Cannot understand the line from Apache Hadoop 3.1.0 documentation - hadoop

I'm reading the hadoop documentation and I'm unable to understand the line which describes replica placement "HDFS’s placement policy is to put one replica on the local machine if the writer is on a datanode, otherwise on a random datanode". Can someone make me understand the line in the quotation marks.

Basically, if a task is running on the same server as the datanode process, write the result locally. Otherwise, pick a datanode at random.
This could happen in the case where you have Hadoop processes running in Mesos or Spark Standalone clusters, where the datanodes are isolated storage servers, or there are dedicated YARN NodeManagers with large memory requirements, but not much disk space.
Second replica goes on the same rack, but a different datanode server, as that first replica.
Third replica goes elsewhere in the cluster, not on the same rack.
At least, that's how I learned it... The documentation seems to say the second and third are on the same remote rack... In any case, two replicas are on the same rack, the third being separate, in case of rack failure.

Related

How does Hadoop distribute the data/tasks for MapReduce jobs?

I've setup a Hadoop cluster with 4 nodes, one of which serves as the NameNode for HDFS as well as the Yarn master. This node is also the most powerful.
Now, I've distributed 2 text files, one on the node01 (namenode) and one on node03 (datanode). When running the basic WordCount MapReduce job, I can see in the logs that only node01 was doing any calculations.
My question is why Hadoop didn't decide to do MapReduce on node03 and transfer the result instead of transferring the entire book to node01. I also checked, duplication is disabled and the book is only available on node03.
So, how does Hadoop decide between transferring the data and setting up the jobs and in this decision, does it check which machine has more compute power (e.g. did it decide to transfer to node01 because node01 is a 4 core 4gig ram machine vs 2core 1 gig on node03)?
I couldn't find anything on this topic, so any guidance would be appreciated.
Thank you!
Some more clarifications:
node01 is running a NameNode as well as a DataNode and a ResourceManager as well as a NodeManager. Thus, it serves as "main node" as well as a "compute node".
I made sure to put one file on node01 and one file on node03 by running:
hdfs dfs -put sample1.txt samples on node01 and hdfs dfs -put sample02.txt samples on node03. As replication is disabled, this leads to the data - that was available locally on node01 respective node03 - only being stored there.
I verified this using the HDFS Webinterface. For sample1.txt, it says the blocks are only available on node01; for sample2.txt, it says the blocks are only available on node03.
Regarding #cricket_007:
My concern is that sample2.txt is only available on node03. The YARN Webinterface tells me that that for the Application Attempt, only one container was allocated on node01. If the map task for file sample2.txt, there would have been a container on node03 as well.
Thus, node01 needs to have fetched the sample2.txt file from node03.
Yes, I know Hadoop is not running well on 1gig of RAM, but I am working with a Raspberry Pi cluster just to fiddle around and learn a little. This is not for production usage.
The YARN application master picks a node at random to run the calculation based on information available from the Namenode where files are stored. DataNodes and NodeManagers should run on the same machines.
If your file isn't larger than the HDFS block size, there is no reason to fetch the data from other nodes.
Note: Hadoop services don't run that well on only 1G of RAM, and you need to adjust the YARN settings differently for different sized nodes.
For anyone else wondering:
At least for me, the HistoryServer UI (which needs to be started manually) shows correctly that node03 and node01 were running map jobs. Thus, my statement was incorrect. I still wonder why the application attempt UI speaks of one container, but I guess that doesn't matter.
Thank you guys!

