[jira] [Comment Edited] (HADOOP-14521) KMS client needs retry logic
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-14521?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16055963#comment-16055963
]
Xiao Chen edited comment on HADOOP-14521 at 6/20/17 3:43 PM:
-
bq. pre-commit
I tried to ran {{TestAclsEndToEnd}} before and after applying this patch on
branch-2.8. It was passing before, failing after. Could you try the same?
Perhaps something odd happening on my local. (I didn't look inside except for
running the tests)
bq. I don't fully understand your comment.
Your patch is cool, just the tool was confused due to the naming.
{{smart-apply-patch}} uses the wiki's naming convention to choose patch for
trunk, branch-2, branch-2.8 etc. I was saying running
{{dev-support/bin/smart-apply-patch HADOOP-14521}} was trying to apply the
branch-2.8 patch when running on trunk:
{quote}
$ ./dev-support/bin/smart-apply-patch HADOOP-14521
Processing: HADOOP-14521
HADOOP-14521 patch is being downloaded at Tue Jun 20 08:31:28 PDT 2017 from
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12873350/HDFS-11804-branch-2.8.patch
-> Downloaded
ERROR: Aborting! HADOOP-14521 cannot be verified.
{quote}
Maybe we can improve yetus on that since as you said, pre-commit ran fine. This
is NBD for this jira as I said, since I can download and apply the patch
manually.
was (Author: xiaochen):
bq. pre-commit
I tried to ran {{TestAclsEndToEnd}} before and after applying this patch on
branch-2.8. It was passing before, failing after. Could you try the same?
Perhaps something odd happening on my local. (I didn't look inside except for
running the tests)
bq. I don't fully understand your comment.
Your patch is cool, just the tool was confused due to the naming.
{{smart-apply-patch}} uses the wiki's naming convention to choose patch for
trunk, branch-2, branch-2.8 etc. I was saying running
{{dev-support/bin/smart-apply-patch HADOOP-14521}} was trying to apply the
branch-2.8 patch when running on trunk:
{quote}
$ ./dev-support/bin/smart-apply-patch HADOOP-14521
Processing: HADOOP-14521
HADOOP-14521 patch is being downloaded at Tue Jun 20 08:31:28 PDT 2017 from
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12873350/HDFS-11804-branch-2.8.patch
-> Downloaded
ERROR: Aborting! HADOOP-14521 cannot be verified.
{quote}
Maybe we can improve yetus on that since as you said, pre-commit ran fine.
> KMS client needs retry logic
>
>
> Key: HADOOP-14521
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-14521
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Improvement
>Affects Versions: 2.6.0
>Reporter: Rushabh S Shah
>Assignee: Rushabh S Shah
> Attachments: HADOOP-14521.09.patch, HDFS-11804-branch-2.8.patch,
> HDFS-11804-trunk-1.patch, HDFS-11804-trunk-2.patch, HDFS-11804-trunk-3.patch,
> HDFS-11804-trunk-4.patch, HDFS-11804-trunk-5.patch, HDFS-11804-trunk-6.patch,
> HDFS-11804-trunk-7.patch, HDFS-11804-trunk-8.patch, HDFS-11804-trunk.patch
>
>
> The kms client appears to have no retry logic – at all. It's completely
> decoupled from the ipc retry logic. This has major impacts if the KMS is
> unreachable for any reason, including but not limited to network connection
> issues, timeouts, the +restart during an upgrade+.
> This has some major ramifications:
> # Jobs may fail to submit, although oozie resubmit logic should mask it
> # Non-oozie launchers may experience higher rates if they do not already have
> retry logic.
> # Tasks reading EZ files will fail, probably be masked by framework reattempts
> # EZ file creation fails after creating a 0-length file – client receives
> EDEK in the create response, then fails when decrypting the EDEK
> # Bulk hadoop fs copies, and maybe distcp, will prematurely fail
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
[jira] [Comment Edited] (HADOOP-14521) KMS client needs retry logic
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-14521?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16048566#comment-16048566
]
Rushabh S Shah edited comment on HADOOP-14521 at 6/14/17 1:08 AM:
--
bq. We can either update the message, or update the maxNumRetries to
providers.length to make sure we try at least once on all providers. Either way
feels okay to me.
I wouldn't worry much about the log message not being entirely accurate.
If the user is making the number of retries less than the number of providers
then he/she knows the problems associated with it.
{quote}
Slightly prefer the latter since by assumption all providers should work and we
don't have retry delay for the whole sweep.
{quote}
Actually I don't prefer overriding the config value which user intentionally
overrode it.
If you strongly feel about updating the log message, then I can change the log
message in the next revision and will add the numRetries and providers length.
Let me know you thoughts.
[~xiaochen]: As always thanks a lot for your time reviewing all the updated
patches.
was (Author: shahrs87):
bq. We can either update the message, or update the maxNumRetries to
providers.length to make sure we try at least once on all providers. Either way
feels okay to me.
I wouldn't worry much about the error message not being entirely accurate.
If the user is making the number of retries less than the number of providers
then he/she knows the problems associated with it.
{quote}
Slightly prefer the latter since by assumption all providers should work and we
don't have retry delay for the whole sweep.
{quote}
Actually I don't prefer overriding the config value which user intentionally
overrode it.
If you strongly feel about updating the log message, then I can change the log
message in the next revision and will add the numRetries and providers length.
Let me know you thoughts.
[~xiaochen]: As always thanks a lot for your time reviewing all the updated
patches.
> KMS client needs retry logic
>
>
> Key: HADOOP-14521
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-14521
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Improvement
>Affects Versions: 2.6.0
>Reporter: Rushabh S Shah
>Assignee: Rushabh S Shah
> Attachments: HDFS-11804-trunk-1.patch, HDFS-11804-trunk-2.patch,
> HDFS-11804-trunk-3.patch, HDFS-11804-trunk-4.patch, HDFS-11804-trunk-5.patch,
> HDFS-11804-trunk-6.patch, HDFS-11804-trunk-7.patch, HDFS-11804-trunk.patch
>
>
> The kms client appears to have no retry logic – at all. It's completely
> decoupled from the ipc retry logic. This has major impacts if the KMS is
> unreachable for any reason, including but not limited to network connection
> issues, timeouts, the +restart during an upgrade+.
> This has some major ramifications:
> # Jobs may fail to submit, although oozie resubmit logic should mask it
> # Non-oozie launchers may experience higher rates if they do not already have
> retry logic.
> # Tasks reading EZ files will fail, probably be masked by framework reattempts
> # EZ file creation fails after creating a 0-length file – client receives
> EDEK in the create response, then fails when decrypting the EDEK
> # Bulk hadoop fs copies, and maybe distcp, will prematurely fail
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
[jira] [Comment Edited] (HADOOP-14521) KMS client needs retry logic
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-14521?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16047355#comment-16047355 ] Rushabh S Shah edited comment on HADOOP-14521 at 6/13/17 2:52 AM: -- bq. For the retries, do you think maybe it's more intuitive to specify num of failovers for the whole provider set? >From [this comment, point >1|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-14521?focusedCommentId=16036988&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-16036988], > I think [~daryn] had a good reason explaining why have fix number of retries >is a good idea. I kind of agreed with him. So keeping the fix number of >retries even in patch #7. bq. KMSCP: the first @Link seems redundant Fixed in v7 bq. Good to have some validations on the config params (e.g. numRetries > 0 etc.) Added few pre conditions checks for all the config params. bq.I'd revert the change that breaks instead of returning. Thanks a lot for catching that. Fixed that in v7 of the patch. was (Author: shahrs87): bq. For the retries, do you think maybe it's more intuitive to specify num of failovers for the whole provider set? >From [this comment, point >1|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-14521?focusedCommentId=16036988&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-16036988], > I think [~daryn] had a good reason explaining why have fix number of retries >is a good idea. I kind of agreed with him. So keeping the fix number of >retries even in patch #7. bq. KMSCP: the first @Link seems redundant Fixed in v7 bq. Good to have some validations on the config params (e.g. numRetries > 0 etc.) Added few pre conditions checks for all the config params. > KMS client needs retry logic > > > Key: HADOOP-14521 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-14521 > Project: Hadoop Common > Issue Type: Improvement >Affects Versions: 2.6.0 >Reporter: Rushabh S Shah >Assignee: Rushabh S Shah > Attachments: HDFS-11804-trunk-1.patch, HDFS-11804-trunk-2.patch, > HDFS-11804-trunk-3.patch, HDFS-11804-trunk-4.patch, HDFS-11804-trunk-5.patch, > HDFS-11804-trunk-6.patch, HDFS-11804-trunk-7.patch, HDFS-11804-trunk.patch > > > The kms client appears to have no retry logic – at all. It's completely > decoupled from the ipc retry logic. This has major impacts if the KMS is > unreachable for any reason, including but not limited to network connection > issues, timeouts, the +restart during an upgrade+. > This has some major ramifications: > # Jobs may fail to submit, although oozie resubmit logic should mask it > # Non-oozie launchers may experience higher rates if they do not already have > retry logic. > # Tasks reading EZ files will fail, probably be masked by framework reattempts > # EZ file creation fails after creating a 0-length file – client receives > EDEK in the create response, then fails when decrypting the EDEK > # Bulk hadoop fs copies, and maybe distcp, will prematurely fail -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: common-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
