You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@flink.apache.org by Rong Rong <wa...@gmail.com> on 2020/02/13 01:41:15 UTC
[DISCUSS] Improve history server with log support
Hi All,
Recently we have been experimenting using Flink’s history server as a
centralized debugging service for completed streaming jobs.
Specifically, we dynamically generate links to access log files on the YARN
host; in the meantime, we use the Flink history server to show job graphs,
exceptions and other info of the completed jobs[2].
This causes some pain for our users, namely: It is inconvenient to go to
YARN host to access logs; then go to Flink history server for the other
information.
Thus we would like to propose an improvement to the currently Flink history
server:
-
To support dynamic links to residual log files from the host machine
within the retention period [3];
-
To support dynamic links to aggregated log files provided by the
cluster, if supported: such as Hadoop HistoryServer[1], or Kubernetes
cluster level logging[4]?
-
Similar integration with Hadoop HistoryServer was already proposed
before[5] with slightly different approach.
Any feedback and suggestions are highly appreciated!
--
Rong
[1]
https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.9.2/hadoop-mapreduce-client/hadoop-mapreduce-client-hs/HistoryServerRest.html
[2]
https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-release-1.9/monitoring/historyserver.html
[3]
https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.9.2/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-common/yarn-default.xml#yarn.nodemanager.log.retain-seconds
[4]
https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/cluster-administration/logging/#cluster-level-logging-architectures
[5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14317
Re: [DISCUSS] Improve history server with log support
Posted by SHI Xiaogang <sh...@gmail.com>.
Hi all,
Thanks a lot for your interest. We are very interesting to contribute the
trace system to the community. We will draft a design document and share it
soon.
The trace system actually is an complement to existing metric and logging
systems, and definitely can not replace the logging system. The proposal
here, in my opinion, is a good improvement to existing logging system. The
trace system is not much related to the proposal. We can discuss the trace
system in a separated thread.
Regarding the proposal here, i tagree that we should unify the API to
collect logs in different clusters. I am really looking forward to Rong's
design.
Regards,
Xiaogang
Rong Rong <wa...@gmail.com> 于2020年2月18日周二 上午5:24写道：
> Hi All,
>
> Thank you all for the prompt feedbacks. Based on the discussion I think
> this seems to be a very useful feature.
> I would start an initial draft of a design doc (or should it be a FLIP?)
> and share with the community.
>
>
>
> Hi Yang, Thanks for the interest and thanks for sharing the ideas.
>
> In fact, I couldn't agree more with this point:
>
> > So i am thinking whether we could provide a unified api and storage
> format
> > for logs. Then
> > we could add different implementation for storage type and use it in
> > history server. And users
> > could get the logs from the history server just like Flink cluster is
> > running.
>
>
> This was our initial intention, since
> 1. utilizing Flink HS the same as a RUNNING cluster one is very tempting
> based on our user feedback: there's no learning curve because the UI looks
> almost exactly the same!
> 2. each cluster environment handles log aggregation a bit differently. It
> would always be best to unified the API and let each individual cluster
> module to extend it.
>
>
> There is one caveat of utilizing Flink HS for this use case in our initial
> study/experiment:
> In our YARN cluster, we observed a few, but not negligible, failures are
> neither due to the job nor due to Flink itself - these are related to
> hardware failure or network connection issues. In this case there would be
> no time for the JM to upload the ArchivedExecutionGraph to the underlying
> filesystem. Our thought is to periodically make archives to the HS
> filesystem, but this is only a thought and still have many details to iron
> out.
>
> We would share the design doc soon, and we would love to hear more of your
> ideas and looking forward to your feedbacks.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Rong
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 16, 2020 at 7:02 PM Yang Wang <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Rong Rong,
> >
> >
> > Thanks for starting this discussion. I think the log is an important part
> > of improving user
> > experience of Flink. The logs is very important for debugging problems or
> > checking the
> > expected output. Some users, especially for machine learning, print
> global
> > steps or
> > residual to the logs. When the application is finished successfully or
> not,
> > the logs should
> > also be accessible.
> >
> >
> > Currently, when deploying Flink on Yarn, the application logs will be
> > aggregated to HDFS
> > on a configured path classified by host. The command `yarn application
> > logs` could be used
> > to get the logs to local.
> >
> >
> > For K8s deployment, daemon set or sidecar container could be used to
> > collect logs to
> > persistent storage(e.g. HDFS, S3, elastic search, etc.).
