Hi Aljoscha, yeah I should have been clearer. I did mean those accumulators but am not trusting them in the sense of total number (as you said, they are reset on failure). On the other hand, if they do not change for a while it is pretty obvious that the job has ingested everything in the queue. But you are right, this is kind of heuristic. In combination with the fact that the DateTimeBucketer does not create new folders I believe this should be sufficient to decide when the job has basically finished, though.
So the setup is the following: The Flink job consists of a FlinkKafkaConsumer08, a map containing just an IntCounter accumulator and finally a rolling sink writing to HDFS. I start it in a per-job yarn session with n=3, s=4. Then I pour 2 million records in the Kafka queue the application is reading from. If no job/task managers are killed, the behavior is exactly as expected: the output files in HDFS grow with time and I can exactly monitor via the accumulator when every record has been ingested from Kafka. After that time, I give the job a few seconds and then cancel it via the web interface. Then still some time later (to give the job the chance to output the few records still hanging around) a wc -l on the output files yields exactly the expected 2 million. On the other hand, if I kill a task manager while the job is in progress, one of the 12 output files seems to be missing as described before. A wc -l on only the relevant bytes as I mentioned in an earlier mail then leads to a number smaller than 2 million. We are using an FsStateBackend in HDFS with a checkpoint interval of 10s. Cheers, Max — Maximilian Bode * Junior Consultant * maximilian.b...@tngtech.com TNG Technology Consulting GmbH, Betastr. 13a, 85774 Unterföhring Geschäftsführer: Henrik Klagges, Christoph Stock, Dr. Robert Dahlke Sitz: Unterföhring * Amtsgericht München * HRB 135082 > Am 08.03.2016 um 17:46 schrieb Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>: > > Hi, > with accumulator you mean the ones you get from > RuntimeContext.addAccumulator/getAccumulator? I’m afraid these are not > fault-tolerant which means that the count in these probably doesn’t reflect > the actual number of elements that were processed. When a job fails and > restarts the accumulators should start from scratch. This makes me wonder how > yours ever reach the required 2 mio, for it to be considered “done”. > > This keeps getting more mysterious… > > By the way, what are you using as StateBackend and checkpoint interval? > > Cheers, > Aljoscha >> On 08 Mar 2016, at 13:38, Maximilian Bode <maximilian.b...@tngtech.com> >> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> thanks for the fast answer. Answers inline. >> >>> Am 08.03.2016 um 13:31 schrieb Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>: >>> >>> Hi, >>> a missing part file for one of the parallel sinks is not necessarily a >>> problem. This can happen if that parallel instance of the sink never >>> received data after the job successfully restarted. >>> >>> Missing data, however, is a problem. Maybe I need some more information >>> about your setup: >>> >>> - When are you inspecting the part files? >> Some time after the cluster is shut down >>> - Do you shutdown the Flink Job before checking? If so, how do you shut it >>> down. >> Via 'cancel' in the Jobmanager Web Interface. Some records seem to be >> written only after cancelling the job, right? >>> - When do you know whether all the data from Kafka was consumed by Flink >>> and has passed through the pipeline into HDFS? >> I have an accumulator in a map right before writing into HDFS. Also, the >> RollingSink has a DataTimeBucketer which makes it transparent when no new >> data is arriving anymore as the last bucket is from some minutes ago. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Aljoscha >>>> On 08 Mar 2016, at 13:19, Maximilian Bode <maximilian.b...@tngtech.