You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@zookeeper.apache.org by "Phillip Liu (Created) (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2012/03/14 23:54:39 UTC

[jira] [Created] (ZOOKEEPER-1416) Persistent Recursive Watch

Persistent Recursive Watch
--------------------------

                 Key: ZOOKEEPER-1416
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1416
             Project: ZooKeeper
          Issue Type: Improvement
          Components: c client, documentation, java client, server
            Reporter: Phillip Liu


h4. The Problem
A ZooKeeper Watch can be placed on a single znode and when the znode changes a Watch event is sent to the client. If there are thousands of znodes being watched, when a client (re)connect, it would have to send thousands of watch requests. At Facebook, we have this problem storing information for thousands of db shards. Consequently a naming service that consumes the db shard definition issues thousands of watch requests each time the service starts and changes Observers.

h4. Proposed Solution
We add the notion of a Persistent Recursive Watch in ZooKeeper. Persistent means no Watch reset is necessary after a watch-fire. Recursive means the Watch applies to the node and descendant nodes. A Persistent Recursive Watch behaves as follows:

# Recursive Watch supports all Watch semantics: CHILDREN, DATA, and EXISTS.
# CHILDREN and DATA Recursive Watches can be placed on any znode.
# EXISTS Recursive Watches can be placed on any path.
# A Recursive Watch behaves like a auto-watch registrar on the server side. Setting a  Recursive Watch means to set watches on all descendant znodes.
# When a watch on a descendant fires, no subsequent event is fired until a corresponding getData(..) on the znode is called, then Recursive Watch automically apply the watch on the znode. This maintains the existing Watch semantic on an individual znode.
# A Recursive Watch overrides any watches placed on a descendant znode. Practically this means the Recursive Watch Watcher callback is the one receiving the event and event is delivered exactly once.

A goal here is to reduce the number of semantic changes. The guarantee of no intermediate watch event until data is read will be maintained. The only difference is we will automatically re-add the watch after read. At the same time we add the convience of reducing the need to add multiple watches for sibling znodes and in turn reduce the number of watch messages sent from the client to the server.

There are some implementation details that needs to be hashed out. Initial thinking is to have the Recursive Watch create per-node watches. This will cause a lot of watches to be created on the server side. Currently, each watch is stored as a single bit in a bit set relative to a session - up to 3 bits per client per znode. If there are 100m znodes with 100k clients, each watching all nodes, then this strategy will consume approximately 3.75TB of ram distributed across all Observers. Seems expensive.

Alternatively, a blacklist of paths to not send Watches regardless of Watch setting can be set each time a watch event from a Recursive Watch is fired. The memory utilization is relative to the number of outstanding reads and at worst case it's 1/3 * 3.75TB using the parameters given above.

Otherwise, a relaxation of no intermediate watch event until read guarantee is required. If the server can send watch events regardless of one has already been fired without corresponding read, then the server can simply fire watch events without tracking.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

[jira] [Commented] (ZOOKEEPER-1416) Persistent Recursive Watch

Posted by "Phillip Liu (Commented) (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1416?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13232834#comment-13232834 ] 

Phillip Liu commented on ZOOKEEPER-1416:
----------------------------------------

@Patrick,

1. re: "holes", I'm still thinking about an efficient solution for this.  If the implementation is to create a watch on all nodes in the sub-tree, and re-apply when client calls getData(..) following a notification, then this would solve the problem but we can easily end up with the problem described in ZOOKEEPER-1177.
2. When a client connect to a different server, the server will rescan the entire sub-tree and send deferred notification similar to the way it works now.
3. re: ZOOKEEPER-1177.  I'm thinking if there's an efficient way implement recursive watches, then we won't need to store as many individual watches.  I'm not planning on solving this problem.
4. Yeah, I mean "client watcher", will update.

