Your SlideShare is downloading. ×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Hw09 Fingerpointing Sourcing Performance Issues

756
views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Education

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
756
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
52
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • Quick mention verbally of what Hadoop is: Distributed parallel processing runtime with a master-slave architecture. Focus on limping-but-alive: performance degradations not caught by heartbeats
  • Describe x and y axes
  • Transcript

    • 1. Jiaqi Tan, Soila Pertet, Xinghao Pan, Mike Kasick, Keith Bare, Eugene Marinelli, Rajeev Gandhi Priya Narasimhan Carnegie Mellon University
    • 2. Automated Problem Diagnosis
      • Diagnosing problems
        • Creates major headaches for administrators
        • Worsens as scale and system complexity grows
      • Goal: automate it and get proactive
        • Failure detection and prediction
        • Problem determination (or “fingerpointing”)
        • Problem visualization
      • How: Instrumentation plus statistical analysis
      Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University
    • 3. Challenges in Problem Analysis
      • Challenging in large-scale networked environment
        • Can have multiple failure manifestations with a single root cause
        • Can have multiple root causes for a single failure manifestation
        • Problems and/or their manifestations can “travel” among communicating components
        • A lot of information from multiple sources – what to use? what to discard?
      • Automated fingerpointing
        • Automatically discover faulty node in a distributed system
      Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University
    • 4. Exploration of Fingerpointing
      • Current explorations
        • Hadoop
          • Open-source implementation of Map/Reduce (Yahoo!)
        • PVFS
          • High-performance file system (Argonne National Labs)
        • Lustre
          • High-performance file system (Sun Microsystems)
      • Studied
        • Various types of problems
        • Various kinds of instrumentation
        • Various kinds of data-analysis techniques
      Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University
    • 5. Why?
      • Hadoop is fault-tolerant
        • Heartbeats: detect lost nodes
        • Speculative re-execution: recover work due to lost/laggard nodes
      • Hadoop’s fault-tolerance can mask performance problems
        • Nodes alive but slow
      • Target failures for our diagnosis
        • Performance degradations (slow, hangs)
      Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University
    • 6. Hadoop Failure Survey
      • Hadoop Issue Tracker from Jan 07 to Dec 08 https://issues.apache.org/jira
      Targeted Failures: 66% Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University
    • 7. Hadoop Mailing List Survey
      • Hadoop user’s mailing list: Oct 08 to Apr 09
      • Examined queries on optimizing programs
      • Most queries: MapReduce-specific aspects e.g. data skew, number of maps and reduces
      Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University
    • 8. M45 Job Performance Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University
      • Failures due to bad config (e.g., missing files) detected quickly
      • However, 20-30% of failed jobs run for over 1hr before aborting
      • Early fault detection desirable
    • 9. BEFORE : Hadoop Web Console
      • Admin/user sifts through wealth of information
        • Problem is aggravated in large clusters
        • Multiple clicks to chase down a problem
      • No support for historical comparison
        • Information displayed is a snapshot in time
      • Poor localization of correlated problems
        • Progress indicators for all tasks are skewed by correlated problem
      • No clear indicators of performance problems
        • Are task slowdowns due to data skew or bugs? Unclear
      Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University
    • 10. AFTER : Goals, Non-Goals
      • Diagnose faulty Master/Slave node to user/admin
      • Target production environment
        • Don’t instrument Hadoop or applications additionally
        • Use Hadoop logs as-is ( white-box strategy )
        • Use OS-level metrics ( black-box strategy )
      • Work for various workloads and under workload changes
      • Support online and offline diagnosis
      • Non-goals (for now)
        • Tracing problem to offending line of code
      Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University
    • 11. Target Hadoop Clusters
      • 4000-processor Yahoo!’s M45 cluster
        • Production environment (managed by Yahoo!)
