[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: hadoop-user
Subject: Re: extremely imbalance in the hdfs cluster
From: 茅旭峰 <m9suns () gmail ! com>
Date: 2011-06-30 4:22:06
Message-ID: BANLkTimBMkO+VXh7TVcty6_ZB4FJk1-F7g () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
Thanks Edward! It seems like we could only live with this issue.
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 11:24 PM, Edward Capriolo <edlinuxguru@gmail.com>wr=
ote:
> We have run into this issue as well. Since hadoop is RR writing different
> size disks really screw things up royally especially if you are running a=
t
> high capacity. We have found that decommissioning hosts for stretches of
> time is more effective then the balancer in extreme situations. Another
> hokey trick is that nodes that launch a job always use that node as the
> first replica. You can leverage that by launching jobs from your bigger
> machines which makes data more likely to be saved there. Super hokey
> solution is moving blocks around with rsync! (block reports later happen
> and
> deal with this (I do not suggest this)).
>
> Hadoop really does need a more intelligent system then Round Robin writin=
g
> for heterogeneous systems, there might be a jira open on this somewhere.
> But
> if you are on 0.20.X you have to work with it.
>
> Edward
>
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 9:06 AM, =E8=8C=85=E6=97=AD=E5=B3=B0 <m9suns@gmai=
l.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm running a 37 DN hdfs cluster. There are 12 nodes have 20TB capacity
> > each
> > node, and the other 25 nodes have 24TB each node.Unfortunately, there a=
re
> > several nodes that contain much more data than others, and I can still
> see
> > the data increasing crazy. The 'dstat' shows
> >
> > dstat -ta 2
> > -----time----- ----total-cpu-usage---- -dsk/total- -net/total-
> ---paging--
> > ---system--
> > date/time |usr sys idl wai hiq siq| read writ| recv send| in ou=
t
> |
> > int csw
> > 24-06 00:42:43| 1 1 95 2 0 0| 25M 62M| 0 0 | 0 0=
.1
> > |3532 5644
> > 24-06 00:42:45| 7 1 91 0 0 0| 16k 176k|8346B 1447k| 0 =
0
> > |1201 365
> > 24-06 00:42:47| 7 1 91 0 0 0| 12k 172k|9577B 1493k| 0 =
0
> > |1223 334
> > 24-06 00:42:49| 11 3 83 1 0 1| 26M 11M| 78M 66M| 0 =
0
> |
> > 12k 18k
> > 24-06 00:42:51| 4 3 90 1 0 2| 17M 181M| 117M 53M| 0 =
0
> |
> > 15k 26k
> > 24-06 00:42:53| 4 3 87 4 0 2| 15M 375M| 117M 55M| 0 =
0
> |
> > 16k 26k
> > 24-06 00:42:55| 3 2 94 1 0 1| 15M 37M| 80M 17M| 0 =
0
> |
> > 10k 15k
> > 24-06 00:42:57| 0 0 98 1 0 0| 18M 23M|7259k 5988k| 0 =
0
> > |1932 1066
> > 24-06 00:42:59| 0 0 98 1 0 0| 16M 132M| 708k 106k| 0 =
0
> > |1484 491
> > 24-06 00:43:01| 4 2 91 2 0 1| 23M 64M| 76M 41M| 0 =
0
> > |8441 13k
> > 24-06 00:43:03| 4 3 88 3 0 1| 17M 207M| 91M 48M| 0 =
0
> |
> > 11k 16k
> >
> > From the result of dstat, we can see that the throughput of write is mu=
ch
> > more than read.
> > I've started a balancer processor, with dfs.balance.bandwidthPerSec set
> to
> > bytes. From
> > the balancer log, I can see the balancer works well. But the balance
> > operation can not
> > catch up with the write operation.
> >
> > Now I can only stop the mad increase of data size by stopping the
> datanode,
> > and setting
> > dfs.datanode.du.reserved 300GB, then starting the datanode again. Until
> the
> > total size
> > reaches the 300GB reservation line, the increase stopped.
> >
> > The output of 'hadoop dfsadmin -report' shows for the crazy nodes,
> >
> > Name: 10.150.161.88:50010
> > Decommission Status : Normal
> > Configured Capacity: 20027709382656 (18.22 TB)
> > DFS Used: 14515387866480 (13.2 TB)
> > Non DFS Used: 0 (0 KB)
> > DFS Remaining: 5512321516176(5.01 TB)
> > DFS Used%: 72.48%
> > DFS Remaining%: 27.52%
> > Last contact: Wed Jun 29 21:03:01 CST 2011
> >
> >
> > Name: 10.150.161.76:50010
> > Decommission Status : Normal
> > Configured Capacity: 20027709382656 (18.22 TB)
> > DFS Used: 16554450730194 (15.06 TB)
> > Non DFS Used: 0 (0 KB)
> > DFS Remaining: 3473258652462(3.16 TB)
> > DFS Used%: 82.66%
> > DFS Remaining%: 17.34%
> > Last contact: Wed Jun 29 21:03:02 CST 2011
> >
> > while the other normal datanode, it just like
> >
> > Name: 10.150.161.65:50010
> > Decommission Status : Normal
> > Configured Capacity: 23627709382656 (21.49 TB)
> > DFS Used: 5953984552236 (5.42 TB)
> > Non DFS Used: 1200643810004 (1.09 TB)
> > DFS Remaining: 16473081020416(14.98 TB)
> > DFS Used%: 25.2%
> > DFS Remaining%: 69.72%
> > Last contact: Wed Jun 29 21:03:01 CST 2011
> >
> >
> > Name: 10.150.161.80:50010
> > Decommission Status : Normal
> > Configured Capacity: 23627709382656 (21.49 TB)
> > DFS Used: 5982565373592 (5.44 TB)
> > Non DFS Used: 1202701691240 (1.09 TB)
> > DFS Remaining: 16442442317824(14.95 TB)
> > DFS Used%: 25.32%
> > DFS Remaining%: 69.59%
> > Last contact: Wed Jun 29 21:03:02 CST 2011
> >
> > Any hint on this issue? We are using 0.20.2-cdh3u0.
> >
> > Thanks and regards,
> >
> > Mao Xu-Feng
> >
>
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic