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

Switch to Threaded View
Accumulo >> mail # user >> Communication issue between zookeeper and accumulo


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Communication issue between zookeeper and accumulo
Is that on the ZK server or the TabletServer? Can we also see the other?
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Ray Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT)
> target     prot opt source               destination
> ACCEPT     tcp  --  anywhere             anywhere            tcp dpt:ssh
> ACCEPT     icmp --  anywhere             anywhere            icmp
> echo-reply
> ACCEPT     icmp --  anywhere             anywhere            icmp
> echo-request
> ACCEPT     tcp  --  anywhere             anywhere            tcp dpt:nrpe
> ACCEPT     udp  --  anywhere             anywhere            udp
> dpt:domain
>
>  Chain FORWARD (policy DROP)
> target     prot opt source               destination
>
>  Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT)
> target     prot opt source               destination
>
>   From: Brendan Heussler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tuesday, August 6, 2013 1:27 PM
> To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Subject: Re: Communication issue between zookeeper and accumulo
>
>   What is the output of iptables --list?
>
>
>
> Brendan
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Ray Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>  Not sure what you mean.  I get the error "Fatal ip6_tables not found."
>>  I'm assuming that means disabled?
>>
>>   From: <Ott>, "Charles H." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Date: Tuesday, August 6, 2013 1:18 PM
>> To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Subject: RE: Communication issue between zookeeper and accumulo
>>
>>   And iptables?****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [
>> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
>> *On Behalf Of *Ray Pfaff
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 06, 2013 12:54 PM
>> *To:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> *Subject:* Re: Communication issue between zookeeper and accumulo****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Yes, it is disabled, so that's not the problem.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *From: *Sean Busbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> *Reply-To: *"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> *Date: *Tuesday, August 6, 2013 12:48 PM
>> *To: *Accumulo User List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> *Subject: *Re: Communication issue between zookeeper and accumulo****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Hi Ray! ****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Can you confirm that IPv6 is disabled?****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Ray Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> ****
>>
>> I'm not sure if I can provide those due to the contract I'm working.  I
>> really don't want to diverge this conversation from the original question
>> I'm asking (which is a problem even running one tablet server per machine)
>> but are you saying that setting tserver.port.search = true shouldn't be
>> done?  I found this to be an undocumented way of running more than one
>> tablet server per system.  I'm still not convinced that this leads to
>> stability issues on tablet servers.  As I said, it's undocumented.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *From: *Eric Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> *Reply-To: *"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>****
>>
>> *Date: *Tuesday, August 6, 2013 11:12 AM ****
>>
>>
>> *To: *"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> *Subject: *Re: Communication issue between zookeeper and accumulo****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Interesting.  You could not get similar performance improvements by
>> increasing the size of the JVM, the number of threads, or the number of
>> tablets per server? ****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> If you have details about what configurations you've tried and the
>> performance numbers you found, please open a ticket.  This would indicate
>> that we have some unnecessary bottleneck in the tserver.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> -Eric****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Ray Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sean