                
> Persistent Recursive Watch
> --------------------------
>
>                 Key: ZOOKEEPER-1416
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1416
>             Project: ZooKeeper
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: c client, documentation, java client, server
>            Reporter: Phillip Liu
>   Original Estimate: 504h
>  Remaining Estimate: 504h
>
> h4. The Problem
> A ZooKeeper Watch can be placed on a single znode and when the znode changes a Watch event is sent to the client. If there are thousands of znodes being watched, when a client (re)connect, it would have to send thousands of watch requests. At Facebook, we have this problem storing information for thousands of db shards. Consequently a naming service that consumes the db shard definition issues thousands of watch requests each time the service starts and changes Observers.
> h4. Proposed Solution
> We add the notion of a Persistent Recursive Watch in ZooKeeper. Persistent means no Watch reset is necessary after a watch-fire. Recursive means the Watch applies to the node and descendant nodes. A Persistent Recursive Watch behaves as follows:
> # Recursive Watch supports all Watch semantics: CHILDREN, DATA, and EXISTS.
> # CHILDREN and DATA Recursive Watches can be placed on any znode.
> # EXISTS Recursive Watches can be placed on any path.
> # A Recursive Watch behaves like a auto-watch registrar on the server side. Setting a  Recursive Watch means to set watches on all descendant znodes.
> # When a watch on a descendant fires, no subsequent event is fired until a corresponding getData(..) on the znode is called, then Recursive Watch automically apply the watch on the znode. This maintains the existing Watch semantic on an individual znode.
> # A Recursive Watch overrides any watches placed on a descendant znode. Practically this means the Recursive Watch Watcher callback is the one receiving the event and event is delivered exactly once.
> A goal here is to reduce the number of semantic changes. The guarantee of no intermediate watch event until data is read will be maintained. The only difference is we will automatically re-add the watch after read. At the same time we add the convience of reducing the need to add multiple watches for sibling znodes and in turn reduce the number of watch messages sent from the client to the server.
> There are some implementation details that needs to be hashed out. Initial thinking is to have the Recursive Watch create per-node watches. This will cause a lot of watches to be created on the server side. Currently, each watch is stored as a single bit in a bit set relative to a session - up to 3 bits per client per znode. If there are 100m znodes with 100k clients, each watching all nodes, then this strategy will consume approximately 3.75TB of ram distributed across all Observers. Seems expensive.
> Alternatively, a blacklist of paths to not send Watches regardless of Watch setting can be set each time a watch event from a Recursive Watch is fired. The memory utilization is relative to the number of outstanding reads and at worst case it's 1/3 * 3.75TB using the parameters given above.
> Otherwise, a relaxation of no intermediate watch event until read guarantee is required. If the server can send watch events regardless of one has already been fired without corresponding read, then the server can simply fire watch events without tracking.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

[jira] [Commented] (ZOOKEEPER-1416) Persistent Recursive Watch

Posted by "Patrick Hunt (Commented) (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1416?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13229754#comment-13229754 ] 

Patrick Hunt commented on ZOOKEEPER-1416:
-----------------------------------------

