Uploaded image for project: 'ZooKeeper'
  1. ZooKeeper
  2. ZOOKEEPER-900

FLE implementation should be improved to use non-blocking sockets

Add voteVotersWatch issueWatchersCreate sub-taskLinkCloneUpdate Comment AuthorReplace String in CommentUpdate Comment VisibilityDelete Comments


    • Improvement
    • Status: Open
    • Major
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • None
    • None
    • None
    • None


      From earlier email exchanges:
      1. Blocking connects and accepts:

      a) The first problem is in manager.toSend(). This invokes connectOne(), which does a blocking connect. While testing, I changed the code so that connectOne() starts a new thread called AsyncConnct(). AsyncConnect.run() does a socketChannel.connect(). After starting AsyncConnect, connectOne starts a timer. connectOne continues with normal operations if the connection is established before the timer expires, otherwise, when the timer expires it interrupts AsyncConnect() thread and returns. In this way, I can have an upper bound on the amount of time we need to wait for connect to succeed. Of course, this was a quick fix for my testing. Ideally, we should use Selector to do non-blocking connects/accepts. I am planning to do that later once we at least have a quick fix for the problem and consensus from others for the real fix (this problem is big blocker for us). Note that it is OK to do blocking IO in SenderWorker and RecvWorker threads since they block IO to the respective peer.

      b) The blocking IO problem is not just restricted to connectOne(), but also in receiveConnection(). The Listener thread calls receiveConnection() for each incoming connection request. receiveConnection does blocking IO to get peer's info (s.read(msgBuffer)). Worse, it invokes connectOne() back to the peer that had sent the connection request. All of this is happening from the Listener. In short, if a peer fails after initiating a connection, the Listener thread won't be able to accept connections from other peers, because it would be stuck in read() or connetOne(). Also the code has an inherent cycle. initiateConnection() and receiveConnection() will have to be very carefully synchronized otherwise, we could run into deadlocks. This code is going to be difficult to maintain/modify.

      Also see: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-822


        1. ZOOKEEPER-900-part2.patch
          30 kB
          Reed Wanderman-Milne
        2. ZOOKEEPER-900.patch
          26 kB
          Vishal Kher
        3. ZOOKEEPER-900.patch2
          25 kB
          Vishal Kher
        4. ZOOKEEPER-900.patch1
          34 kB
          Vishal Kher

        Issue Links


          This comment will be Viewable by All Users Viewable by All Users


            makuchta Martin Kuchta
            vishalmlst Vishal Kher




                Issue deployment