[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14090?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16841794#comment-16841794
 ] 

Íñigo Goiri commented on HDFS-14090:
------------------------------------

I think that Approach 1 is the natural extension of the current model to manage 
this scenario.
In the past few months I've been doing some changes to support unavailable 
subclusters.
I think this approach would be able to handle this a little more cleanly.

It would be nice to have a summary of where the main code changes would be.
It looks to me that we will have to do some change to the commons part for both 
RPC client and server.

> RBF: Improved isolation for downstream name nodes.
> --------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDFS-14090
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14090
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>            Reporter: CR Hota
>            Assignee: CR Hota
>            Priority: Major
>         Attachments: RBF_ Isolation design.pdf
>
>
> Router is a gateway to underlying name nodes. Gateway architectures, should 
> help minimize impact of clients connecting to healthy clusters vs unhealthy 
> clusters.
> For example - If there are 2 name nodes downstream, and one of them is 
> heavily loaded with calls spiking rpc queue times, due to back pressure the 
> same with start reflecting on the router. As a result of this, clients 
> connecting to healthy/faster name nodes will also slow down as same rpc queue 
> is maintained for all calls at the router layer. Essentially the same IPC 
> thread pool is used by router to connect to all name nodes.
> Currently router uses one single rpc queue for all calls. Lets discuss how we 
> can change the architecture and add some throttling logic for 
> unhealthy/slow/overloaded name nodes.
> One way could be to read from current call queue, immediately identify 
> downstream name node and maintain a separate queue for each underlying name 
> node. Another simpler way is to maintain some sort of rate limiter configured 
> for each name node and let routers drop/reject/send error requests after 
> certain threshold. 
> This won’t be a simple change as router’s ‘Server’ layer would need redesign 
> and implementation. Currently this layer is the same as name node.
> Opening this ticket to discuss, design and implement this feature.
>  



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org

Reply via email to