Not the same but you've seen this as background? ZOOKEEPER-153
                
> Persistent Recursive Watch
> --------------------------
>
>                 Key: ZOOKEEPER-1416
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1416
>             Project: ZooKeeper
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: c client, documentation, java client, server
>            Reporter: Phillip Liu
>   Original Estimate: 504h
>  Remaining Estimate: 504h
>
> h4. The Problem
> A ZooKeeper Watch can be placed on a single znode and when the znode changes a Watch event is sent to the client. If there are thousands of znodes being watched, when a client (re)connect, it would have to send thousands of watch requests. At Facebook, we have this problem storing information for thousands of db shards. Consequently a naming service that consumes the db shard definition issues thousands of watch requests each time the service starts and changes Observers.
> h4. Proposed Solution
> We add the notion of a Persistent Recursive Watch in ZooKeeper. Persistent means no Watch reset is necessary after a watch-fire. Recursive means the Watch applies to the node and descendant nodes. A Persistent Recursive Watch behaves as follows:
> # Recursive Watch supports all Watch semantics: CHILDREN, DATA, and EXISTS.
> # CHILDREN and DATA Recursive Watches can be placed on any znode.
> # EXISTS Recursive Watches can be placed on any path.
> # A Recursive Watch behaves like a auto-watch registrar on the server side. Setting a  Recursive Watch means to set watches on all descendant znodes.
> # When a watch on a descendant fires, no subsequent event is fired until a corresponding getData(..) on the znode is called, then Recursive Watch automically apply the watch on the znode. This maintains the existing Watch semantic on an individual znode.
> # A Recursive Watch overrides any watches placed on a descendant znode. Practically this means the Recursive Watch Watcher callback is the one receiving the event and event is delivered exactly once.
> A goal here is to reduce the number of semantic changes. The guarantee of no intermediate watch event until data is read will be maintained. The only difference is we will automatically re-add the watch after read. At the same time we add the convience of reducing the need to add multiple watches for sibling znodes and in turn reduce the number of watch messages sent from the client to the server.
> There are some implementation details that needs to be hashed out. Initial thinking is to have the Recursive Watch create per-node watches. This will cause a lot of watches to be created on the server side. Currently, each watch is stored as a single bit in a bit set relative to a session - up to 3 bits per client per znode. If there are 100m znodes with 100k clients, each watching all nodes, then this strategy will consume approximately 3.75TB of ram distributed across all Observers. Seems expensive.
> Alternatively, a blacklist of paths to not send Watches regardless of Watch setting can be set each time a watch event from a Recursive Watch is fired. The memory utilization is relative to the number of outstanding reads and at worst case it's 1/3 * 3.75TB using the parameters given above.
> Otherwise, a relaxation of no intermediate watch event until read guarantee is required. If the server can send watch events regardless of one has already been fired without corresponding read, then the server can simply fire watch events without tracking.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

[jira] [Commented] (ZOOKEEPER-1416) Persistent Recursive Watch

Posted by "Patrick Hunt (Commented) (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1416?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13230365#comment-13230365 ] 

Patrick Hunt commented on ZOOKEEPER-1416:
-----------------------------------------

These watches will need to be re-established when the client moves to a different server (but same session). How will the new server know about all the "holes"? Also, this will mean scanning the entire sub-tree to determine which deferred notifications need to be sent. Have you thought about this? Seems like it works similar to the current way it's handled?

re use of the bitset, I assume you're talking about this one - ZOOKEEPER-1177 ? A performance issue was found with the current patch, are you planning to resolve that?


bq. Consequently a naming service that consumes the db shard definition issues thousands of watch requests each time the service starts and changes Observers.

nit: do you really mean observer here, or "client watcher"?





                
> Persistent Recursive Watch
> --------------------------
>
>                 Key: ZOOKEEPER-1416
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1416
>             Project: ZooKeeper
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: c client, documentation, java client, server
>            Reporter: Phillip Liu
>   Original Estimate: 504h
>  Remaining Estimate: 504h
>
> h4. The Problem
> A ZooKeeper Watch can be placed on a single znode and when the znode changes a Watch event is sent to the client. If there are thousands of znodes being watched, when a client (re)connect, it would have to send thousands of watch requests. At Facebook, we have this problem storing information for thousands of db shards. Consequently a naming service that consumes the db shard definition issues thousands of watch requests each time the service starts and changes Observers.
> h4. Proposed Solution
> We add the notion of a Persistent Recursive Watch in ZooKeeper. Persistent means no Watch reset is necessary after a watch-fire. Recursive means the Watch applies to the node and descendant nodes. A Persistent Recursive Watch behaves as follows:
> # Recursive Watch supports all Watch semantics: CHILDREN, DATA, and EXISTS.
> # CHILDREN and DATA Recursive Watches can be placed on any znode.
> # EXISTS Recursive Watches can be placed on any path.
> # A Recursive Watch behaves like a auto-watch registrar on the server side. Setting a  Recursive Watch means to set watches on all descendant znodes.
> # When a watch on a descendant fires, no subsequent event is fired until a corresponding getData(..) on the znode is called, then Recursive Watch automically apply the watch on the znode. This maintains the existing Watch semantic on an individual znode.
> # A Recursive Watch overrides any watches placed on a descendant znode. Practically this means the Recursive Watch Watcher callback is the one receiving the event and event is delivered exactly once.
> A goal here is to reduce the number of semantic changes. The guarantee of no intermediate watch event until data is read will be maintained. The only difference is we will automatically re-add the watch after read. At the same time we add the convience of reducing the need to add multiple watches for sibling znodes and in turn reduce the number of watch messages sent from the client to the server.
> There are some implementation details that needs to be hashed out. Initial thinking is to have the Recursive Watch create per-node watches. This will cause a lot of watches to be created on the server side. Currently, each watch is stored as a single bit in a bit set relative to a session - up to 3 bits per client per znode. If there are 100m znodes with 100k clients, each watching all nodes, then this strategy will consume approximately 3.75TB of ram distributed across all Observers. Seems expensive.
> Alternatively, a blacklist of paths to not send Watches regardless of Watch setting can be set each time a watch event from a Recursive Watch is fired. The memory utilization is relative to the number of outstanding reads and at worst case it's 1/3 * 3.75TB using the parameters given above.
> Otherwise, a relaxation of no intermediate watch event until read guarantee is required. If the server can send watch events regardless of one has already been fired without corresponding read, then the server can simply fire watch events without tracking.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