> >
> >
> > So i am thinking whether we could provide a unified api and storage
> format
> > for logs. Then
> > we could add different implementation for storage type and use it in
> > history server. And users
> > could get the logs from the history server just like Flink cluster is
> > running.
> >
> >
> >
> > Best,
> > Yang
> >
> > Venkata Sanath Muppalla <sa...@gmail.com> 于2020年2月15日周六 下午3:19写道：
> >
> > > @Xiaogang Could please share more details about the trace mechanism you
> > > mentioned. As Rong mentioned, we are also working on something similar.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 14, 2020, 9:12 AM Rong Rong <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thank you for the prompt feedbacks
> > > >
> > > > @Aljoscha. Yes you are absolutely correct - adding Hadoop dependency
> to
> > > > cluster runtime component is definitely not what we are proposing.
> > > > We were trying to see how the community thinks about the idea of
> adding
> > > log
> > > > support into History server.
> > > > - The reference to this JIRA ticket is more on the intention rather
> > > than
> > > > the solution. - in fact the intention is slightly different, we were
> > > > trying to put it in the history server while the original JIRA
> proposed
> > > to
> > > > add it in the live runtime modules.
> > > > - IMO, in order to support different cluster environments: the
> > generic
> > > > cluster component should only provide an interface, where each
> cluster
> > > impl
> > > > module should extend from.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > @Xiaogang, thank you for bringing up the idea of utilizing a trace
> > > system.
> > > >
> > > > The event tracing would definitely provide additional, in fact more
> > > > valuable information for debugging purposes.
> > > > In fact we were also internally experimenting with the idea similar
> to
> > > > Spark's ListenerInterface [1] to capture some of the important
> messages
> > > > sent via akka.
> > > > But we are still in a very early preliminary stage, thus we haven't
> > > > included them in this discussion.
> > > >
> > > > We would love to hear more regarding the trace system you proposed.
> > could
> > > > you share more information regarding this?
> > > > Such as how would the live events being listened; how would the trace
> > > being
> > > > collected/stored; etc.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://spark.apache.org/docs/2.0.2/api/java/org/apache/spark/scheduler/SparkListener.html
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Rong
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 7:33 AM Aljoscha Krettek <
> aljoscha@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > what's the difference in approach to the mentioned related Jira
> Issue
> > > > > ([1])? I commented there because I'm skeptical about adding
> > > > > Hadoop-specific code to the generic cluster components.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Aljoscha
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14317
> > > > >
> > > > > On 13.02.20 03:47, SHI Xiaogang wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Rong Rong,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for the proposal. We are also suffering from some pains
> > > brought
> > > > by
> > > > > > history server. To address them, we propose a trace system, which
> > is
> > > > very
> > > > > > similar to the metric system, for historical information.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > A trace is semi-structured information about events in Flink.
> > Useful
> > > > > traces
> > > > > > include:
> > > > > > * job traces: which contain the job graph of submitted jobs.
> > > > > > * schedule traces: A schedule trace is typically composed of the
> > > > > > information of task slots. They are generated when a job
> finishes,
> > > > fails,
> > > > > > or is canceled. As a job may restart mutliple times, a job
> > typically
> > > > has
> > > > > > multiple schedule traces.
> > > > > > * checkpoint traces: which are generated when a checkpoint
> > completes
> > > or
> > > > > > fails.
> > > > > > * task manager traces: which are generated when a task manager
> > > > > terminates.
> > > > > > Users can access the link to aggregated logs intaskmanager
> traces.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Users can use TraceReport to collect traces in Flink and export
> > them
> > > to
> > > > > > external storage (e.g., ElasticSearch). By retrieving traces when
> > > > > > exceptions happen, we can improve user experience in altering.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > Xiaogang
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Rong Rong <wa...@gmail.com> 于2020年2月13日周四 上午9:41写道：
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Hi All,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Recently we have been experimenting using Flink’s history server
> > as
> > > a
> > > > > >> centralized debugging service for completed streaming jobs.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Specifically, we dynamically generate links to access log files
> on
> > > the
> > > > > YARN
> > > > > >> host; in the meantime, we use the Flink history server to show
> job
> > > > > graphs,
> > > > > >> exceptions and other info of the completed jobs[2].
