[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14786?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Mingliang Liu updated HDFS-14786:
---------------------------------
Description:
{{NetworkTopology}} assumes "/datacenter/rack/host" 3 layer topology. Default
block placement policies are rack awareness for better fault tolerance. Newer
block placement policy like {{BlockPlacementPolicyRackFaultTolerant}} tries its
best to place the replicas to most racks, which further tolerates more racks
failing. HADOOP-8470 brought {{NetworkTopologyWithNodeGroup}} to add another
layer under rack, i.e. "/datacenter/rack/host/nodegroup" 4 layer topology. With
that, replicas within a rack can be placed in different node groups for better
isolation.
Existing block placement policies tolerate one rack failure since at least two
racks are chosen in those cases. Chances are all replicas could be placed in
the same datacenter, though there are multiple data centers in the same cluster
topology. In other words, fault of higher layers beyond rack is not well
tolerated.
However, more deployments in public cloud are leveraging multiple available
zones (AZ) for high-availability since the inter-AZ latency seems affordable in
many cases. In a single AZ, some cloud providers like AWS support [partitioned
placement
groups|https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/placement-groups.html#placement-groups-partition]
which basically are different racks. A simple network topology mapped to HDFS
is "/availabilityzone/rack/host" 3 layers.
To achieve high availability tolerating zone failure, this JIRA proposes a new
data placement policy which tries its best to place replicas in most AZs, most
racks, and most evenly distributed.
Examples with 3 replicas, we choose racks as following:
# 1AZ: fall back to {{BlockPlacementPolicyRackFaultTolerant}} to most racks
# 2AZ: randomly choose one rack in 1st AZ and randomly choose two racks in the
other AZ
# 3AZ: randomly choose one rack in one AZ
# 4AZ: randomly choose three AZ and one rack in each AZ
After racks are chosen, hosts are chosen randomly honoring local storage,
favorite nodes, excluded nodes, storage types etc.
Data may become imbalance if topology is very uneven in AZs. This seems not a
problem as in public cloud, infrastructure provisioning is more flexible than
1P.
was:
{{NetworkTopology}} assumes "/datacenter/rack/host" 3 layer topology. Default
block placement policies are rack awareness for better fault tolerance Newer
block placement policy like {{BlockPlacementPolicyRackFaultTolerant}} tries its
best to place the replicas to most racks, which further tolerates more racks
failing. [HADOOP-8470] brought {{NetworkTopologyWithNodeGroup}} to add another
layer under rack, i.e. "/datacenter/rack/host/nodegroup" 4 layer topology. With
that, replicas within a rack can be placed in different node groups for better
isolation.
Existing block placement policies tolerate rack failure since at least two
racks are chosen in those cases. Chances are all replicas could be placed in
the same datacenter, though there are multiple data centers in the same cluster
topology. In other words, fault of higher layers beyond rack is not well
tolerated.
However, more deployments in public cloud are leveraging multiple available
zones (AZ) for high-availability since the inter-AZ latency seems affordable in
many cases. In a single AZ, some cloud providers like AWS support [partitioned
placement
groups|https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/placement-groups.html#placement-groups-partition]
which basically are different racks. A simple network topology mapped to HDFS
is "/availabilityzone/rack/host" 3 layers.
To achieve high availability tolerating zone failure, this JIRA proposes a new
data placement policy which tries its best to place replicas in most AZs, most
racks, and most evenly distributed.
Examples with 3 replicas, we choose racks as following:
# 1AZ: fall back to {{BlockPlacementPolicyRackFaultTolerant}} to most racks
# 2AZ: randomly choose one rack in 1st AZ and randomly choose two racks in the
other AZ
# 3AZ: randomly choose one rack in one AZ
# 4AZ: randomly choose three AZ and one rack in each AZ
After racks are chosen, hosts are chosen randomly honoring local storage,
favorite nodes, excluded nodes, storage types etc.
Data may become imbalance if topology is very uneven in AZs. This seems not a
problem as in public cloud, infrastructure provisioning is more flexible than
1P.
> A new block placement policy tolerating availability zone failure
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-14786
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14786
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: block placement
> Reporter: Mingliang Liu
> Priority: Major
>
> {{NetworkTopology}} assumes "/datacenter/rack/host" 3 layer topology. Default
> block placement policies are rack awareness for better fault tolerance. Newer
> block placement policy like {{BlockPlacementPolicyRackFaultTolerant}} tries
> its best to place the replicas to most racks, which further tolerates more
> racks failing. HADOOP-8470 brought {{NetworkTopologyWithNodeGroup}} to add
> another layer under rack, i.e. "/datacenter/rack/host/nodegroup" 4 layer
> topology. With that, replicas within a rack can be placed in different node
> groups for better isolation.
> Existing block placement policies tolerate one rack failure since at least
> two racks are chosen in those cases. Chances are all replicas could be placed
> in the same datacenter, though there are multiple data centers in the same
> cluster topology. In other words, fault of higher layers beyond rack is not
> well tolerated.
> However, more deployments in public cloud are leveraging multiple available
> zones (AZ) for high-availability since the inter-AZ latency seems affordable
> in many cases. In a single AZ, some cloud providers like AWS support
> [partitioned placement
> groups|https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/placement-groups.html#placement-groups-partition]
> which basically are different racks. A simple network topology mapped to
> HDFS is "/availabilityzone/rack/host" 3 layers.
> To achieve high availability tolerating zone failure, this JIRA proposes a
> new data placement policy which tries its best to place replicas in most AZs,
> most racks, and most evenly distributed.
> Examples with 3 replicas, we choose racks as following:
> # 1AZ: fall back to {{BlockPlacementPolicyRackFaultTolerant}} to most racks
> # 2AZ: randomly choose one rack in 1st AZ and randomly choose two racks in
> the other AZ
> # 3AZ: randomly choose one rack in one AZ
> # 4AZ: randomly choose three AZ and one rack in each AZ
> After racks are chosen, hosts are chosen randomly honoring local storage,
> favorite nodes, excluded nodes, storage types etc.
> Data may become imbalance if topology is very uneven in AZs. This seems not a
> problem as in public cloud, infrastructure provisioning is more flexible than
> 1P.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.2#803003)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