[jira] [Commented] (ZOOKEEPER-1416) Persistent Recursive Watch

Posted by "Benjamin Reed (Commented) (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1416?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13229847#comment-13229847 ] 

Benjamin Reed commented on ZOOKEEPER-1416:
------------------------------------------

can you explain more about the no intermediate watch until read? for example, if i have a recursive watch on /a and /a/a changes and /a/b changes and /a/a changes again without any intermediate reads, does the client just get events for /a/a and /a/b?
                
> Persistent Recursive Watch
> --------------------------
>
>                 Key: ZOOKEEPER-1416
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1416
>             Project: ZooKeeper
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: c client, documentation, java client, server
>            Reporter: Phillip Liu
>   Original Estimate: 504h
>  Remaining Estimate: 504h
>
> h4. The Problem
> A ZooKeeper Watch can be placed on a single znode and when the znode changes a Watch event is sent to the client. If there are thousands of znodes being watched, when a client (re)connect, it would have to send thousands of watch requests. At Facebook, we have this problem storing information for thousands of db shards. Consequently a naming service that consumes the db shard definition issues thousands of watch requests each time the service starts and changes Observers.
> h4. Proposed Solution
> We add the notion of a Persistent Recursive Watch in ZooKeeper. Persistent means no Watch reset is necessary after a watch-fire. Recursive means the Watch applies to the node and descendant nodes. A Persistent Recursive Watch behaves as follows:
> # Recursive Watch supports all Watch semantics: CHILDREN, DATA, and EXISTS.
> # CHILDREN and DATA Recursive Watches can be placed on any znode.
> # EXISTS Recursive Watches can be placed on any path.
> # A Recursive Watch behaves like a auto-watch registrar on the server side. Setting a  Recursive Watch means to set watches on all descendant znodes.
> # When a watch on a descendant fires, no subsequent event is fired until a corresponding getData(..) on the znode is called, then Recursive Watch automically apply the watch on the znode. This maintains the existing Watch semantic on an individual znode.
> # A Recursive Watch overrides any watches placed on a descendant znode. Practically this means the Recursive Watch Watcher callback is the one receiving the event and event is delivered exactly once.
> A goal here is to reduce the number of semantic changes. The guarantee of no intermediate watch event until data is read will be maintained. The only difference is we will automatically re-add the watch after read. At the same time we add the convience of reducing the need to add multiple watches for sibling znodes and in turn reduce the number of watch messages sent from the client to the server.
> There are some implementation details that needs to be hashed out. Initial thinking is to have the Recursive Watch create per-node watches. This will cause a lot of watches to be created on the server side. Currently, each watch is stored as a single bit in a bit set relative to a session - up to 3 bits per client per znode. If there are 100m znodes with 100k clients, each watching all nodes, then this strategy will consume approximately 3.75TB of ram distributed across all Observers. Seems expensive.
> Alternatively, a blacklist of paths to not send Watches regardless of Watch setting can be set each time a watch event from a Recursive Watch is fired. The memory utilization is relative to the number of outstanding reads and at worst case it's 1/3 * 3.75TB using the parameters given above.
> Otherwise, a relaxation of no intermediate watch event until read guarantee is required. If the server can send watch events regardless of one has already been fired without corresponding read, then the server can simply fire watch events without tracking.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

[jira] [Commented] (ZOOKEEPER-1416) Persistent Recursive Watch

Posted by "Phillip Liu (Commented) (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1416?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13230290#comment-13230290 ] 

Phillip Liu commented on ZOOKEEPER-1416:
----------------------------------------

@Patrick, thanks for pointing out ZOOKEEPER-153, I'll go over the proposal.

@Bejamin, /a/a and /a/b are handled as distinct data watches maintaining the existing behavior:

case A:
1. recursive watch placed on /a
2. /a/a changes, data watch fires
3. /a/a changes, no data watch fires
4. get(/a/a), data watch is automatically 'reset'
5. /a/a changes, data watch fires

case B:
1. recursive watch placed on /a
2. /a/a changes, data watch fires
3. /a/b changes, data watch fires
4. get(/a/a), data watch is automatically 'reset'
5. /a/b changes, no data watch fires
6. /a/a changes, data watch fires

                
> Persistent Recursive Watch
> --------------------------
>
>                 Key: ZOOKEEPER-1416
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1416
>             Project: ZooKeeper
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: c client, documentation, java client, server
>            Reporter: Phillip Liu
>   Original Estimate: 504h
>  Remaining Estimate: 504h
>
> h4. The Problem
> A ZooKeeper Watch can be placed on a single znode and when the znode changes a Watch event is sent to the client. If there are thousands of znodes being watched, when a client (re)connect, it would have to send thousands of watch requests. At Facebook, we have this problem storing information for thousands of db shards. Consequently a naming service that consumes the db shard definition issues thousands of watch requests each time the service starts and changes Observers.
> h4. Proposed Solution
> We add the notion of a Persistent Recursive Watch in ZooKeeper. Persistent means no Watch reset is necessary after a watch-fire. Recursive means the Watch applies to the node and descendant nodes. A Persistent Recursive Watch behaves as follows:
> # Recursive Watch supports all Watch semantics: CHILDREN, DATA, and EXISTS.
> # CHILDREN and DATA Recursive Watches can be placed on any znode.
> # EXISTS Recursive Watches can be placed on any path.
> # A Recursive Watch behaves like a auto-watch registrar on the server side. Setting a  Recursive Watch means to set watches on all descendant znodes.
> # When a watch on a descendant fires, no subsequent event is fired until a corresponding getData(..) on the znode is called, then Recursive Watch automically apply the watch on the znode. This maintains the existing Watch semantic on an individual znode.
> # A Recursive Watch overrides any watches placed on a descendant znode. Practically this means the Recursive Watch Watcher callback is the one receiving the event and event is delivered exactly once.
> A goal here is to reduce the number of semantic changes. The guarantee of no intermediate watch event until data is read will be maintained. The only difference is we will automatically re-add the watch after read. At the same time we add the convience of reducing the need to add multiple watches for sibling znodes and in turn reduce the number of watch messages sent from the client to the server.
> There are some implementation details that needs to be hashed out. Initial thinking is to have the Recursive Watch create per-node watches. This will cause a lot of watches to be created on the server side. Currently, each watch is stored as a single bit in a bit set relative to a session - up to 3 bits per client per znode. If there are 100m znodes with 100k clients, each watching all nodes, then this strategy will consume approximately 3.75TB of ram distributed across all Observers. Seems expensive.
> Alternatively, a blacklist of paths to not send Watches regardless of Watch setting can be set each time a watch event from a Recursive Watch is fired. The memory utilization is relative to the number of outstanding reads and at worst case it's 1/3 * 3.75TB using the parameters given above.
> Otherwise, a relaxation of no intermediate watch event until read guarantee is required. If the server can send watch events regardless of one has already been fired without corresponding read, then the server can simply fire watch events without tracking.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

