[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14118?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16738515#comment-16738515
]
Fengnan Li commented on HDFS-14118:
-----------------------------------
Thanks for the comments and pointers [~elgoiri]!
One thing I don't understand in your comment for [link
HDFS-13312|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-13312] is that it will
affect a lot of components. Do you refer to that DN will need this approach as
well?
DNS strategy here is pretty straightforward for us. Internally we also
discussed a lot about which way we should go, and DNS is our final choice.
> RBF: Use DNS to help resolve routers
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-14118
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14118
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: Fengnan Li
> Assignee: Fengnan Li
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: HDFS-14118.patch
>
>
> Clients will need to know about routers to talk to the HDFS cluster
> (obviously), and having routers updating (adding/removing) will have to make
> every client change, which is a painful process.
> DNS can be used here to resolve the single domain name clients knows to a
> list of routers in the current config. However, DNS won't be able to consider
> only resolving to the working router based on certain health thresholds.
> There are some ways about how this can be solved. One way is to have a
> separate script to regularly check the status of the router and update the
> DNS records if a router fails the health thresholds. In this way, security
> might be carefully considered for this way. Another way is to have the client
> do the normal connecting/failover after they get the list of routers, which
> requires the change of current failover proxy provider.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
