[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-5529?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Jackson Yao updated HDDS-5529:
------------------------------
    Description: 
{code:java}
// code placeholder
{code}
@Replicate void updatePipelineState( HddsProtos.PipelineID pipelineIDProto, 
HddsProtos.PipelineState newState ) throws IOException; @Override public void 
updatePipelineState( HddsProtos.PipelineID pipelineIDProto, 
HddsProtos.PipelineState newState) throws IOException \{ PipelineID pipelineID 
= PipelineID.getFromProtobuf(pipelineIDProto); Pipeline.PipelineState oldState 
= null; lock.writeLock().lock(); try { oldState = 
getPipeline(pipelineID).getPipelineState(); // null check is here to prevent 
the case where SCM store // is closed but the staleNode handlers/pipeline 
creations // still try to access it. if (pipelineStore != null) { 
pipelineStateMap.updatePipelineState(pipelineID, 
Pipeline.PipelineState.fromProtobuf(newState)); transactionBuffer 
.addToBuffer(pipelineStore, pipelineID, getPipeline(pipelineID)); } } catch 
(PipelineNotFoundException pnfe) \{ LOG.warn("Pipeline {} is not found in the 
pipeline Map. Pipeline" + " may have been deleted already.", pipelineID); } 
catch (IOException ex) \{ LOG.warn("Pipeline {} state update failed", 
pipelineID); // revert back to old state in memory 
pipelineStateMap.updatePipelineState(pipelineID, oldState); } finally \{ 
lock.writeLock().unlock(); } }

 


 it is annotated with {{@Replicate}} , so it will be replicated by ratis if HA 
is enabled and it is actually called when the raft log is applied. suppose we 
have one leader L1 , and two followes F1 and F2. if the rocksdb of L1 is ok , 
and the methoed is excuted successfully at L1. when L1 crashed , F1 is elected 
as the new leader, but the rocksdb of F1 got some error(for example , can not 
be written) , so when F1 applied the raft log entry,  it will get an exception, 
and the code of e\{{xception}} will be excuted. so the point here is that , 
current HA implementation seems could not guarantee the consistence of 
different SCM, because although different scm apply the same raft logs in the 
same order, but the result of  {{@Replicate}}  functions may be different by 
other factors. leader may succeed writting DB. but follower may fail when it is 
elected as a new leader , this may cause the inconsistence

  was:
```

@Replicate
 void updatePipelineState(
 HddsProtos.PipelineID pipelineIDProto,
 HddsProtos.PipelineState newState
 )
 throws IOException; @Override
 public void updatePipelineState(
 HddsProtos.PipelineID pipelineIDProto, HddsProtos.PipelineState newState)
 throws IOException {
 PipelineID pipelineID = PipelineID.getFromProtobuf(pipelineIDProto);
 Pipeline.PipelineState oldState = null;
 lock.writeLock().lock();
 try {
 oldState = getPipeline(pipelineID).getPipelineState();
 // null check is here to prevent the case where SCM store
 // is closed but the staleNode handlers/pipeline creations
 // still try to access it.
 if (pipelineStore != null)

{ pipelineStateMap.updatePipelineState(pipelineID, 
Pipeline.PipelineState.fromProtobuf(newState)); transactionBuffer 
.addToBuffer(pipelineStore, pipelineID, getPipeline(pipelineID)); }

} catch (PipelineNotFoundException pnfe) {
 LOG.warn("Pipeline {} is not found in the pipeline Map. Pipeline"
 + " may have been deleted already.", pipelineID);
 } catch (IOException ex) {
 LOG.warn("Pipeline {} state update failed", pipelineID);
 // revert back to old state in memory
 pipelineStateMap.updatePipelineState(pipelineID, oldState);
 } finally

{ lock.writeLock().unlock(); }

}

```
 it is annotated with {{@Replicate}} , so it will be replicated by ratis if HA 
is enabled and it is actually called when the raft log is applied. suppose we 
have one leader L1 , and two followes F1 and F2. if the rocksdb of L1 is ok , 
and the methoed is excuted successfully at L1. when L1 crashed , F1 is elected 
as the new leader, but the rocksdb of F1 got some error(for example , can not 
be written) , so when F1 applied the raft log entry,  it will get an exception, 
and the code of e\{{xception}} will be excuted. so the point here is that , 
current HA implementation seems could not guarantee the consistence of 
different SCM, because although different scm apply the same raft logs in the 
same order, but the result of  {{@Replicate}}  functions may be different by 
other factors. leader may succeed writting DB. but follower may fail when it is 
elected as a new leader , this may cause the inconsistence


> scm should be terminated when IOException is throw by rocksdb
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDDS-5529
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-5529
>             Project: Apache Ozone
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>            Reporter: Jackson Yao
>            Assignee: Jackson Yao
>            Priority: Major
>
> {code:java}
> // code placeholder
> {code}
> @Replicate void updatePipelineState( HddsProtos.PipelineID pipelineIDProto, 
> HddsProtos.PipelineState newState ) throws IOException; @Override public void 
> updatePipelineState( HddsProtos.PipelineID pipelineIDProto, 
> HddsProtos.PipelineState newState) throws IOException \{ PipelineID 
> pipelineID = PipelineID.getFromProtobuf(pipelineIDProto); 
> Pipeline.PipelineState oldState = null; lock.writeLock().lock(); try { 
> oldState = getPipeline(pipelineID).getPipelineState(); // null check is here 
> to prevent the case where SCM store // is closed but the staleNode 
> handlers/pipeline creations // still try to access it. if (pipelineStore != 
> null) { pipelineStateMap.updatePipelineState(pipelineID, 
> Pipeline.PipelineState.fromProtobuf(newState)); transactionBuffer 
> .addToBuffer(pipelineStore, pipelineID, getPipeline(pipelineID)); } } catch 
> (PipelineNotFoundException pnfe) \{ LOG.warn("Pipeline {} is not found in the 
> pipeline Map. Pipeline" + " may have been deleted already.", pipelineID); } 
> catch (IOException ex) \{ LOG.warn("Pipeline {} state update failed", 
> pipelineID); // revert back to old state in memory 
> pipelineStateMap.updatePipelineState(pipelineID, oldState); } finally \{ 
> lock.writeLock().unlock(); } }
>  
>  it is annotated with {{@Replicate}} , so it will be replicated by ratis if 
> HA is enabled and it is actually called when the raft log is applied. suppose 
> we have one leader L1 , and two followes F1 and F2. if the rocksdb of L1 is 
> ok , and the methoed is excuted successfully at L1. when L1 crashed , F1 is 
> elected as the new leader, but the rocksdb of F1 got some error(for example , 
> can not be written) , so when F1 applied the raft log entry,  it will get an 
> exception, and the code of e\{{xception}} will be excuted. so the point here 
> is that , current HA implementation seems could not guarantee the consistence 
> of different SCM, because although different scm apply the same raft logs in 
> the same order, but the result of  {{@Replicate}}  functions may be different 
> by other factors. leader may succeed writting DB. but follower may fail when 
> it is elected as a new leader , this may cause the inconsistence



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to