[jira] [Updated] (ZOOKEEPER-1416) Persistent Recursive Watch

Posted by "Phillip Liu (Updated) (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1416?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Phillip Liu updated ZOOKEEPER-1416:
-----------------------------------

    Description: 
h4. The Problem
A ZooKeeper Watch can be placed on a single znode and when the znode changes a Watch event is sent to the client. If there are thousands of znodes being watched, when a client (re)connect, it would have to send thousands of watch requests. At Facebook, we have this problem storing information for thousands of db shards. Consequently a naming service that consumes the db shard definition issues thousands of watch requests each time the service starts and changes client watcher.

h4. Proposed Solution
We add the notion of a Persistent Recursive Watch in ZooKeeper. Persistent means no Watch reset is necessary after a watch-fire. Recursive means the Watch applies to the node and descendant nodes. A Persistent Recursive Watch behaves as follows:

# Recursive Watch supports all Watch semantics: CHILDREN, DATA, and EXISTS.
# CHILDREN and DATA Recursive Watches can be placed on any znode.
# EXISTS Recursive Watches can be placed on any path.
# A Recursive Watch behaves like a auto-watch registrar on the server side. Setting a  Recursive Watch means to set watches on all descendant znodes.
# When a watch on a descendant fires, no subsequent event is fired until a corresponding getData(..) on the znode is called, then Recursive Watch automically apply the watch on the znode. This maintains the existing Watch semantic on an individual znode.
# A Recursive Watch overrides any watches placed on a descendant znode. Practically this means the Recursive Watch Watcher callback is the one receiving the event and event is delivered exactly once.

A goal here is to reduce the number of semantic changes. The guarantee of no intermediate watch event until data is read will be maintained. The only difference is we will automatically re-add the watch after read. At the same time we add the convience of reducing the need to add multiple watches for sibling znodes and in turn reduce the number of watch messages sent from the client to the server.

There are some implementation details that needs to be hashed out. Initial thinking is to have the Recursive Watch create per-node watches. This will cause a lot of watches to be created on the server side. Currently, each watch is stored as a single bit in a bit set relative to a session - up to 3 bits per client per znode. If there are 100m znodes with 100k clients, each watching all nodes, then this strategy will consume approximately 3.75TB of ram distributed across all Observers. Seems expensive.

Alternatively, a blacklist of paths to not send Watches regardless of Watch setting can be set each time a watch event from a Recursive Watch is fired. The memory utilization is relative to the number of outstanding reads and at worst case it's 1/3 * 3.75TB using the parameters given above.

Otherwise, a relaxation of no intermediate watch event until read guarantee is required. If the server can send watch events regardless of one has already been fired without corresponding read, then the server can simply fire watch events without tracking.

  was:
h4. The Problem
A ZooKeeper Watch can be placed on a single znode and when the znode changes a Watch event is sent to the client. If there are thousands of znodes being watched, when a client (re)connect, it would have to send thousands of watch requests. At Facebook, we have this problem storing information for thousands of db shards. Consequently a naming service that consumes the db shard definition issues thousands of watch requests each time the service starts and changes Observers.

h4. Proposed Solution
We add the notion of a Persistent Recursive Watch in ZooKeeper. Persistent means no Watch reset is necessary after a watch-fire. Recursive means the Watch applies to the node and descendant nodes. A Persistent Recursive Watch behaves as follows:

# Recursive Watch supports all Watch semantics: CHILDREN, DATA, and EXISTS.
# CHILDREN and DATA Recursive Watches can be placed on any znode.
# EXISTS Recursive Watches can be placed on any path.
# A Recursive Watch behaves like a auto-watch registrar on the server side. Setting a  Recursive Watch means to set watches on all descendant znodes.
# When a watch on a descendant fires, no subsequent event is fired until a corresponding getData(..) on the znode is called, then Recursive Watch automically apply the watch on the znode. This maintains the existing Watch semantic on an individual znode.
# A Recursive Watch overrides any watches placed on a descendant znode. Practically this means the Recursive Watch Watcher callback is the one receiving the event and event is delivered exactly once.