HDFS migrate datanodes servers to new servers

I want to migrate our hadoop server with all the data and components to new servers (newer version of redhat).
I saw a post on cloudera site about how to move the namenode,
but I dont know how to move all the datanodes without data loss.
We have replica factor 2.
If I will shutdown 1 datanode at a time hdsfs will generate new replicas?
Is there A way to migrate all the datanodes at once? what is the correct way to transfer all (about 20 server) datanodes to a new cluster?
Also I wanted to know if hbase will have the same problem or if I can just to delete and add the roles on the new servers
Update for clearify:
My Hadoop cluster already contains two sets of servers (They are in the same hadoop cluster, I just splited it logicly for the example)
First set is the older version of linux servers
Second set is the newer version of linux servers
Both sets are already share data and components (the namenode is in the old set of servers).
I want to remove all the old set of servers so only the new set of servers will remain in the hadoop cluster.
Does the execution should be like:
shutdown one datanode (from old servers set)
run balancer and wait for finish
do the same for the next datanodes
because if so, the balancer operation takes a lot of time and the whole operation will take a lot of time.
Same problem is for the hbase,
Now hbase region and master are only on the old set of servers, and I want remove it and install on the new set of servers without data loss.
Thanks
New Datanodes can be freely added without touching the namenode. But you definitely shouldn't shut down more than one at a time.
As an example, if you pick two servers to shut down at random, and both hold a block of a file, there's no chance of it replicating somewhere else. Therefore, upgrade one at a time if you're reusing the same hardware.
In an ideal scenario, your OS disk is separated from the HDFS disks. In which case, you can unmount them, upgrade the OS, reinstall HDFS service, remount the disks, and everything will work as previously. If that isn't how you have the server set up, you should do that before your next upgrade.
In order to get replicas added to any new datanodes, you'll need to either 1) Increase the replication factor or 2) run the HDFS rebalancer to ensure that the replicas are shuffled across the cluster
I'm not too familiar with Hbase, but I know you'll need to flush the regionservers before you install and migrate that service to other servers. But if you flush the majority of them without rebalancing the regions, you'll have one server that holds all the data. I'm sure the master server has similar caveats, although hbase backup seems to be a command worth trying.
#guylot - After adding the new nodes and running the balancer process take the old nodes out of the cluster by going through the decommissioning process. The decommissioning process will move the data to another node in your cluster. As a matter of precaution, only run against on one node at a time. This will limit the potential for a lost data incident.

How does Apache Spark handles system failure when deployed in YARN?

Preconditions
Let's assume Apache Spark is deployed on a hadoop cluster using YARN. Furthermore a spark execution is running. How does spark handle the situations listed below?
Cases & Questions
One node of the hadoop clusters fails due to a disc error. However replication is high enough and no data was lost.
What will happen to tasks that where running at that node?
One node of the hadoop clusters fails due to a disc error. Replication was not high enough and data was lost. Simply spark couldn't find a file anymore which was pre-configured as resource for the work flow.
How will it handle this situation?
During execution the primary namenode fails over.
Did spark automatically use the fail over namenode?
What happens when the secondary namenode fails as well?
For some reasons during a work flow the cluster is totally shut down.
Will spark restart with the cluster automatically?
Will it resume to the last "save" point during the work flow?
I know, some questions might sound odd. Anyway, I hope you can answer some or all.
Thanks in advance. :)
Here are the answers given by the mailing list to the questions (answers where provided by Sandy Ryza of Cloudera):
"Spark will rerun those tasks on a different node."
"After a number of failed task attempts trying to read the block, Spark would pass up whatever error HDFS is returning and fail the job."
"Spark accesses HDFS through the normal HDFS client APIs. Under an HA configuration, these will automatically fail over to the new namenode. If no namenodes are left, the Spark job will fail."
Restart is part of administration and "Spark has support for checkpointing to HDFS, so you would be able to go back to the last time checkpoint was called that HDFS was available."

