 |
 |
Hi Matevz, Ah, I see you are as confused as Wilko (and perhaps me :-). We just spent some time understanding what is going on for you (yes, my explanation made some assumptions). a) I assumed you first talked to a meta-redirector that asked several hadoop sites whether they had the file. You then got redirected to some xrootd and opened the file there. Indeed the "redirect" setting in this case is immaterial as the lookup has already been done. b) If (a) was not true, instead you went directly to a particular Hadoop cluster and opened the file on it's local redirector then the "redirect" makes a big difference. In this case, immed means no lookup is done and you get sent to some server which will honor or fail your request. Andy -----Original Message----- From: Matevz Tadel Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2014 3:53 PM To: Andrew Hanushevsky ; xrootd-dev Subject: Re: cms.dfs question Hi Andy, Thanks for the explanation! To make sure I understand: 1. When redirector does not know if a file exists, it still has to perform the lookup, as configured. 2. When using "lookup central", we are actually "measuring" the limit of hdfs lookup on a single node (the redirector). Now I understand that redirector has to perform the lookup when it doesn't know if a file exists ... otherwise it can not report to meta-manager(s). Would it make sense to have the equivalent of "lookup none" for open requests. The client can then deal directly with a data server. It's true that the redirector does not "learn" anything useful in this case so it can lead to more trouble down the road, especially with mis-behaving users/clients. Matevz On 2/4/14 3:20 PM, Andrew Hanushevsky wrote: > Hi Matevz, > > You are getting caught in the lookup" phase. Distributed lookup will > always > scale better then central lookup, when a lookup *has* to be performed. The > redirect part is what to do when a lookup can be avoided because the > information > is already cached. Immed is always the best option is you have a true > distributed file system underneath. > > Anyway, I can't say that I have convinced people that distributed normally > has > better scaling, and I have tried. Unfortunately, the majority still seems > to > gravitate to centralized vertical design options because they are more > comforting. > > Andy > > -----Original Message----- From: Matevz Tadel > Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2014 2:46 PM > To: xrootd-dev > Subject: cms.dfs question > > Hi, > > We (AAA) are doing redirection rate scaling tests and noticed a large > difference > between *hadoop* sites based on how cms.dfs is setup. > > This works great (scaling beyond 300Hz): > cms.dfs lookup distrib redirect immed > and this saturates at ~20Hz: > cms.dfs lookup central redirect immed > > I'm puzzled, because I'd expect that "redirect immed" trumps whatever > lookup > setting one might choose. We were lucky -- we had two sites that chose > different > values for lookup :) > > Matevz > > ######################################################################## > Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list > > To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-DEV list, click the following link: > https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-DEV&A=1 ######################################################################## Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list To unsubscribe from the XROOTD-DEV list, click the following link: https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=XROOTD-DEV&A=1