        • Offered to CMU as free cloud-computing resource
        • Diverse kinds of real workloads, problems in the wild
          • Massive machine-learning, language/machine-translation
        • Permission to harvest all logs and OS data each week
      • 100-node Amazon’s EC2 cluster
        • Production environment (managed by Amazon)
        • Commercial, pay-as-you-use cloud-computing resource
        • Workloads under our control, problems injected by us
          • gridmix, nutch, pig, sort, randwriter
        • Can harvest logs and OS data of only our workloads
      Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University
    • 12. Performance Problems Studied Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University Studied Hadoop Issue Tracker (JIRA) from Jan-Dec 2007 Fault Description Resource contention CPU hog External process uses 70% of CPU Packet-loss 5% or 50% of incoming packets dropped Disk hog 20GB file repeatedly written to Disk full Disk full Application bugs Source: Hadoop JIRA HADOOP-1036 Maps hang due to unhandled exception HADOOP-1152 Reduces fail while copying map output HADOOP-2080 Reduces fail due to incorrect checksum HADOOP-2051 Jobs hang due to unhandled exception HADOOP-1255 Infinite loop at Nameode
    • 13. Hadoop: Instrumentation Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University JobTracker NameNode TaskTracker DataNode Map/Reduce tasks HDFS blocks MASTER NODE SLAVE NODES Hadoop logs OS data OS data Hadoop logs
    • 14. How About Those Metrics?
      • White-box metrics (from Hadoop logs)
        • Event-driven (based on Hadoop’s activities)
        • Durations
          • Map-task durations, Reduce-task durations, ReduceCopy-durations, etc.
        • System-wide dependencies between tasks and data blocks
        • Heartbeat information: Heartbeat rates, Heartbeat-timestamp skew between the Master and Slave nodes
      • Black-box metrics (from OS /proc)
        • 64 different time-driven metrics (sampled every second)
        • Memory used, context-switch rate, User-CPU usage, System-CPU usage, I/O wait time, run-queue size, number of bytes transmitted, number of bytes received, pages in, pages out, page faults
      Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University
    • 15. Intuition for Diagnosis
      • Slave nodes are doing approximately similar things for a given job
      • Gather metrics and extract statistics
        • Determine metrics of relevance
        • For both black-box and white-box data
      • Peer-compare histograms, means, etc. to determine “odd-man out”
      Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University
    • 16. Log-Analysis Approach
      • S ALSA: A nalyzing L ogs as S t A te Machines [ USENIX WASL 2008 ]
      • Extract state-machine views of execution from Hadoop logs
        • Distributed control-flow view of logs
        • Distributed data-flow view of logs
      • Diagnose failures based on statistics of these extracted views
        • Control-flow based diagnosis
        • Control-flow + data-flow based diagnosis
      • Perform analysis incrementally so that we can support it online
      Carnegie Mellon University Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009
    • 17. Applying SALSA to Hadoop Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University [ t] Launch Map task : [t] Copy Map outputs : [t] Map task done Map outputs to Reduce tasks on other nodes Data-flow view: transfer of data to other nodes
      • [ t] Launch Reduce task
      • :
      • [t] Reduce is idling, waiting for Map outputs
      • :
      • [t] Repeat until all Map outputs copied
        • [t] Start Reduce Copy
        • (of completed Map output)
        • :
        • [t] Finish Reduce Copy
      • [t] Reduce Merge Copy
      Incoming Map outputs for this Reduce task Control-flow view: state orders, durations
    • 18. Distributed Control+Data Flow
      • Distributed control-flow
        • Causal flow of task execution across cluster nodes, i.e., Reduces waiting on Maps via Shuffles
      • Distributed data-flow
        • Data paths of Map outputs shuffled to Reduces
        • HDFS data blocks read into and written out of jobs
      • Job-centric data-flows : Fused Control+Data Flows
        • Correlate paths of data and execution
        • Create conjoined causal paths from data source before, to data destination after, processing
      <your name here> © Oct 25, 2009 http://www.pdl.cmu.edu/
    • 19. Intuition: Peer Similarity Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University
      • In fault-free conditions, metrics (e.g., WriteBlock durations) are similar across nodes
      • Faulty node: Same metric is different on faulty node, as compared to non-faulty nodes
      • Kullback-Leibler divergence (comparison of histograms)
      Faulty node Normalized counts (total 1.0) Histograms (distributions) of durations of WriteBlock over a 30-second window Normal node Normal node Normalized counts (total 1.0) Normalized counts (total 1.0)
    • 20. What Else Do We Do?
