Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Plain View
MapReduce >> mail # user >> Re: high availability


Copy link to this message
-
Re: high availability
http://blog.cloudera.com/blog/2012/10/quorum-based-journaling-in-cdh4-1/

Old version (4.1) but the principle is still the same.

*No requirement for custom fencing configuration *- fencing methods such as
STONITH <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STONITH> require custom hardware;
instead, we should rely only on software methods.

Bertrand

PS: But then the only true validation is by testing it.

On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Jing Zhao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I think a real fencing is not required in case that you're using
> QJM-based HA. If you are using ZKFC, a graceful fencing will first be
> triggered in which ZKFC will send a RPC request to the original ANN to
> make it standby. If the graceful fencing failed the configured fencing
> will be used. In the worst case that your original ANN cannot
> transition to standby state, QJM still has built-in single-writer
> semantics (see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-3862,
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-4915). Thus you can set the
> fence method to shell(/bin/true) (since in the current code the fence
> configuration is still required).
>
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Koert Kuipers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Jing,
> > thanks for your answer.
> >
> > if hbase with high availability is the desired goal, is it recommended to
> > remove sshfence? we do not plan to use hdfs for anything else.
> >
> > i understood that the only downside of no fencing is that the old
> namenode
> > could still be serving read requests. could this negatively impact hbase
> > functionality, or worse, could it corrupt hbase somehow (not sure how
> that
> > would be...)?
> >
> > thanks! koert
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 12:38 AM, Jing Zhao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> "it is unclear to me if the transition in this case is also rapid but
> >> the fencing takes long while the new namenode is already active, or if
> >> in this period i am stuck without an active namenode."
> >>
> >> The standby->active transition will get stuck in this period, i.e.,
> >> the NN can only become active after fencing the old active NN. During
> >> this period since the only NN is in standby state which cannot handle
> >> usual R/W operations and just throws StandbyException, hbase region
> >> server may kill itself in some cases I guess.
> >>
> >> I think you can remove sshfence from the configuration if you are
> >> using QJM-based HA.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Koert Kuipers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >> > i have been playing with high availability using journalnodes and 2
> >> > masters
> >> > both running namenode and hbase master.
> >> >
> >> > when i kill the namenode and hbase-master processes on the active
> >> > master,
> >> > the failover is perfect. hbase never stops and a running map-reduce
> jobs
> >> > keeps going. this is impressive!
> >> >
> >> > however when instead of killing the proceses i kill the entire active
> >> > master
> >> > machine, the transactions is less smooth and can take a long time, at
> >> > least
> >> > it seems this way in the logs. this is because ssh fencing fails but
> >> > keeps
> >> > trying. my fencing is configured as:
> >> >
> >> >  <property>
> >> >     <name>dfs.ha.fencing.methods</name>
> >> >     <value>
> >> >       sshfence
> >> >       shell(/bin/true)
> >> >     </value>
> >> >     <final>true</final>
> >> >   </property>
> >> >
> >> > it is unclear to me if the transition in this case is also rapid but
> the
> >> > fencing takes long while the new namenode is already active, or if in
> >> > this
> >> > period i am stuck without an active namenode. it is hard to accurately
> >> > test
> >> > this in my setup.
> >> > is this supposed to take this long? is HDFS writable in this period?
> and
> >> > is
> >> > hbase supposed to survive this long transition?
> >> >
> >> > thanks! koert
> >>
> >> --
> >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity

Bertrand Dechoux
+
Jing Zhao 2013-10-15, 04:38
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB