Clay B. created HBASE-12954:
-------------------------------

             Summary: Ability impared using HBase on multihomed hosts
                 Key: HBASE-12954
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-12954
             Project: HBase
          Issue Type: Bug
    Affects Versions: 0.98.4
            Reporter: Clay B.
            Priority: Minor


For HBase clusters running on unusual networks (such as NAT'd cloud 
environments or physical machines with multiple IP's per network interface) it 
would be ideal to have a way to both specify:

# which IP interface to which HBase master or region-server will bind
# what hostname HBase will advertise in Zookeeper both for a master or 
region-server process

While efforts such as HBASE-8640 go a long way to normalize these two sources 
of information, it is not possible in the current design of the properties 
available to an administrator for these to be unambiguously specified.

One has been able to request `hbase.master.ipc.address` or 
`hbase.regionserver.ipc.address` but one can not specify the desired HBase 
`hbase.master.hostname`. (It was removed in HBASE-1357, further I am unaware of 
a region-server equivalent.)

I use a configuration management system to generate all of my configuration 
files on a per-machine basis. As such, an option to generate a file specifying 
exactly which hostname to use would be helpful.

Today, specifying the bind address for HBase works and one can use an 
HBase-only DNS for faking what to put in Zookeeper but this is far from ideal. 
Network interfaces have no intrinsic IP address, nor hostname. Specifing a DNS 
server is awkward as the DNS server may differ from the system's resolver and 
is a single IP address. Similarly, on hosts which use a transient VIP (e.g. 
through keepalived) for other services, it means there's a seemingly 
non-deterministic hostname choice made by HBase depending on the state of the 
VIP at daemon start-up time.

I will attach two networking examples I use which become very difficult to 
manage under the current properties.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to