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> This causes some pain for our users, namely: It is inconvenient
> to
> > > go
> > > > to
> > > > > >> YARN host to access logs; then go to Flink history server for
> the
> > > > other
> > > > > >> information.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Thus we would like to propose an improvement to the currently
> > Flink
> > > > > history
> > > > > >> server:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> -
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> To support dynamic links to residual log files from the host
> > > > machine
> > > > > >> within the retention period [3];
> > > > > >> -
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> To support dynamic links to aggregated log files provided by
> > the
> > > > > >> cluster, if supported: such as Hadoop HistoryServer[1], or
> > > > > Kubernetes
> > > > > >> cluster level logging[4]?
> > > > > >> -
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Similar integration with Hadoop HistoryServer was already
> > > > > proposed
> > > > > >> before[5] with slightly different approach.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Any feedback and suggestions are highly appreciated!
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> --
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Rong
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> [1]
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.9.2/hadoop-mapreduce-client/hadoop-mapreduce-client-hs/HistoryServerRest.html
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> [2]
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-release-1.9/monitoring/historyserver.html
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> [3]
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.9.2/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-common/yarn-default.xml#yarn.nodemanager.log.retain-seconds
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> [4]
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/cluster-administration/logging/#cluster-level-logging-architectures
> > > > > >> [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14317
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Improve history server with log support
Posted by Rong Rong <wa...@gmail.com>.
Hi All,
Thank you all for the prompt feedbacks. Based on the discussion I think
this seems to be a very useful feature.
I would start an initial draft of a design doc (or should it be a FLIP?)
and share with the community.
Hi Yang, Thanks for the interest and thanks for sharing the ideas.
In fact, I couldn't agree more with this point:
> So i am thinking whether we could provide a unified api and storage format
> for logs. Then
> we could add different implementation for storage type and use it in
> history server. And users
> could get the logs from the history server just like Flink cluster is
> running.
This was our initial intention, since
1. utilizing Flink HS the same as a RUNNING cluster one is very tempting
based on our user feedback: there's no learning curve because the UI looks
almost exactly the same!
2. each cluster environment handles log aggregation a bit differently. It
would always be best to unified the API and let each individual cluster
module to extend it.
There is one caveat of utilizing Flink HS for this use case in our initial
study/experiment:
In our YARN cluster, we observed a few, but not negligible, failures are
neither due to the job nor due to Flink itself - these are related to
hardware failure or network connection issues. In this case there would be
no time for the JM to upload the ArchivedExecutionGraph to the underlying
filesystem. Our thought is to periodically make archives to the HS
filesystem, but this is only a thought and still have many details to iron
out.
We would share the design doc soon, and we would love to hear more of your
ideas and looking forward to your feedbacks.
Thanks,
Rong
On Sun, Feb 16, 2020 at 7:02 PM Yang Wang <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Rong Rong,
>
>
> Thanks for starting this discussion. I think the log is an important part
> of improving user
> experience of Flink. The logs is very important for debugging problems or
> checking the
> expected output. Some users, especially for machine learning, print global
> steps or
> residual to the logs. When the application is finished successfully or not,
> the logs should
> also be accessible.
>
>
> Currently, when deploying Flink on Yarn, the application logs will be
> aggregated to HDFS
> on a configured path classified by host. The command `yarn application
> logs` could be used
> to get the logs to local.
>
>
> For K8s deployment, daemon set or sidecar container could be used to
> collect logs to
> persistent storage(e.g. HDFS, S3, elastic search, etc.).
>
>
> So i am thinking whether we could provide a unified api and storage format
> for logs. Then
> we could add different implementation for storage type and use it in
> history server. And users
> could get the logs from the history server just like Flink cluster is
> running.
>
>
>
> Best,
> Yang
>
> Venkata Sanath Muppalla <sa...@gmail.com> 于2020年2月15日周六 下午3:19写道：
>
> > @Xiaogang Could please share more details about the trace mechanism you
> > mentioned. As Rong mentioned, we are also working on something similar.
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 14, 2020, 9:12 AM Rong Rong <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Thank you for the prompt feedbacks
> > >
> > > @Aljoscha. Yes you are absolutely correct - adding Hadoop dependency to
> > > cluster runtime component is definitely not what we are proposing.
> > > We were trying to see how the community thinks about the idea of adding
> > log
> > > support into History server.
> > > - The reference to this JIRA ticket is more on the intention rather
> > than
> > > the solution. - in fact the intention is slightly different, we were
> > > trying to put it in the history server while the original JIRA proposed
> > to
> > > add it in the live runtime modules.
