[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14045?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16677695#comment-16677695
]
Jiandan Yang commented on HDFS-14045:
--------------------------------------
Thanks [~xkrogen] for your suggest and reminding about multiple standbys.
At first I thought getting active latency is enough because standy does not
provide service for users, and after reading your comments I realize it's
helpful to monitor observer if it also offer service, but I think grouping
metrics by role of NN is more better than by NameNode ID, because we can not
know which metric is Active/Standy/Observer from name of metric.
> Use different metrics in DataNode to better measure latency of
> heartbeat/blockReports/incrementalBlockReports of Active/Standby NN
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-14045
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14045
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: datanode
> Reporter: Jiandan Yang
> Assignee: Jiandan Yang
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: HDFS-14045.001.patch, HDFS-14045.002.patch,
> HDFS-14045.003.patch, HDFS-14045.004.patch
>
>
> Currently DataNode uses same metrics to measure rpc latency of NameNode, but
> Active and Standby usually have different performance at the same time,
> especially in large cluster. For example, rpc latency of Standby is very long
> when Standby is catching up editlog. We may misunderstand the state of HDFS.
> Using different metrics for Active and standby can help us obtain more
> precise metric data.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