HBase HDFS zookeeper

Now I am learning about HBase. I set up my HBase Cluster and Hadoop Cluster like this:
server1: Namenode HMaster
server2: datanode1 RegionServer1 HQuorumPeer
Server3: datanode2 RegionServer2 HQuorumPeer
Server4: datanode3 RegionServer3 HQuorumPeer
I have several question about HBase cluster:
1: All RegionServers must be in the Hadoop Cluster so it can use HDFS to store
data, even though it will store data into local file system, right?
2: What does RegionServer do? Does the HMaster give the job to all RegionServeres
and let them running parallel, like tasktracker in datanode?
3: What does zookeeper do? Do I need to setup zookeeper in all RegionServers
nodes and the master node?
4: It is related to #3. I know HBase uses zookeeper to recovery once regionServer
is down. How does it specific work?
All RegionServers must be in the Hadoop Cluster so it can use HDFS to store
data, even though it will store data into local file system, right?
Yes. RegionServers are the daemons that are responsible for storing data in a HBase cluster. You store data in HBase tables which are spread over many regions on several RegionServers across the cluster. Although data goes into the RegionServers, it actually gets stored inside HDFS. But if you are on a standalone setup HDFS is not used. The data gets stored directly in the local FS. It is analogous to any DB and FS. Take MSQL and ext3 for example. And yes, all the HDFS data is stored on your disk in reality. You cannot see it directly though.
What does RegionServer do? Does the HMaster give the job to all RegionServeres
and let them running parallel, like tasktracker in datanode?
As specified in the comment above RegionServer is the daemon that actually stores data in a HBase cluster. I'm sorry I didn't quite get the second part of this question. what do you mean by like tasktracker in datanode? In a HBase cluster HMaster is the daemon which is responsible for monitoring all RegionServer instances in the cluster, and is the interface for all metadata changes. Its job is monitoring and management. Regionservers don't run any job like TaskTrackers do. They just store data and are responsible for stuff like serving and managing regions.
What does zookeeper do? Do I need to setup zookeeper in all RegionServers
nodes and the master node?
Zookeeper is the guy who coordinates everything behind the curtains. It is a centralized service for maintaining configuration information, naming, providing distributed synchronization, and providing group services. A distributed HBase setup depends on a running ZooKeeper cluster. All participating nodes and clients need to be able to access the running ZooKeeper ensemble. HBase by default manages a ZooKeeper cluster. It gets started and stopped as part of the HBase start/stop process. But, you can also manage the ZooKeeper ensemble independent of HBase and just point HBase at the cluster it should use. You don't have to have Zookeepers running on all the nodes. Just decide some number which suits your cluster. One thing to note here is that you should always use an odd number of Zookeepers.
It is related to #3. I know HBase uses zookeeper to recovery once regionServer
is down. How does it specific work?
Each RegionServer is connected to ZooKeeper, and the master watches these connections. ZooKeeper manages a heartbeat with a timeout. So, on a timeout, the HMaster declares the region server as dead, and starts the recovery process. Following things happen during the recovery process :
Identifying that a node is down : a node can cease to respond simply because it is overloaded or as well because it is dead.
Recovering the writes in progress : that’s reading the commit log and recovering the edits that were not flushed.
Reassigning the regions : the region server was previously handling a set of regions. This set must be reallocated to other region servers, depending on their respective workload.
The process is actually a bit more involved. You can find more on this here. I would also suggest you to go through the book HBase The Definitive Guide by Lars in order to get some grip on HBase.
HTH

How to separate Hadoop MapReduce from HDFS?

I'm curious if you could essentially separate the HDFS filesystem from the MapReduce framework. I know that the main point of Hadoop is to run the maps and reduces on the machines with the data in question, but I was wondering if you could just change the *.xml files to change the configuration of what machine the jobtracker, namenode and datanodes are running on.
Currently, my configuration is a 2 VMs setup: one (the master) with Namenode, Datanode, JobTracker, Tasktracker (and the SecondaryNameNode), the other (the slave) with DataNode, Tasktraker. Essentially, what I want to change is have the master with NameNode DataNode(s), JobTracker, and have the slave with only the TaskTracker to perform the computations (and later on, have more slaves with only TaskTrackers on them; one on each). The bottleneck will be the data transfer between the two VMs for the computations of maps and reduces, but since the data at this stage is so small I'm not primarily concerned with it. I would just like to know if this configuration is possible, and how to do it. Any tips?
Thanks!
You don't specify this kind of options in the configuration files.
What you have to do is to take care of what kind of deamons you start on each machine(you call them VMs but I think you mean machines).
I suppose you usually start everything using the start-all.sh script which you can find in the bin directory under the hadoop installation dir.
If you take a look at this script you will see that what it does is to call a number of sub-scripts corresponding to starting the datanodes, tasktrackers and namenode, jobtracker.
In order to achive what you've said, I would do like this:
Modify the masters and slaves files as this:
Master file should contain the name of machine1
Slaves should contain the name of machine2
Run start-mapred.sh
Modify the masters and slaves files as this:
Master file should contain the machine1
Slaves file should contain machine1
Run start-dfs.sh
I have to tell you that I've never tried such a configuration so I'm not sure this is going to work but you can give it a try. Anyway the solution is in this direction!
Essentially, what I want to change is have the master with NameNode DataNode(s), JobTracker, and have the slave with only the TaskTracker to perform the computations (and later on, have more slaves with only TaskTrackers on them; one on each).
First, I am not sure why to separate the computation from the storage. The whole purpose of MR locality is lost, thought you might be able to run the job successfully.
Use the dfs.hosts, dfs.hosts.exclude parameters to control which datanodes can connect to the namenode and the mapreduce.jobtracker.hosts.filename, mapreduce.jobtracker.hosts.exclude.filename parameters to control which tasktrackers can connect to the jobtracker. One disadvantage of this approach is that the datanodes and tasktrackers are started on the nodes which are excluded and aren't part of the Hadoop cluster.
Another approach is to modify the code to have a separate slave file for the tasktracker and the datanode. Currently, this is not supported in Hadoop and would require a code change.

Resources