[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-2816?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Sylvain Lebresne updated CASSANDRA-2816:
----------------------------------------
Attachment: 0001-Schedule-merkle-tree-request-one-by-one.patch
Attaching patch against 0.8. The patch implements the idea of scheduling the
merkle tree requests one by one, to make sure the tree are started as close as
possible of "the same time". This also put validation compaction in their own
executor (to avoid them to be queued up behind standard compactions). That
specific executor is created with 2 core threads, to allow for Peter's use case
of wanting to do multiple repairs at the same time. That is, by default, you
can do 2 repairs involving the same node and be ok. More and you may experience
crappy precision in repair. The new concurrent_validators parameter is exposed
in case some would want more that 2. That being said, regular compactions and
validations are not separated for everything and in particular throttling is
shared.
As far as I can test, this successfully fixes the problems from CASSANDRA-2811
and CASSANDRA-2815. This also don't change anything on the on-wire protocol
side, so I think we can target that for 0.8.2.
> Repair doesn't synchronize merkle tree creation properly
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-2816
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-2816
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Core
> Affects Versions: 0.7.0, 0.8.0
> Reporter: Sylvain Lebresne
> Assignee: Sylvain Lebresne
> Labels: repair
> Attachments: 0001-Schedule-merkle-tree-request-one-by-one.patch
>
>
> Being a little slow, I just realized after having opened CASSANDRA-2811 and
> CASSANDRA-2815 that there is a more general problem with repair.
> When a repair is started, it will send a number of merkle tree to its
> neighbor as well as himself and assume for correction that the building of
> those trees will be started on every node roughly at the same time (if not,
> we end up comparing data snapshot at different time and will thus mistakenly
> repair a lot of useless data). This is bogus for many reasons:
> * Because validation compaction runs on the same executor that other
> compaction, the start of the validation on the different node is subject to
> other compactions. 0.8 mitigates this in a way by being multi-threaded (and
> thus there is less change to be blocked a long time by a long running
> compaction), but the compaction executor being bounded, its still a problem)
> * if you run a nodetool repair without arguments, it will repair every CFs.
> As a consequence it will generate lots of merkle tree requests and all of
> those requests will be issued at the same time. Because even in 0.8 the
> compaction executor is bounded, some of those validations will end up being
> queued behind the first ones. Even assuming that the different validation are
> submitted in the same order on each node (which isn't guaranteed either),
> there is no guarantee that on all nodes, the first validation will take the
> same time, hence desynchronizing the queued ones.
> Overall, it is important for the precision of repair that for a given CF and
> range (which is the unit at which trees are computed), we make sure that all
> node will start the validation at the same time (or, since we can't do magic,
> as close as possible).
> One (reasonably simple) proposition to fix this would be to have repair
> schedule validation compactions across nodes one by one (i.e, one CF/range at
> a time), waiting for all nodes to return their tree before submitting the
> next request. Then on each node, we should make sure that the node will start
> the validation compaction as soon as requested. For that, we probably want to
> have a specific executor for validation compaction and:
> * either we fail the whole repair whenever one node is not able to execute
> the validation compaction right away (because no thread are available right
> away).
> * we simply tell the user that if he start too many repairs in parallel, he
> may start seeing some of those repairing more data than it should.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
