+1 for approach A.

On Thu, 11 Apr 2019, 12:23 pm Akira Ajisaka, <aajis...@apache.org> wrote:

> The Approach A looks good to me.
>
> Thanks,
> Akira
>
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 2:30 PM Xiaoqiao He <xq.he2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi forks,
> >
> > The current implementation of RBF is not sensitive about data locality,
> > since NameNode could not get real client hostname by invoke
> > Server#getRemoteAddress when RPC request forward by Router to NameNode.
> > Therefore, it will lead to several challenges, for instance,
> >
> >    - a. Client could have to go for remote read instead of local read,
> >    Short-Circuit could not be used in most cases.
> >    - b. Block placement policy could not run as except based on defined
> >    rack aware. Thus it will loss local node write.
> >
> > There are some different solutions to solve data locality issue after
> > discussion, some of them will change RPC protocol, so we look forward to
> > furthermore suggestions and votes. HDFS-13248 is tracking the issue.
> >
> >    - Approach A: Changing IPC/RPC layer protocol
> (IpcConnectionContextProto
> >    or RpcHeader#RpcRequestHeaderProto) and add extra field about client
> >    hostname. Of course the new field is optional, only input by Router
> and
> >    parse by Namenode in generally. This approach is compatibility and
> Client
> >    should do nothing after changing.
> >    - Approach B: Changing ClientProtocol and add extra interface
> >    create/append/getBlockLocations with additional parameter about client
> >    hostname. As approach A, it is input by Router and parse by Namenode,
> and
> >    also is compatibility.
> >    - Approach C: Solve write and read locality separately based on
> current
> >    interface and no changes, for write, hack client hostname as one of
> favor
> >    nodes for addBlocks, for read, reorder targets at Router after
> Namenode
> >    returns result to Router.
> >
> > As discussion and evaluation in HDFS-13248, we prefer to change IPC/RPC
> > layer protocol to support RPC data locality. We welcome more suggestions,
> > votes or just give us feedback to push forward this feature. Thanks.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Hexiaoqiao
> >
> > reference
> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-13248
> > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10467
> >
> > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-12615
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-dev-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-dev-h...@hadoop.apache.org
>
>

Reply via email to