Hadoop Summit 2012 | HDFS High Availability

3,979 views

Published on

The HDFS NameNode is a robust and reliable service as seen in practice in production at Yahoo and other customers. However, the NameNode does not have automatic failover support. A hot failover solution called HA NameNode is currently under active development (HDFS-1623). This talk will cover the architecture, design and setup. We will also discuss the future direction for HA NameNode.

Published in: Technology, Business
1 Comment
17 Likes
Statistics
Notes
No Downloads
Views
Total views
3,979
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
419
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
1
Likes
17
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Data – can I read what I wrote, is the service availableWhen I asked one of the original authors of of GFS if there were any decisions they would revist – random writersSimplicity is keyRaw disk – fs take time to stabilize – we can take advantage of ext4, xfs or zfs
  • Data – can I read what I wrote, is the service availableWhen I asked one of the original authors of of GFS if there were any decisions they would revist – random writersSimplicity is keyRaw disk – fs take time to stabilize – we can take advantage of ext4, xfs or zfs
  • Data – can I read what I wrote, is the service availableWhen I asked one of the original authors of of GFS if there were any decisions they would revist – random writersSimplicity is keyRaw disk – fs take time to stabilize – we can take advantage of ext4, xfs or zfs
  • Data – can I read what I wrote, is the service availableWhen I asked one of the original authors of of GFS if there were any decisions they would revist – random writersSimplicity is keyRaw disk – fs take time to stabilize – we can take advantage of ext4, xfs or zfs
  • Hadoop Summit 2012 | HDFS High Availability

