[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-7265?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Neil Joshi updated HDDS-7265:
-----------------------------
    Summary: ScatterRackPolicy for Ratis pipeline provider container placement  
 (was: ScatterRackPolicy for Ratis container placement behaves like RackAware 
policy)

> ScatterRackPolicy for Ratis pipeline provider container placement 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDDS-7265
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-7265
>             Project: Apache Ozone
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Neil Joshi
>            Assignee: Neil Joshi
>            Priority: Major
>
> We expected container placement for ratis containers under the 
> SCMContainerPlacementRackScatter to behave as documented for EC.  Instead, we 
> find when we configure ozone to use the SCMContainerPlacementRackScatter for 
> ratis container placement, the placement behaves like the 
> SCMContainerPlacementRackAware. 
> That is, for a cluster with 3 racks and Datanodes on each of the racks, with 
> a RATIS 3 configuration, to have pipelines and containers placed on each of 
> the 3 racks.  Instead we find that pipelines and containers are placed like 
> SCMContainerPlacementRackAware with 2 on one rack and 1 on another rack. 
>  
> Design for providing a ScatterRack pipelinePlacementPolicy for the pipeline 
> provider on open containers, RatisPipelineProvider. 
> Proposed in this design document is to provide an additional 
> PipelinePlacementPolicy that prioritizes container fault tolerance ensuring 
> whenever possible each pipeline is on a separate rack. see 
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1npEseOoRzaNJIwFq7di4tWhb5o8LpUFYifU30kopd8g/edit?usp=sharing



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

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

Reply via email to