.spaggiari.org/index.php/hbase/changing-the-hbase-default-loadbalancer
I'm a newby on HBase, so you're better to rely on someone more
experienced feedback.

@Mike:

Hi Mike,

I totally agree with your opinion. My balancer is totally a hack on a
'Frankencluster' (BTW, I LOVE this description! Perfect fit!) and a
way for me to take a deeper look at HBase's code.

One question about data locality. When you run an HBase MR, even with
a factor 3 replication, data is considered local only if it's running
on the RS version the region is stored. But does HBase has a way to
see if it can be run on any of the replicats? The replicate might be
on a different rack. But if the job is running there, it can also be
considered as running locally, right? Or will it always be retrieved
from the datanode linked to the RS hosting the region we are dealing
with? Not sure I'm clear :(

JM

2012/12/9, Michael Segel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Ok...
>
> From a production/commercial grade answer...
>
> With respect to HBase, you will have 1 live copy and 2 replications.
> (Assuming you didn't change this.) So when you run against HBase, data
> locality becomes less of an issue.
> And again, you have to temper that with that it depends on the number of
> regions within the table...
>
> A lot of people, including committers tend to get hung up on some of the
> details and they tend to lose focus on the larger picture.
>
> If you were running a production cluster and your one node was radically
> different... then you would be better off taking it out of the cluster and
> making it an edge node. (Edge nodes are very important...)
>
> If we're talking about a very large cluster which has evolved... then you
> would want to work out your rack aware placements.  Note that rack aware is
> a logical and not a physical location. So you can modify it to let the
> distro's placement take the hint and move the data.  This is more of a cheat
> and even here... I think that at scale, the potential improvement gains are
> going to be minimal.
>
> This works for everything but HBase.
>
> On that note, it doesn't matter. Again, assume that you have your data
> equally distributed around the cluster and that your access pattern is to
> all nodes in the cluster.  The parallelization in the cluster will average
> out the slow ones.
>
> In terms of your small research clusters...
>
> You're not looking at performance when you build a 'Frankencluster'
>
> Specifically to your case... move all the data to that node and you end up
> with both a networking and disk i/o bottlenecks.
>
> You're worried about the noise.
>
> Having said that...
>
> If you want to improve the balancer code, sure, however, you're going to
> need to do some work where you capture your cluster's statistics so that the
> balancer has more intelligence.
>
> You may start off wanting to allow HBase to take hints about the cluster,
> but in truth, I don't think its a good idea. Note, I realize that you and
> Jean-Marc are not suggesting that it is your intent to add something like
> this, but that someone will create a JIRA and then someone else may act upon
> it....
>
> IMHO, that's a lot of work, adding intelligence to the HBase Scheduler and I
> don't think it will really make a difference in terms of overall
> performance.
>
>
> Just saying...
>
> -Mike
>
> On Dec 8, 2012, at 5:50 PM, Robert Dyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I of course can not speak for Jean-Marc, however my use case is not very
>> corporate.  It is a small cluster (9 nodes) and only 1 of those nodes is
>> different (drastically different).
>>
>> And yes, I configured it so that node has a lot more map slots.  However,
>> the problem is HBase balances without regard to that and thus even though
>> more map tasks run on those nodes they are not data-local!  If I have a
>> balancer that is able to keep more regions on that particular node, then
+
Anoop Sam John 2012-12-11, 04:04
+
Jean-Marc Spaggiari 2012-12-11, 18:48
+
Harsh J 2012-12-11, 20:20
+
Anoop Sam John 2012-12-12, 03:54
+
Jean-Marc Spaggiari 2012-12-09, 02:36