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

Switch to Threaded View
MapReduce >> mail # user >> NameNode uses up (almost) all ports

Copy link to this message
Re: NameNode uses up (almost) all ports
Hi James,
Since it seems intermittent, have you verified if there are any maintenance
type procedures being done within the namenode machine or it's related

On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 9:51 PM, Jianhui Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> Hi folks,
> We've got this weird problem regularly on our NameNode (apache
> hadoop- - every couple of weeks:
> The JobTracker had this error:
> 2012-10-08 11:44:03,928 WARN org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.DFSClient: Problem
> renewing lease for DFSClient_1416124356
> java.io.IOException: Call to nn-virtual.x.y.z/ failed on
> local exception: java.net.BindException: Cannot assign requested address
>         at org.apache.hadoop.ipc.Client.wrapException(Client.java:1103)
>         at org.apache.hadoop.ipc.Client.call(Client.java:1071)
>         at org.apache.hadoop.ipc.RPC$Invoker.invoke(RPC.java:225)
>         at $Proxy5.renewLease(Unknown Source)
> and
> 2012-10-08 11:44:03,927 INFO org.apache.hadoop.ipc.Client: Retrying
> connect to server: nn-virtual.x.y.z/ Already tried 9 time(s).
> in which "nn-virtual.x.y.z/" is our HDFS address.
> I listed out all the local addresses on the NN and got about 24K (more or
> less) open ports. The ip_local_port_range has:
> 32768 61000
> We are not reaching the limit, but very close. What's strange is: almost
> all of the local ports are used by the NN process. There might be some
> holes in the list, but overall, it seems the NN was using up all the
> ephemeral ports available in the range.
> Right now, I strongly suspect that "Cannot assign requested address" is
> due to lack of ports - although I'm not 100% sure since the ephemeral ports
> change all the time.
> Has anybody seen this before?  Any pointers would be appreciated.
> Also, we are using a virtual IP for the NN. All the ports are opened on
> the virtual IP address. Could it be related to the problem?
>  Thanks for your help,
> James