      • Analyze black-box data with similar intuition
        • Derive PDFs and use a clustering approach
          • Distinct behavior profiles of metric correlations
        • Compare them across nodes
        • Technique called Ganesha [ HotMetrics 2009 ]
      • Analyze heartbeat traffic
        • Compare heartbeat durations across nodes
        • Compare heartbeat-timestamp skews across nodes
      • Different metrics, different viewpoints, different algorithms
      Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University
    • 21. Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University
    • 22. Putting the Elephant Together Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University TaskTracker heartbeat timestamps Black-box resource usage JobTracker Durations views TaskTracker Durations views JobTracker heartbeat timestamps Job-centric data flows BliMEy: Bli nd Me n and the E lephant Framework [ CMU-CS-09-135 ]
    • 23. Visualization
      • To uncover Hadoop’s execution in an insightful way
      • To reveal outcome of diagnosis on sight
      • To allow developers/admins to get a handle as the system scales
      • Value to programmers [ HotCloud 2009 ]
        • Allows them to spot issues that might assist them in restructuring their code
        • Allows them to spot faulty nodes
      Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University
    • 24. Visualization ( timeseries ) Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University DiskHog on slave node visible through lower heartbeat rate for that node
    • 25. Visualization( heatmaps ) Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University CPU Hog on node 1 visible on Map-task durations
    • 26. Visualizations ( swimlanes ) Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University Long-tailed map Delaying overall job completion time
    • 27. MIROS
      • MIROS (Map Inputs, Reduce Outputs, Shuffles)
      • Aggregates data volumes across:
        • All tasks per node
        • Entire job
      • Shows skewed data flows, bottlenecks
      Jiaqi Tan © July 09 http://www.pdl.cmu.edu/
    • 28. Current Developments
      • State-machine extraction + visualization being implemented for the Hadoop Chukwa project
        • Collaboration with Yahoo!
      • Web-based visualization widgets for HICC (Hadoop Infrastructure Care Center)
      • “ Swimlanes” currently available in Chukwa trunk (CHUKWA-94)
      <your name here> © Oct 25, 2009 http://www.pdl.cmu.edu/
    • 29. Briefly: Online Fingerpointing
      • ASDF : A utomated S ystem for D iagnosing F ailures
        • Can incorporate any number of different data sources
        • Can use any number of analysis techniques to process this data
      • Can support online or offline analyses for Hadoop
      • Currently plugging in our white-box & black-box algorithms
      Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University
    • 30. Hard Problems
      • Understanding the limits of black-box fingerpointing
        • What failures are outside the reach of a black-box approach?
        • What are the limits of “peer” comparison?
        • What other kinds of black-box instrumentation exist?
      • Scalability
        • Scaling to run across large systems and understanding “growing pains”
      • Visualization
        • Helping system administrators visualize problem diagnosis
      • Trade-offs
        • More instrumentation and more frequent data can improve accuracy of diagnosis, but at what performance cost?
      • Virtualized environments
        • Do these environments help/hurt problem diagnosis?
      Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University
    • 31. Summary
      • Automated problem diagnosis
      • Current targets: Hadoop, PVFS, Lustre
      • Initial set of failures
        • Real-world bug databases, problems in the wild
      • Short-term: Transition techniques into Hadoop code-base working with Yahoo!
      • Long-term
        • Scalability, scalability, scalability, ….
        • Expand fault study
        • Improve visualization, working with users
      • Additional details
        • USENIX WASL 2008 (white-box log analysis)
        • USENIX HotCloud 2009 (visualization)
        • USENIX HotMetrics 2009 (black-box metric analysis)
        • HotDep 2009 (black-box analysis for PVFS)
      Priya Narasimhan © Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University
    • 32. priya@cs.cmu.edu Oct 25, 2009 Carnegie Mellon University