> > > - IMO, in order to support different cluster environments: the
> generic
> > > cluster component should only provide an interface, where each cluster
> > impl
> > > module should extend from.
> > >
> > >
> > > @Xiaogang, thank you for bringing up the idea of utilizing a trace
> > system.
> > >
> > > The event tracing would definitely provide additional, in fact more
> > > valuable information for debugging purposes.
> > > In fact we were also internally experimenting with the idea similar to
> > > Spark's ListenerInterface [1] to capture some of the important messages
> > > sent via akka.
> > > But we are still in a very early preliminary stage, thus we haven't
> > > included them in this discussion.
> > >
> > > We would love to hear more regarding the trace system you proposed.
> could
> > > you share more information regarding this?
> > > Such as how would the live events being listened; how would the trace
> > being
> > > collected/stored; etc.
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://spark.apache.org/docs/2.0.2/api/java/org/apache/spark/scheduler/SparkListener.html
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Rong
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 7:33 AM Aljoscha Krettek <al...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > what's the difference in approach to the mentioned related Jira Issue
> > > > ([1])? I commented there because I'm skeptical about adding
> > > > Hadoop-specific code to the generic cluster components.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Aljoscha
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14317
> > > >
> > > > On 13.02.20 03:47, SHI Xiaogang wrote:
> > > > > Hi Rong Rong,
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the proposal. We are also suffering from some pains
> > brought
> > > by
> > > > > history server. To address them, we propose a trace system, which
> is
> > > very
> > > > > similar to the metric system, for historical information.
> > > > >
> > > > > A trace is semi-structured information about events in Flink.
> Useful
> > > > traces
> > > > > include:
> > > > > * job traces: which contain the job graph of submitted jobs.
> > > > > * schedule traces: A schedule trace is typically composed of the
> > > > > information of task slots. They are generated when a job finishes,
> > > fails,
> > > > > or is canceled. As a job may restart mutliple times, a job
> typically
> > > has
> > > > > multiple schedule traces.
> > > > > * checkpoint traces: which are generated when a checkpoint
> completes
> > or
> > > > > fails.
> > > > > * task manager traces: which are generated when a task manager
> > > > terminates.
> > > > > Users can access the link to aggregated logs intaskmanager traces.
> > > > >
> > > > > Users can use TraceReport to collect traces in Flink and export
> them
> > to
> > > > > external storage (e.g., ElasticSearch). By retrieving traces when
> > > > > exceptions happen, we can improve user experience in altering.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Xiaogang
> > > > >
> > > > > Rong Rong <wa...@gmail.com> 于2020年2月13日周四 上午9:41写道：
> > > > >
> > > > >> Hi All,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Recently we have been experimenting using Flink’s history server
> as
> > a
> > > > >> centralized debugging service for completed streaming jobs.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Specifically, we dynamically generate links to access log files on
> > the
> > > > YARN
> > > > >> host; in the meantime, we use the Flink history server to show job
> > > > graphs,
> > > > >> exceptions and other info of the completed jobs[2].
> > > > >>
> > > > >> This causes some pain for our users, namely: It is inconvenient to
> > go
> > > to
> > > > >> YARN host to access logs; then go to Flink history server for the
> > > other
> > > > >> information.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thus we would like to propose an improvement to the currently
> Flink
> > > > history
> > > > >> server:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> -
> > > > >>
> > > > >> To support dynamic links to residual log files from the host
> > > machine
> > > > >> within the retention period [3];
> > > > >> -
> > > > >>
> > > > >> To support dynamic links to aggregated log files provided by
> the
> > > > >> cluster, if supported: such as Hadoop HistoryServer[1], or
> > > > Kubernetes
> > > > >> cluster level logging[4]?
> > > > >> -
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Similar integration with Hadoop HistoryServer was already
> > > > proposed
> > > > >> before[5] with slightly different approach.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Any feedback and suggestions are highly appreciated!
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Rong
> > > > >>
> > > > >> [1]
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.9.2/hadoop-mapreduce-client/hadoop-mapreduce-client-hs/HistoryServerRest.html
> > > > >>
> > > > >> [2]
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-release-1.9/monitoring/historyserver.html
> > > > >>
> > > > >> [3]
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.9.2/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-common/yarn-default.xml#yarn.nodemanager.log.retain-seconds
> > > > >>
> > > > >> [4]
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/cluster-administration/logging/#cluster-level-logging-architectures
> > > > >> [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14317
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Improve history server with log support
Posted by Yang Wang <da...@gmail.com>.
