[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-16499?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16418580#comment-16418580
 ] 

Hadoop QA commented on HBASE-16499:
-----------------------------------

| (x) *{color:red}-1 overall{color}* |
\\
\\
|| Vote || Subsystem || Runtime || Comment ||
| {color:blue}0{color} | {color:blue} reexec {color} | {color:blue}  0m 
11s{color} | {color:blue} Docker mode activated. {color} |
|| || || || {color:brown} Prechecks {color} ||
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} hbaseanti {color} | {color:green}  0m  
0s{color} | {color:green} Patch does not have any anti-patterns. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} @author {color} | {color:green}  0m  
0s{color} | {color:green} The patch does not contain any @author tags. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} test4tests {color} | {color:green}  0m 
 0s{color} | {color:green} The patch appears to include 1 new or modified test 
files. {color} |
|| || || || {color:brown} master Compile Tests {color} ||
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvninstall {color} | {color:green}  4m 
54s{color} | {color:green} master passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} compile {color} | {color:green}  1m 
44s{color} | {color:green} master passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} checkstyle {color} | {color:green}  1m 
11s{color} | {color:green} master passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} shadedjars {color} | {color:green}  6m 
13s{color} | {color:green} branch has no errors when building our shaded 
downstream artifacts. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} findbugs {color} | {color:green}  2m  
6s{color} | {color:green} master passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javadoc {color} | {color:green}  0m 
30s{color} | {color:green} master passed {color} |
|| || || || {color:brown} Patch Compile Tests {color} ||
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvninstall {color} | {color:green}  4m 
56s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} compile {color} | {color:green}  1m 
46s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javac {color} | {color:green}  1m 
46s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} checkstyle {color} | {color:green}  1m 
13s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} whitespace {color} | {color:green}  0m 
 0s{color} | {color:green} The patch has no whitespace issues. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} shadedjars {color} | {color:green}  5m 
 7s{color} | {color:green} patch has no errors when building our shaded 
downstream artifacts. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} hadoopcheck {color} | {color:green} 
19m 45s{color} | {color:green} Patch does not cause any errors with Hadoop 
2.6.5 2.7.4 or 3.0.0. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} findbugs {color} | {color:green}  1m 
59s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javadoc {color} | {color:green}  0m 
28s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
|| || || || {color:brown} Other Tests {color} ||
| {color:red}-1{color} | {color:red} unit {color} | {color:red} 10m 37s{color} 
| {color:red} hbase-server in the patch failed. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} asflicense {color} | {color:green}  0m 
10s{color} | {color:green} The patch does not generate ASF License warnings. 
{color} |
| {color:black}{color} | {color:black} {color} | {color:black} 56m 50s{color} | 
{color:black} {color} |
\\
\\
|| Subsystem || Report/Notes ||
| Docker | Client=17.05.0-ce Server=17.05.0-ce Image:yetus/hbase:d8b550f |
| JIRA Issue | HBASE-16499 |
| JIRA Patch URL | 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12916755/HBASE-16499.patch |
| Optional Tests |  asflicense  javac  javadoc  unit  findbugs  shadedjars  
hadoopcheck  hbaseanti  checkstyle  compile  |
| uname | Linux c1fbadb041b1 3.13.0-139-generic #188-Ubuntu SMP Tue Jan 9 
14:43:09 UTC 2018 x86_64 GNU/Linux |
| Build tool | maven |
| Personality | 
/home/jenkins/jenkins-slave/workspace/PreCommit-HBASE-Build@2/component/dev-support/hbase-personality.sh
 |
| git revision | master / d8b550fabc |
| maven | version: Apache Maven 3.5.3 
(3383c37e1f9e9b3bc3df5050c29c8aff9f295297; 2018-02-24T19:49:05Z) |
| Default Java | 1.8.0_162 |
| findbugs | v3.1.0-RC3 |
| unit | 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/12200/artifact/patchprocess/patch-unit-hbase-server.txt
 |
|  Test Results | 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/12200/testReport/ |
| modules | C: hbase-server U: hbase-server |
| Console output | 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/12200/console |
| Powered by | Apache Yetus 0.7.0   http://yetus.apache.org |


This message was automatically generated.



> slow replication for small HBase clusters
> -----------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-16499
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-16499
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Replication
>            Reporter: Vikas Vishwakarma
>            Assignee: Vikas Vishwakarma
>            Priority: Major
>             Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.1.0, 2.0.0
>
>         Attachments: HBASE-16499.patch
>
>
> For small clusters 10-20 nodes we recently observed that replication is 
> progressing very slowly when we do bulk writes and there is lot of lag 
> accumulation on AgeOfLastShipped / SizeOfLogQueue. From the logs we observed 
> that the number of threads used for shipping wal edits in parallel comes from 
> the following equation in HBaseInterClusterReplicationEndpoint
> int n = Math.min(Math.min(this.maxThreads, entries.size()/100+1),
>       replicationSinkMgr.getSinks().size());
> ... 
>       for (int i=0; i<n; i++) {
>         entryLists.add(new ArrayList<HLog.Entry>(entries.size()/n+1)); <-- 
> batch size
>       }
> ...
>         for (int i=0; i<entryLists.size(); i++) {
>          .....
>             // RuntimeExceptions encountered here bubble up and are handled 
> in ReplicationSource
>             pool.submit(createReplicator(entryLists.get(i), i));  <-- 
> concurrency 
>             futures++;
>           }
>         }
> maxThreads is fixed & configurable and since we are taking min of the three 
> values n gets decided based replicationSinkMgr.getSinks().size() when we have 
> enough edits to replicate
> replicationSinkMgr.getSinks().size() is decided based on 
> int numSinks = (int) Math.ceil(slaveAddresses.size() * ratio);
> where ratio is this.ratio = conf.getFloat("replication.source.ratio", 
> DEFAULT_REPLICATION_SOURCE_RATIO);
> Currently DEFAULT_REPLICATION_SOURCE_RATIO is set to 10% so for small 
> clusters of size 10-20 RegionServers  the value we get for numSinks and hence 
> n is very small like 1 or 2. This substantially reduces the pool concurrency 
> used for shipping wal edits in parallel effectively slowing down replication 
> for small clusters and causing lot of lag accumulation in AgeOfLastShipped. 
> Sometimes it takes tens of hours to clear off the entire replication queue 
> even after the client has finished writing on the source side. 
> We are running tests by varying replication.source.ratio and have seen 
> multi-fold improvement in total replication time (will update the results 
> here). I wanted to propose here that we should increase the default value for 
> replication.source.ratio also so that we have sufficient concurrency even for 
> small clusters. We figured it out after lot of iterations and debugging so 
> probably slightly higher default will save the trouble. 



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

Reply via email to