[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10566?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Nicolas Liochon updated HBASE-10566:
------------------------------------

    Status: Patch Available  (was: Open)

> cleanup rpcTimeout in the client
> --------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-10566
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10566
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Client
>    Affects Versions: 0.99.0
>            Reporter: Nicolas Liochon
>            Assignee: Nicolas Liochon
>             Fix For: 0.99.0
>
>         Attachments: 10566.sample.patch, 10566.v1.patch, 10566.v2.patch
>
>
> There are two issues:
> 1) A confusion between the socket timeout and the call timeout
> Socket timeouts should be minimal: a default like 20 seconds, that could be 
> lowered to single digits timeouts for some apps: if we can not write to the 
> socket in 10 second, we have an issue. This is different from the total 
> duration (send query + do query + receive query), that can be longer, as it 
> can include remotes calls on the server and so on. Today, we have a single 
> value, it does not allow us to have low socket read timeouts.
> 2) The timeout can be different between the calls. Typically, if the total 
> time, retries included is 60 seconds but failed after 2 seconds, then the 
> remaining is 58s. HBase does this today, but by hacking with a thread local 
> storage variable. It's a hack (it should have been a parameter of the 
> methods, the TLS allowed to bypass all the layers. May be protobuf makes this 
> complicated, to be confirmed), but as well it does not really work, because 
> we can have multithreading issues (we use the updated rpc timeout of someone 
> else, or we create a new BlockingRpcChannelImplementation with a random 
> default timeout).
> Ideally, we could send the call timeout to the server as well: it will be 
> able to dismiss alone the calls that it received but git stick in the request 
> queue or in the internal retries (on hdfs for example).
> This will make the system more reactive to failure.
> I think we can solve this now, especially after 10525. The main issue is to 
> something that fits well with protobuf...
> Then it should be easy to have a pool of thread for writers and readers, w/o 
> a single thread per region server as today. 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1.5#6160)

Reply via email to