    1. 1. HDFSHigh AvailabilitySuresh Srinivas- HortonworksAaron T. Myers - Cloudera
    2. 2. Overview• Part 1 – Suresh Srinivas(Hortonworks) − HDFS Availability and Reliability – what is the record? − HA Use Cases − HA Design• Part 2 – Aaron T. Myers (Cloudera) − NN HA Design Details  Automatic failure detection and NN failover  Client-NN connection failover − Operations and Admin of HA − Future Work 2
    3. 3. Availability, Reliability and MaintainabilityReliability = MTBF/(1 + MTBF)• Probability a system performs its functions without failure for a desired period of timeMaintainability = 1/(1+MTTR)• Probability that a failed system can be restored within a given timeframeAvailability = MTTF/MTBF• Probability that a system is up when requested for use• Depends on both on Reliability and MaintainabilityMean Time To Failure (MTTF): Average time between successive failuresMean Time To Repair/Restore (MTTR): Average time to repair failed systemMean Time Between Failures (MTBF): Average time between successive failures = MTTR + MTTF 3
    4. 4. Current HDFS Availability & Data Integrity• Simple design for Higher Reliability − Storage: Rely on Native file system on the OS rather than use raw disk − Single NameNode master  Entire file system state is in memory − DataNodes simply store and deliver blocks  All sophisticated recovery mechanisms in NN• Fault Tolerance − Design assumes disks, nodes and racks fail − Multiple replicas of blocks  active monitoring and replication  DN actively monitor for block deletion and corruption − Restart/migrate the NameNode on failure  Persistent state: multiple copies + checkpoints  Functions as Cold Standby − Restart/replace the DNs on failure − DNs tolerate individual disk failures 4
    5. 5. How Well Did HDFS Work?• Data Reliability − Lost 19 out of 329 Million blocks on 10 clusters with 20K nodes in 2009 − 7-9’s of reliability − Related bugs fixed in 20 and 21.• NameNode Availability − 18 months Study: 22 failures on 25 clusters - 0.58 failures per year per cluster − Only 8 would have benefitted from HA failover!! (0.23 failures per cluster year) − NN is very reliable  Resilient against overload caused by misbehaving apps• Maintainability − Large clusters see failure of one DataNode/day and more frequent disk failures − Maintenance once in 3 months to repair or replace DataNodes 5
    6. 6. Why NameNode HA?• NameNode is highly reliable (low MTTF) − But Availability is not the same as Reliability• NameNode MTTR depends on − Restarting NameNode daemon on failure  Operator restart – (failure detection + manual restore) time  Automatic restart – 1-2 minutes − NameNode Startup time  Small/medium cluster 1-2 minutes  Very large cluster – 5-15 minutes• Affects applications that have real time requirement• For higher HDFS Availability − Need redundant NameNode to eliminate SPOF − Need automatic failover to reduce MTTR and improve Maintainability − Need Hot standby to reduce MTTR for very large clusters  Cold standby is sufficient for small clusters 6
    7. 7. NameNode HA – Initial Goals• Support for Active and a single Standby − Active and Standby with manual failover  Standby could be cold/warm/hot  Addresses downtime during upgrades – main cause of unavailability − Active and Standby with automatic failover  Hot standby  Addresses downtime during upgrades and other failures• Backward compatible configuration• Standby performs checkpointing − Secondary NameNode not needed• Management and monitoring tools• Design philosophy – choose data integrity over service availability 7
    8. 8. High Level Use Cases• Planned downtime Supported failures − Upgrades • Single hardware failure − Config changes − Double hardware failure not − Main reason for downtime supported • Some software failures − Same software failure affects• Unplanned downtime both active and standby − Hardware failure − Server unresponsive − Software failures − Occurs infrequently 8
    9. 9. High Level Design• Service monitoring and leader election outside NN − Similar to industry standard HA frameworks• Parallel Block reports to both Active and Standby NN• Shared or non-shared NN file system state• Fencing of shared resources/data − DataNodes − Shared NN state (if any)• Client failover − Client side failover (based on configuration or ZooKeeper) − IP Failover 9
    10. 10. Design Considerations• Sharing state between Active and Hot Standby − File system state and Block locations• Automatic Failover − Monitoring Active NN and performing failover on failure• Making a NameNode active during startup − Reliable mechanism for choosing only one NN as active and the other as standby• Prevent data corruption on split brain − Shared Resource Fencing  DataNodes and shared storage for NN metadata − NameNode Fencing  when shared resource cannot be fenced• Client failover − Clients connect to the new Active NN during failover 10
    11. 11. Failover Control Outside NN • Similar to Industry Standard HA frameworks • HA daemon outside NameNode ZooKeeper − Simpler to build − Immune to NN failures • Daemon manages resources Resources Failover − Resources – OS, HW, Network etc. Resources Actions ResourcesController start, stop, failover, monitor, … − NameNode is just another resource • Performs Shared Resources − Active NN election during startup − Automatic Failover − Fencing  Shared resources  NameNode
    12. 12. Architecture ZK ZK ZK Leader election Failover Failover Controller Controller Active Standby Cmds editlogMonitor Health Monitor Health editlogs NN (fencing) NN Active Standby Block Reports DN DN DN
    13. 13. First Phase – Hot Standby Needs to be HA editlogs NN (Shared NFS storage) NN Active Standby Manual Failover Block Reports DN fencing DN DN DN
    14. 14. HA Design Details 14
    15. 15. Client Failover Design Details• Smart clients (client side failover) − Users use one logical URI, client selects correct NN to connect to − Clients know which operations are idempotent, therefore safe to retry on a failover − Clients have configurable failover/retry strategies• Current implementation − Client configured with the addresses of all NNs• Other implementations in the future (more later) 15
    16. 16. Client Failover Configuration Example...<property> <name>dfs.namenode.rpc-address.name-service1.nn1</name> <value>host1.example.com:8020</value></property><property> <name>dfs.namenode.rpc-address.name-service1.nn2</name> <value>host2.example.com:8020</value></property><property> <name>dfs.namenode.http-address.name-service1.nn1</name> <value>host1.example.com:50070</value></property>... 16
    17. 17. Automatic Failover Design Details• Automatic failover requires Zookeeper − Not required for manual failover − ZK makes it easy to:  Detect failure of the active NN  Determine which NN should become the Active NN• On both NN machines, run another daemon − ZKFailoverController (Zookeeper Failover Controller)• Each ZKFC is responsible for: − Health monitoring of its associated NameNode − ZK session management / ZK-based leader election• See HDFS-2185 and HADOOP-8206 for more details 17
    18. 18. Automatic Failover Design Details (cont) 18
    19. 19. Ops/Admin: Shared Storage• To share NN state, need shared storage − Needs to be HA itself to avoid just shifting SPOF − Many come with IP fencing options − Recommended mount options:  tcp,soft,intr,timeo=60,retrans=10• Still configure local edits dirs, but shared dir is special• Work is currently underway to do away with shared storage requirement (more later) 19
    20. 20. Ops/Admin: NN fencing• Critical for correctness that only one NN is active at a time• Out of the box − RPC to active NN to tell it to go to standby (graceful failover) − SSH to active NN and `kill -9’ NN• Pluggable options − Many filers have protocols for IP-based fencing options − Many PDUs have protocols for IP-based plug-pulling (STONITH)  Nuke the node from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.• Configure extra options if available to you − Will be tried in order during a failover event − Escalate the aggressiveness of the method − Fencing is critical for correctness of NN metadata 20
    21. 21. Ops/Admin: Automatic Failover• Deploy ZK as usual (3 or 5 nodes) or reuse existing ZK − ZK daemons have light resource requirement − OK to collocate 1 on each NN, many collocate 3rd on the YARN RM − Advisable to configure ZK daemons with dedicated disks for isolation − Fine to use the same ZK quorum as for HBase, etc.• Fencing methods still required − The ZKFC that wins the election is responsible for performing fencing − Fencing script(s) must be configured and work from the NNs• Admin commands which manually initiate failovers still work − But rather than coordinating the failover themselves, use the ZKFCs 21
    22. 22. Ops/Admin: Monitoring• New NN metrics − Size of pending DN message queues − Seconds since the standby NN last read from shared edit log − DN block report lag − All measurements of standby NN lag – monitor/alert on all of these• Monitor shared storage solution − Volumes fill up, disks go bad, etc − Should configure paranoid edit log retention policy (default is 2)• Canary-based monitoring of HDFS a good idea − Pinging both NNs not sufficient 22
    23. 23. Ops/Admin: Hardware• Active/Standby NNs should be on separate racks• Shared storage system should be on separate rack• Active/Standby NNs should have close to the same hardware − Same amount of RAM – need to store the same things − Same # of processors - need to serve same number of clients• All the same recommendations still apply for NN − ECC memory, 48GB − Several separate disks for NN metadata directories − Redundant disks for OS drives, probably RAID 5 or mirroring − Redundant power 23
    24. 24. Future Work• Other options to share NN metadata − Journal daemons with list of active JDs stored in ZK (HDFS-3092) − Journal daemons with quorum writes (HDFS-3077)• More advanced client failover/load shedding − Serve stale reads from the standby NN − Speculative RPC − Non-RPC clients (IP failover, DNS failover, proxy, etc.) − Less client-side configuration (ZK, custom DNS records, HDFS-3043)• Even Higher HA − Multiple standby NNs 24
    25. 25. QA• HA design: HDFS-1623 −First released in Hadoop 2.0.0-alpha• Auto failover design: HDFS-3042 / -2185 −First released in Hadoop 2.0.1-alpha• Community effort 25

    ×