Member since
07-31-2013
1924
Posts
462
Kudos Received
311
Solutions
My Accepted Solutions
| Title | Views | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 2128 | 07-09-2019 12:53 AM | |
| 12448 | 06-23-2019 08:37 PM | |
| 9560 | 06-18-2019 11:28 PM | |
| 10525 | 05-23-2019 08:46 PM | |
| 4895 | 05-20-2019 01:14 AM |
05-14-2018
10:28 AM
Thanks @Harsh J, indeed I've finally solved using hdfs://hanameservice for name node and yarnrm for the job tracker.
... View more
05-08-2018
04:18 AM
Hi @Harsh J, thanks a million for such thorough and elaborate answer. I haven't solved the problem yet, probably I will apply cgroups configuration as suggested. I hope it's going to work however the reason why single JVM uses so much CPU is misterious to me. I understand that yarn treats vcore as rough forecaster of how much CPU time will be used and probably we could mitigate problem by putting more vcores in job's application or reducing number of running containers on the node in other way, but still we wouldn't be guaranteed that some of the containers wouldn't use even more CPU up to total capacity of the server. It looks like having containers running many threads resulting in CPU share more than 100% per container undermines the concept how yarn dispatch tasks to the nodes. I've also come across this tutorial: https://hortonworks.com/blog/apache-hadoop-yarn-in-hdp-2-2-isolation-of-cpu-resources-in-your-hadoop-yarn-clusters/ which includes: " how do we ensure that containers don’t exceed their vcore allocation? What’s stopping an errant container from spawning a bunch of threads and consume all the CPU on the node?" It appears that in the past the rule of thumb 1+vcore/1real core worked ( I saw it several older tutorials) but now we have different patterns of the workload (less IO dependant/more CPU consuming) and this rule doesn't work very well now So effectively cgroups seem to be the only solution to ensure containers don't exceed their vcore allocation. Let me know if you agree or see other solutions. Thanks a million!
... View more
04-17-2018
06:37 AM
@Harsh J Thank you, unfortunately I have access only to edge node (I can't ssh to masters and workers). I have access to web interfaces though (CM, HUE, Yarn, etc) thus if there is anything I can check from there let me know.
... View more
04-16-2018
07:47 AM
For the trivial shell example you could just make echo print both with an inlined sub-shell that does the counting: for file in $(FILE_LIST_SUBCOMMAND) do echo ${file} $(hadoop fs -text ${file} | wc -l) done
... View more
04-16-2018
01:55 AM
Thank you, exactly what I was thinking. With all queries aggregated in one script I gain speed (no overhead on Yarn containers) but in case of error I loose granularity for debug.
... View more
04-10-2018
03:48 AM
I ended up restarting the offending DataNodes on the IPs that appeared in the log and the warning/info went away. I wonder what it was ...
... View more
04-09-2018
08:51 AM
Hi @Harsh J, thank you for even more thorough answer, placement policy is clear now. I didn't see the risk of rogue Yarn apps before, it's very helpful. Many thanks!
... View more
03-29-2018
05:50 AM
I've check agent's log file /var/log/cloudera-scm-agent.log (dbs02). The error is No route to host. It's a common error, just need to check the firewall condition and close it . So until now, my problem is solved, thanks all of you.!!!
... View more
03-28-2018
12:34 PM
Ohhh! thanks i needed this information. Thanks, really.
... View more