A goal here is to reduce the number of semantic changes. The guarantee of no intermediate watch event until data is read will be maintained. The only difference is we will automatically re-add the watch after read. At the same time we add the convience of reducing the need to add multiple watches for sibling znodes and in turn reduce the number of watch messages sent from the client to the server.

There are some implementation details that needs to be hashed out. Initial thinking is to have the Recursive Watch create per-node watches. This will cause a lot of watches to be created on the server side. Currently, each watch is stored as a single bit in a bit set relative to a session - up to 3 bits per client per znode. If there are 100m znodes with 100k clients, each watching all nodes, then this strategy will consume approximately 3.75TB of ram distributed across all Observers. Seems expensive.

Alternatively, a blacklist of paths to not send Watches regardless of Watch setting can be set each time a watch event from a Recursive Watch is fired. The memory utilization is relative to the number of outstanding reads and at worst case it's 1/3 * 3.75TB using the parameters given above.

Otherwise, a relaxation of no intermediate watch event until read guarantee is required. If the server can send watch events regardless of one has already been fired without corresponding read, then the server can simply fire watch events without tracking.

    
> Persistent Recursive Watch
> --------------------------
>
>                 Key: ZOOKEEPER-1416
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1416
>             Project: ZooKeeper
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: c client, documentation, java client, server
>            Reporter: Phillip Liu
>   Original Estimate: 504h
>  Remaining Estimate: 504h
>
> h4. The Problem
> A ZooKeeper Watch can be placed on a single znode and when the znode changes a Watch event is sent to the client. If there are thousands of znodes being watched, when a client (re)connect, it would have to send thousands of watch requests. At Facebook, we have this problem storing information for thousands of db shards. Consequently a naming service that consumes the db shard definition issues thousands of watch requests each time the service starts and changes client watcher.
> h4. Proposed Solution
> We add the notion of a Persistent Recursive Watch in ZooKeeper. Persistent means no Watch reset is necessary after a watch-fire. Recursive means the Watch applies to the node and descendant nodes. A Persistent Recursive Watch behaves as follows:
> # Recursive Watch supports all Watch semantics: CHILDREN, DATA, and EXISTS.
> # CHILDREN and DATA Recursive Watches can be placed on any znode.
> # EXISTS Recursive Watches can be placed on any path.
> # A Recursive Watch behaves like a auto-watch registrar on the server side. Setting a  Recursive Watch means to set watches on all descendant znodes.
> # When a watch on a descendant fires, no subsequent event is fired until a corresponding getData(..) on the znode is called, then Recursive Watch automically apply the watch on the znode. This maintains the existing Watch semantic on an individual znode.
> # A Recursive Watch overrides any watches placed on a descendant znode. Practically this means the Recursive Watch Watcher callback is the one receiving the event and event is delivered exactly once.
> A goal here is to reduce the number of semantic changes. The guarantee of no intermediate watch event until data is read will be maintained. The only difference is we will automatically re-add the watch after read. At the same time we add the convience of reducing the need to add multiple watches for sibling znodes and in turn reduce the number of watch messages sent from the client to the server.
> There are some implementation details that needs to be hashed out. Initial thinking is to have the Recursive Watch create per-node watches. This will cause a lot of watches to be created on the server side. Currently, each watch is stored as a single bit in a bit set relative to a session - up to 3 bits per client per znode. If there are 100m znodes with 100k clients, each watching all nodes, then this strategy will consume approximately 3.75TB of ram distributed across all Observers. Seems expensive.
> Alternatively, a blacklist of paths to not send Watches regardless of Watch setting can be set each time a watch event from a Recursive Watch is fired. The memory utilization is relative to the number of outstanding reads and at worst case it's 1/3 * 3.75TB using the parameters given above.
> Otherwise, a relaxation of no intermediate watch event until read guarantee is required. If the server can send watch events regardless of one has already been fired without corresponding read, then the server can simply fire watch events without tracking.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