Hi Rong Rong,
Thanks for starting this discussion. I think the log is an important part
of improving user
experience of Flink. The logs is very important for debugging problems or
checking the
expected output. Some users, especially for machine learning, print global
steps or
residual to the logs. When the application is finished successfully or not,
the logs should
also be accessible.
Currently, when deploying Flink on Yarn, the application logs will be
aggregated to HDFS
on a configured path classified by host. The command `yarn application
logs` could be used
to get the logs to local.
For K8s deployment, daemon set or sidecar container could be used to
collect logs to
persistent storage(e.g. HDFS, S3, elastic search, etc.).
So i am thinking whether we could provide a unified api and storage format
for logs. Then
we could add different implementation for storage type and use it in
history server. And users
could get the logs from the history server just like Flink cluster is
running.
Best,
Yang
Venkata Sanath Muppalla <sa...@gmail.com> 于2020年2月15日周六 下午3:19写道：
> @Xiaogang Could please share more details about the trace mechanism you
> mentioned. As Rong mentioned, we are also working on something similar.
>
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020, 9:12 AM Rong Rong <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thank you for the prompt feedbacks
> >
> > @Aljoscha. Yes you are absolutely correct - adding Hadoop dependency to
> > cluster runtime component is definitely not what we are proposing.
> > We were trying to see how the community thinks about the idea of adding
> log
> > support into History server.
> > - The reference to this JIRA ticket is more on the intention rather
> than
> > the solution. - in fact the intention is slightly different, we were
> > trying to put it in the history server while the original JIRA proposed
> to
> > add it in the live runtime modules.
> > - IMO, in order to support different cluster environments: the generic
> > cluster component should only provide an interface, where each cluster
> impl
> > module should extend from.
> >
> >
> > @Xiaogang, thank you for bringing up the idea of utilizing a trace
> system.
> >
> > The event tracing would definitely provide additional, in fact more
> > valuable information for debugging purposes.
> > In fact we were also internally experimenting with the idea similar to
> > Spark's ListenerInterface [1] to capture some of the important messages
> > sent via akka.
> > But we are still in a very early preliminary stage, thus we haven't
> > included them in this discussion.
> >
> > We would love to hear more regarding the trace system you proposed. could
> > you share more information regarding this?
> > Such as how would the live events being listened; how would the trace
> being
> > collected/stored; etc.
> >
> >
> > [1]
> >
> >
> https://spark.apache.org/docs/2.0.2/api/java/org/apache/spark/scheduler/SparkListener.html
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rong
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 7:33 AM Aljoscha Krettek <al...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > what's the difference in approach to the mentioned related Jira Issue
> > > ([1])? I commented there because I'm skeptical about adding
> > > Hadoop-specific code to the generic cluster components.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Aljoscha
> > >
> > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14317
> > >
> > > On 13.02.20 03:47, SHI Xiaogang wrote:
> > > > Hi Rong Rong,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the proposal. We are also suffering from some pains
> brought
> > by
> > > > history server. To address them, we propose a trace system, which is
> > very
> > > > similar to the metric system, for historical information.
> > > >
> > > > A trace is semi-structured information about events in Flink. Useful
> > > traces
> > > > include:
> > > > * job traces: which contain the job graph of submitted jobs.
> > > > * schedule traces: A schedule trace is typically composed of the
> > > > information of task slots. They are generated when a job finishes,
> > fails,
> > > > or is canceled. As a job may restart mutliple times, a job typically
> > has
> > > > multiple schedule traces.
> > > > * checkpoint traces: which are generated when a checkpoint completes
> or
> > > > fails.
> > > > * task manager traces: which are generated when a task manager
> > > terminates.
> > > > Users can access the link to aggregated logs intaskmanager traces.
> > > >
> > > > Users can use TraceReport to collect traces in Flink and export them
> to
> > > > external storage (e.g., ElasticSearch). By retrieving traces when
> > > > exceptions happen, we can improve user experience in altering.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Xiaogang
> > > >
> > > > Rong Rong <wa...@gmail.com> 于2020年2月13日周四 上午9:41写道：
> > > >
> > > >> Hi All,
> > > >>
> > > >> Recently we have been experimenting using Flink’s history server as
> a
> > > >> centralized debugging service for completed streaming jobs.
> > > >>
> > > >> Specifically, we dynamically generate links to access log files on
> the
> > > YARN
> > > >> host; in the meantime, we use the Flink history server to show job
> > > graphs,
> > > >> exceptions and other info of the completed jobs[2].
> > > >>
> > > >> This causes some pain for our users, namely: It is inconvenient to
> go
> > to
> > > >> YARN host to access logs; then go to Flink history server for the
> > other
> > > >> information.
> > > >>
> > > >> Thus we would like to propose an improvement to the currently Flink
> > > history
> > > >> server:
> > > >>
> > > >> -
> > > >>
> > > >> To support dynamic links to residual log files from the host
> > machine
> > > >> within the retention period [3];
> > > >> -
> > > >>
> > > >> To support dynamic links to aggregated log files provided by the
> > > >> cluster, if supported: such as Hadoop HistoryServer[1], or
> > > Kubernetes
> > > >> cluster level logging[4]?
> > > >> -
> > > >>
> > > >> Similar integration with Hadoop HistoryServer was already
> > > proposed
> > > >> before[5] with slightly different approach.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Any feedback and suggestions are highly appreciated!
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >>
> > > >> Rong
> > > >>
> > > >> [1]
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.9.2/hadoop-mapreduce-client/hadoop-mapreduce-client-hs/HistoryServerRest.html
> > > >>
> > > >> [2]
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-release-1.9/monitoring/historyserver.html
> > > >>
> > > >> [3]
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.9.2/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-common/yarn-default.xml#yarn.nodemanager.log.retain-seconds
> > > >>
> > > >> [4]
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/cluster-administration/logging/#cluster-level-logging-architectures
> > > >> [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14317
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Improve history server with log support
Posted by Venkata Sanath Muppalla <sa...@gmail.com>.
@Xiaogang Could please share more details about the trace mechanism you
mentioned. As Rong mentioned, we are also working on something similar.
On Fri, Feb 14, 2020, 9:12 AM Rong Rong <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you for the prompt feedbacks
>
> @Aljoscha. Yes you are absolutely correct - adding Hadoop dependency to
> cluster runtime component is definitely not what we are proposing.
> We were trying to see how the community thinks about the idea of adding log
> support into History server.
> - The reference to this JIRA ticket is more on the intention rather than
> the solution. - in fact the intention is slightly different, we were
> trying to put it in the history server while the original JIRA proposed to
> add it in the live runtime modules.
> - IMO, in order to support different cluster environments: the generic
> cluster component should only provide an interface, where each cluster impl
> module should extend from.
>
>
> @Xiaogang, thank you for bringing up the idea of utilizing a trace system.
>
> The event tracing would definitely provide additional, in fact more
> valuable information for debugging purposes.
> In fact we were also internally experimenting with the idea similar to
> Spark's ListenerInterface [1] to capture some of the important messages
> sent via akka.
> But we are still in a very early preliminary stage, thus we haven't
> included them in this discussion.
>
> We would love to hear more regarding the trace system you proposed. could
> you share more information regarding this?
> Such as how would the live events being listened; how would the trace being
> collected/stored; etc.
>
>
> [1]
>
> https://spark.apache.org/docs/2.0.2/api/java/org/apache/spark/scheduler/SparkListener.html
>
> Thanks,
> Rong
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 7:33 AM Aljoscha Krettek <al...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > what's the difference in approach to the mentioned related Jira Issue
> > ([1])? I commented there because I'm skeptical about adding
> > Hadoop-specific code to the generic cluster components.
> >
> > Best,
> > Aljoscha
> >
> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14317
> >
> > On 13.02.20 03:47, SHI Xiaogang wrote:
> > > Hi Rong Rong,
> > >
> > > Thanks for the proposal. We are also suffering from some pains brought
> by
> > > history server. To address them, we propose a trace system, which is
> very
> > > similar to the metric system, for historical information.
> > >
> > > A trace is semi-structured information about events in Flink. Useful
> > traces
> > > include:
> > > * job traces: which contain the job graph of submitted jobs.
> > > * schedule traces: A schedule trace is typically composed of the
> > > information of task slots. They are generated when a job finishes,
> fails,
> > > or is canceled. As a job may restart mutliple times, a job typically
> has
> > > multiple schedule traces.
> > > * checkpoint traces: which are generated when a checkpoint completes or
> > > fails.
> > > * task manager traces: which are generated when a task manager
> > terminates.
> > > Users can access the link to aggregated logs intaskmanager traces.
> > >
> > > Users can use TraceReport to collect traces in Flink and export them to
> > > external storage (e.g., ElasticSearch). By retrieving traces when
> > > exceptions happen, we can improve user experience in altering.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Xiaogang
> > >
> > > Rong Rong <wa...@gmail.com> 于2020年2月13日周四 上午9:41写道：
> > >
> > >> Hi All,
> > >>
> > >> Recently we have been experimenting using Flink’s history server as a
> > >> centralized debugging service for completed streaming jobs.
> > >>
> > >> Specifically, we dynamically generate links to access log files on the
> > YARN
> > >> host; in the meantime, we use the Flink history server to show job
> > graphs,
> > >> exceptions and other info of the completed jobs[2].
> > >>
> > >> This causes some pain for our users, namely: It is inconvenient to go
> to
> > >> YARN host to access logs; then go to Flink history server for the
> other
> > >> information.
> > >>
> > >> Thus we would like to propose an improvement to the currently Flink
> > history
> > >> server:
> > >>
> > >> -
> > >>
> > >> To support dynamic links to residual log files from the host
> machine
> > >> within the retention period [3];
> > >> -
> > >>
> > >> To support dynamic links to aggregated log files provided by the
> > >> cluster, if supported: such as Hadoop HistoryServer[1], or
> > Kubernetes
> > >> cluster level logging[4]?
> > >> -
> > >>
> > >> Similar integration with Hadoop HistoryServer was already
> > proposed
> > >> before[5] with slightly different approach.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Any feedback and suggestions are highly appreciated!
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >>
> > >> Rong
> > >>
> > >> [1]
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.9.2/hadoop-mapreduce-client/hadoop-mapreduce-client-hs/HistoryServerRest.html
> > >>
> > >> [2]
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-release-1.9/monitoring/historyserver.html
> > >>
> > >> [3]
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.9.2/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-common/yarn-default.xml#yarn.nodemanager.log.retain-seconds
> > >>
> > >> [4]
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/cluster-administration/logging/#cluster-level-logging-architectures
> > >> [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14317
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Improve history server with log support
Posted by Rong Rong <wa...@gmail.com>.
Thank you for the prompt feedbacks
@Aljoscha. Yes you are absolutely correct - adding Hadoop dependency to
cluster runtime component is definitely not what we are proposing.
We were trying to see how the community thinks about the idea of adding log
support into History server.
- The reference to this JIRA ticket is more on the intention rather than
the solution. - in fact the intention is slightly different, we were
trying to put it in the history server while the original JIRA proposed to
add it in the live runtime modules.
- IMO, in order to support different cluster environments: the generic
cluster component should only provide an interface, where each cluster impl
module should extend from.
@Xiaogang, thank you for bringing up the idea of utilizing a trace system.
The event tracing would definitely provide additional, in fact more
valuable information for debugging purposes.
In fact we were also internally experimenting with the idea similar to
Spark's ListenerInterface [1] to capture some of the important messages
sent via akka.
But we are still in a very early preliminary stage, thus we haven't
included them in this discussion.
We would love to hear more regarding the trace system you proposed. could
you share more information regarding this?
Such as how would the live events being listened; how would the trace being
collected/stored; etc.
[1]
https://spark.apache.org/docs/2.0.2/api/java/org/apache/spark/scheduler/SparkListener.html
Thanks,
Rong
On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 7:33 AM Aljoscha Krettek <al...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> what's the difference in approach to the mentioned related Jira Issue
> ([1])? I commented there because I'm skeptical about adding
> Hadoop-specific code to the generic cluster components.
>
> Best,
> Aljoscha
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14317
>
> On 13.02.20 03:47, SHI Xiaogang wrote:
> > Hi Rong Rong,
> >
> > Thanks for the proposal. We are also suffering from some pains brought by
> > history server. To address them, we propose a trace system, which is very
> > similar to the metric system, for historical information.
> >
> > A trace is semi-structured information about events in Flink. Useful
> traces
> > include:
> > * job traces: which contain the job graph of submitted jobs.
> > * schedule traces: A schedule trace is typically composed of the
> > information of task slots. They are generated when a job finishes, fails,
> > or is canceled. As a job may restart mutliple times, a job typically has
> > multiple schedule traces.
> > * checkpoint traces: which are generated when a checkpoint completes or
> > fails.
> > * task manager traces: which are generated when a task manager
> terminates.
