[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-15541?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16516306#comment-16516306
]
Sean Mackrory edited comment on HADOOP-15541 at 6/18/18 8:27 PM:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
{quote}Like you say, no real point in not aborting here.{quote}
Help me understand, though: when *do* we get a benefit from draining the stream
instead of simply aborting?
{quote}Happy for a patch, I don't think we can test this easily so not
expecting any tests in the patch...{quote}
Yeah. This was (at the time anyway) happening pretty repeatedly with a
particular workload - I'm hoping that keeps up so I can be fairly confident
that the end result here is correct handling of timeouts.
Instead of the forceAbort option, any objection to simple aborting when we
catch IOExceptions AND SdkClientExceptions? If we're intended to close a
previous stream and open a new one and draining the stream fails for any reason
at all, I'd think we'd still want to force abort and proceed regardless of the
option that led us to this point.
was (Author: mackrorysd):
{quote}Like you say, no real point in not aborting here.\{quote}
Help me understand, though: when *do* we get a benefit from draining the stream
instead of simply aborting?
{quote}Happy for a patch, I don't think we can test this easily so not
expecting any tests in the patch...\{quote}
Yeah. This was (at the time anyway) happening pretty repeatedly with a
particular workload - I'm hoping that keeps up so I can be fairly confident
that the end result here is correct handling of timeouts.
> AWS SDK can mistake stream timeouts for EOF and throw SdkClientExceptions
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HADOOP-15541
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-15541
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: fs/s3
> Affects Versions: 2.9.1, 2.8.4, 3.0.2, 3.1.1
> Reporter: Sean Mackrory
> Assignee: Sean Mackrory
> Priority: Major
>
> I've gotten a few reports of read timeouts not being handled properly in some
> Impala workloads. What happens is the following sequence of events (credit to
> Sailesh Mukil for figuring this out):
> * S3AInputStream.read() gets a SocketTimeoutException when it calls
> wrappedStream.read()
> * This is handled by onReadFailure -> reopen -> closeStream. When we try to
> drain the stream, SdkFilterInputStream.read() in the AWS SDK fails because of
> checkLength. The underlying Apache Commons stream returns -1 in the case of a
> timeout, and EOF.
> * The SDK assumes the -1 signifies an EOF, so assumes the bytes read must
> equal expected bytes, and because they don't (because it's a timeout and not
> an EOF) it throws an SdkClientException.
> This is tricky to test for without a ton of mocking of AWS SDK internals,
> because you have to get into this conflicting state where the SDK has only
> read a subset of the expected bytes and gets a -1.
> closeStream will abort the stream in the event of an IOException when
> draining. We could simply also abort in the event of an SdkClientException.
> I'm testing that this results in correct functionality in the workloads that
> seem to hit these timeouts a lot, but all the s3a tests continue to work with
> that change. I'm going to open an issue with the AWS SDK Github as well, but
> I'm not sure what the ideal outcome would be unless there's a good way to
> distinguish between a stream that has timed out and a stream that read all
> the data without huge rewrites.
>
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