[jira] [Commented] (ZOOKEEPER-1416) Persistent Recursive Watch

Posted by "Vishal Kathuria (Commented) (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1416?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13233032#comment-13233032 ] 

Vishal Kathuria commented on ZOOKEEPER-1416:
--------------------------------------------

@Phillip:
Since the recursive watch is a new functionality, I think it is okay to change the behavior and say that the watch will keep firing on a node, even if you don't read it. Watch firing is cheap so these extra watches are okay. The inefficiency is that because of the multiple watches, you end up doing multiple getData calls even though, all the watches that fire before the getData returns were unnecessary.

If that client wants, it can optimize by keeping track of the watch holes (the znodes for which getData is pending) and ignore those watches.

This will really simplify the implementation of this.
                
> Persistent Recursive Watch
> --------------------------
>
>                 Key: ZOOKEEPER-1416
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1416
>             Project: ZooKeeper
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: c client, documentation, java client, server
>            Reporter: Phillip Liu
>   Original Estimate: 504h
>  Remaining Estimate: 504h
>
> h4. The Problem
> A ZooKeeper Watch can be placed on a single znode and when the znode changes a Watch event is sent to the client. If there are thousands of znodes being watched, when a client (re)connect, it would have to send thousands of watch requests. At Facebook, we have this problem storing information for thousands of db shards. Consequently a naming service that consumes the db shard definition issues thousands of watch requests each time the service starts and changes client watcher.
> h4. Proposed Solution
> We add the notion of a Persistent Recursive Watch in ZooKeeper. Persistent means no Watch reset is necessary after a watch-fire. Recursive means the Watch applies to the node and descendant nodes. A Persistent Recursive Watch behaves as follows:
> # Recursive Watch supports all Watch semantics: CHILDREN, DATA, and EXISTS.
> # CHILDREN and DATA Recursive Watches can be placed on any znode.
> # EXISTS Recursive Watches can be placed on any path.
> # A Recursive Watch behaves like a auto-watch registrar on the server side. Setting a  Recursive Watch means to set watches on all descendant znodes.
> # When a watch on a descendant fires, no subsequent event is fired until a corresponding getData(..) on the znode is called, then Recursive Watch automically apply the watch on the znode. This maintains the existing Watch semantic on an individual znode.
> # A Recursive Watch overrides any watches placed on a descendant znode. Practically this means the Recursive Watch Watcher callback is the one receiving the event and event is delivered exactly once.
> A goal here is to reduce the number of semantic changes. The guarantee of no intermediate watch event until data is read will be maintained. The only difference is we will automatically re-add the watch after read. At the same time we add the convience of reducing the need to add multiple watches for sibling znodes and in turn reduce the number of watch messages sent from the client to the server.
> There are some implementation details that needs to be hashed out. Initial thinking is to have the Recursive Watch create per-node watches. This will cause a lot of watches to be created on the server side. Currently, each watch is stored as a single bit in a bit set relative to a session - up to 3 bits per client per znode. If there are 100m znodes with 100k clients, each watching all nodes, then this strategy will consume approximately 3.75TB of ram distributed across all Observers. Seems expensive.
> Alternatively, a blacklist of paths to not send Watches regardless of Watch setting can be set each time a watch event from a Recursive Watch is fired. The memory utilization is relative to the number of outstanding reads and at worst case it's 1/3 * 3.75TB using the parameters given above.
> Otherwise, a relaxation of no intermediate watch event until read guarantee is required. If the server can send watch events regardless of one has already been fired without corresponding read, then the server can simply fire watch events without tracking.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira