[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-9802?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13801353#comment-13801353
]
Enis Soztutar commented on HBASE-9802:
--------------------------------------
Sounds interesting, but some of the listed items are already design points in
current CM.
bq. 1) Only process-level actions can be simulated, not support
machine-level/hardware-level/network-level actions.
Action class is not specific to process. HW actions can easily be implemented
as subclasses.
bq. 2) No data validation before and after the test, the fatal bugs such as
that can cause data inconsistent may be overlook.
I think it is not the duty of the CM to verify the data, since verification of
the data is test specific.
bq. 3) When failure occurs, we can't repro the problem and hard to figure out
the reason.
Agreed. There has been some discussions for choosing a seed for random actions,
so that the actions can be replayed. Also we can do a replay log.
Would love to see a patch.
> A new failover test framework for HBase
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-9802
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-9802
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: test
> Affects Versions: 0.94.3
> Reporter: chendihao
> Priority: Minor
>
> Currently HBase uses ChaosMonkey for IT test and fault injection. It will
> restart regionserver, force balancer and perform other actions randomly and
> periodically. However, we need a more extensible and full-featured framework
> for our failover test and we find ChaosMonkey cant' suit our needs since it
> has the following drawbacks.
> 1) Only process-level actions can be simulated, not support
> machine-level/hardware-level/network-level actions.
> 2) No data validation before and after the test, the fatal bugs such as that
> can cause data inconsistent may be overlook.
> 3) When failure occurs, we can't repro the problem and hard to figure out the
> reason.
> Therefore, we have developed a new framework to satisfy the need of failover
> test. We extended ChaosMonkey and implement the function to validate data and
> to replay failed actions. Here are the features we add.
> 1) Policy/Task/Action abstraction, seperating Task from Policy and Action
> makes it easier to manage and replay a set of actions.
> 2) Make action configurable. We have implemented some actions to cause
> machine failure and defined the same interface as original actions.
> 3) We should validate the date consistent before and after failover test to
> ensure the availability and data correctness.
> 4) After performing a set of actions, we also check the consistency of table
> as well.
> 5) The set of actions that caused test failure can be replayed, and the
> reproducibility of actions can help fixing the exposed bugs.
> Our team has developed this framework and run for a while. Some bugs were
> exposed and fixed by running this test framework. Moreover, we have a monitor
> program which shows the progress of failover test and make sure our cluster
> is as stable as we want. Now we are trying to make it more general and will
> opensource it later.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1#6144)