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Aljoscha, >>>> >>>> oh I see. I was under the impression this file was used internally and the >>>> output being completed at the end. Ok, so I extracted the relevant lines >>>> using >>>> for i in part-*; do head -c $(cat "_$i.valid-length" | strings) "$i" > >>>> "$i.final"; done >>>> which seems to do the trick. >>>> >>>> Unfortunately, now some records are missing again. In particular, there >>>> are the files >>>> part-0-0, part-1-0, ..., part-10-0, part-11-0, each with corresponding >>>> .valid-length files >>>> part-0-1, part-1-1, ..., part-10-0 >>>> in the bucket, where job parallelism=12. So it looks to us as if one of >>>> the files was not even created in the second attempt. This behavior seems >>>> to be what somewhat reproducible, cf. my earlier email where the part-11 >>>> file disappeared as well. >>>> >>>> Thanks again for your help. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Max >>>> — >>>> Maximilian Bode * Junior Consultant * maximilian.b...@tngtech.com >>>> TNG Technology Consulting GmbH, Betastr. 13a, 85774 Unterföhring >>>> Geschäftsführer: Henrik Klagges, Christoph Stock, Dr. Robert Dahlke >>>> Sitz: Unterföhring * Amtsgericht München * HRB 135082 >>>> >>>>> Am 08.03.2016 um 11:05 schrieb Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> are you taking the “.valid-length” files into account. The problem with >>>>> doing “exactly-once” with HDFS is that before Hadoop 2.7 it was not >>>>> possible to truncate files. So the trick we’re using is to write the >>>>> length up to which a file is valid if we would normally need to truncate >>>>> it. (If the job fails in the middle of writing the output files have to >>>>> be truncated to a valid position.) For example, say you have an output >>>>> file part-8-0. Now, if there exists a file part-8-0.valid-length this >>>>> file tells you up to which position the file part-8-0 is valid. So you >>>>> should only read up to this point. >>>>> >>>>> The name of the “.valid-length” suffix can also be configured, by the >>>>> way, as can all the other stuff. >>>>> >>>>> If this is not the problem then I definitely have to investigate further. >>>>> I’ll also look into the Hadoop 2.4.1 build problem. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Aljoscha >>>>>> On 08 Mar 2016, at 10:26, Maximilian Bode <maximilian.b...@tngtech.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Aljoscha, >>>>>> thanks again for getting back to me. I built from your branch and the >>>>>> exception is not occurring anymore. The RollingSink state can be >>>>>> restored. >>>>>> >>>>>> Still, the exactly-once guarantee seems not to be fulfilled, there are >>>>>> always some extra records after killing either a task manager or the job >>>>>> manager. Do you have an idea where this behavior might be coming from? >>>>>> (I guess concrete numbers will not help greatly as there are so many >>>>>> parameters influencing them. Still, in our test scenario, we produce 2 >>>>>> million records in a Kafka queue but in the final output files there are >>>>>> on the order of 2.1 million records, so a 5% error. The job is running >>>>>> in a per-job YARN session with n=3, s=4 with a checkpointing interval of >>>>>> 10s.) >>>>>> >>>>>> On another (maybe unrelated) note: when I pulled your branch, the Travis >>>>>> build did not go through for -Dhadoop.version=2.4.1. I have not looked >>>>>> into this further as of now, is this one of the tests known to fail >>>>>> sometimes? >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Max >>>>>> <travis.log> >>>>>> — >>>>>> Maximilian Bode * Junior Consultant * maximilian.b...@tngtech.com >>>>>> TNG Technology Consulting GmbH, Betastr. 13a, 85774 Unterföhring >>>>>> Geschäftsführer: Henrik Klagges, Christoph Stock, Dr. Robert Dahlke >>>>>> Sitz: Unterföhring * Amtsgericht München * HRB 135082 >>>>>> >>>>>>> Am 07.03.2016 um 17:20 schrieb Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Maximilian, >>>>>>> sorry for the delay, we where very busy with the release last week. I >>>>>>> had a hunch about the problem but I think I found a fix now. The >>>>>>> problem is in snapshot restore. When restoring, the sink tries to clean >>>>>>> up any files that where previously in progress. If Flink restores to >>>>>>> the same snapshot twice in a row then it will try to clean up the >>>>>>> leftover files twice but they are not there anymore, this causes the >>>>>>> exception. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have a fix in my branch: >>>>>>> https://github.com/aljoscha/flink/tree/rolling-sink-fix >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Could you maybe try if this solves your problem? Which version of Flink >>>>>>> are you using? You would have to build from source to try it out. >>>>>>> Alternatively I could build it and put it onto a maven snapshot >>>>>>> repository for you to try it out. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>> Aljoscha >>>>>>>> On 03 Mar 2016, at 14:50, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> did you check whether there are any files at your specified HDFS >>>>>>>> output location? If yes, which files are there? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>> Aljoscha >>>>>>>>> On 03 Mar 2016, at 14:29, Maximilian Bode >>>>>>>>> <maximilian.b...@tngtech.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Just for the sake of completeness: this also happens when killing a >>>>>>>>> task manager and is therefore probably unrelated to job manager HA. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Am 03.03.2016 um 14:17 schrieb Maximilian Bode >>>>>>>>>> <maximilian.b...@tngtech.com>: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi everyone, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> unfortunately, I am running into another problem trying to establish >>>>>>>>>> exactly once guarantees (Kafka -> Flink 1.0.0-rc3 -> HDFS). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> When using >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> RollingSink<Tuple3<Integer,Integer,String>> sink = new >>>>>>>>>> RollingSink<Tuple3<Integer,Integer,String>>("hdfs://our.machine.com:8020/hdfs/dir/outbound"); >>>>>>>>>> sink.setBucketer(new NonRollingBucketer()); >>>>>>>>>> output.addSink(sink); >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> and then killing the job manager, the new job manager is unable to >>>>>>>>>> restore the old state throwing >>>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>>> java.lang.Exception: Could not restore checkpointed state to >>>>>>>>>> operators and functions >>>>>>>>>> at >>>>>>>>>> org.apache.flink.streaming.runtime.tasks.StreamTask.restoreState(StreamTask.java:454) >>>>>>>>>> at >>>>>>>>>> org.apache.flink.streaming.runtime.tasks.StreamTask.invoke(StreamTask.java:209) >>>>>>>>>> at org.apache.flink.runtime.taskmanager.Task.run(Task.java:559) >>>>>>>>>> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:744) >>>>>>>>>> Caused by: java.lang.Exception: Failed to restore state to function: >>>>>>>>>> In-Progress file >>>>>>>>>> hdfs://our.machine.com:8020/hdfs/dir/outbound/part-5-0 was neither >>>>>>>>>> moved to pending nor is still in progress. >>>>>>>>>> at >>>>>>>>>> org.apache.flink.streaming.api.operators.AbstractUdfStreamOperator.restoreState(AbstractUdfStreamOperator.java:168) >>>>>>>>>> at >>>>>>>>>> org.apache.flink.streaming.runtime.tasks.StreamTask.restoreState(StreamTask.java:446) >>>>>>>>>> ... 3 more >>>>>>>>>> Caused by: java.lang.RuntimeException: In-Progress file >>>>>>>>>> hdfs://our.machine.com:8020/hdfs/dir/outbound/part-5-0 was neither >>>>>>>>>> moved to pending nor is still in progress. >>>>>>>>>> at >>>>>>>>>> org.apache.flink.streaming.connectors.fs.RollingSink.restoreState(RollingSink.java:686) >>>>>>>>>> at >>>>>>>>>> org.apache.flink.streaming.connectors.fs.RollingSink.restoreState(RollingSink.java:122) >>>>>>>>>> at >>>>>>>>>> org.apache.flink.streaming.api.operators.AbstractUdfStreamOperator.restoreState(AbstractUdfStreamOperator.java:165) >>>>>>>>>> ... 4 more >>>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>>> I found a resolved issue [1] concerning Hadoop 2.7.1. We are in fact >>>>>>>>>> using 2.4.0 – might this be the same issue? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Another thing I could think of is that the job is not configured >>>>>>>>>> correctly and there is some sort of timing issue. The checkpoint >>>>>>>>>> interval is 10 seconds, everything else was left at default value. >>>>>>>>>> Then again, as the NonRollingBucketer is used, there should not be >>>>>>>>>> any timing issues, right? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>> Max >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-2979 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> — >>>>>>>>>> Maximilian Bode * Junior Consultant * maximilian.b...@tngtech.com >>>>>>>>>> TNG Technology Consulting GmbH, Betastr. 13a, 85774 Unterföhring >>>>>>>>>> Geschäftsführer: Henrik Klagges, Christoph Stock, Dr. Robert Dahlke >>>>>>>>>> Sitz: Unterföhring * Amtsgericht München * HRB 135082 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