> > Users can access the link to aggregated logs intaskmanager traces.
> >
> > Users can use TraceReport to collect traces in Flink and export them to
> > external storage (e.g., ElasticSearch). By retrieving traces when
> > exceptions happen, we can improve user experience in altering.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Xiaogang
> >
> > Rong Rong <wa...@gmail.com> 于2020年2月13日周四 上午9:41写道：
> >
> >> Hi All,
> >>
> >> Recently we have been experimenting using Flink’s history server as a
> >> centralized debugging service for completed streaming jobs.
> >>
> >> Specifically, we dynamically generate links to access log files on the
> YARN
> >> host; in the meantime, we use the Flink history server to show job
> graphs,
> >> exceptions and other info of the completed jobs[2].
> >>
> >> This causes some pain for our users, namely: It is inconvenient to go to
> >> YARN host to access logs; then go to Flink history server for the other
> >> information.
> >>
> >> Thus we would like to propose an improvement to the currently Flink
> history
> >> server:
> >>
> >> -
> >>
> >> To support dynamic links to residual log files from the host machine
> >> within the retention period [3];
> >> -
> >>
> >> To support dynamic links to aggregated log files provided by the
> >> cluster, if supported: such as Hadoop HistoryServer[1], or
> Kubernetes
> >> cluster level logging[4]?
> >> -
> >>
> >> Similar integration with Hadoop HistoryServer was already
> proposed
> >> before[5] with slightly different approach.
> >>
> >>
> >> Any feedback and suggestions are highly appreciated!
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Rong
> >>
> >> [1]
> >>
> >>
> https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.9.2/hadoop-mapreduce-client/hadoop-mapreduce-client-hs/HistoryServerRest.html
> >>
> >> [2]
> >>
> >>
> https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-release-1.9/monitoring/historyserver.html
> >>
> >> [3]
> >>
> >>
> https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.9.2/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-common/yarn-default.xml#yarn.nodemanager.log.retain-seconds
> >>
> >> [4]
> >>
> >>
> https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/cluster-administration/logging/#cluster-level-logging-architectures
> >> [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14317
> >>
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Improve history server with log support
Posted by Aljoscha Krettek <al...@apache.org>.
Hi,
what's the difference in approach to the mentioned related Jira Issue
([1])? I commented there because I'm skeptical about adding
Hadoop-specific code to the generic cluster components.
Best,
Aljoscha
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14317
On 13.02.20 03:47, SHI Xiaogang wrote:
> Hi Rong Rong,
>
> Thanks for the proposal. We are also suffering from some pains brought by
> history server. To address them, we propose a trace system, which is very
> similar to the metric system, for historical information.
>
> A trace is semi-structured information about events in Flink. Useful traces
> include:
> * job traces: which contain the job graph of submitted jobs.
> * schedule traces: A schedule trace is typically composed of the
> information of task slots. They are generated when a job finishes, fails,
> or is canceled. As a job may restart mutliple times, a job typically has
> multiple schedule traces.
> * checkpoint traces: which are generated when a checkpoint completes or
> fails.
> * task manager traces: which are generated when a task manager terminates.
> Users can access the link to aggregated logs intaskmanager traces.
>
> Users can use TraceReport to collect traces in Flink and export them to
> external storage (e.g., ElasticSearch). By retrieving traces when
> exceptions happen, we can improve user experience in altering.
>
> Regards,
> Xiaogang
>
> Rong Rong <wa...@gmail.com> 于2020年2月13日周四 上午9:41写道：
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Recently we have been experimenting using Flink’s history server as a
>> centralized debugging service for completed streaming jobs.
>>
>> Specifically, we dynamically generate links to access log files on the YARN
>> host; in the meantime, we use the Flink history server to show job graphs,
>> exceptions and other info of the completed jobs[2].
>>
>> This causes some pain for our users, namely: It is inconvenient to go to
>> YARN host to access logs; then go to Flink history server for the other
>> information.
>>
>> Thus we would like to propose an improvement to the currently Flink history
>> server:
>>
>> -
>>
>> To support dynamic links to residual log files from the host machine
>> within the retention period [3];
>> -
>>
>> To support dynamic links to aggregated log files provided by the
>> cluster, if supported: such as Hadoop HistoryServer[1], or Kubernetes
>> cluster level logging[4]?
>> -
>>
>> Similar integration with Hadoop HistoryServer was already proposed
>> before[5] with slightly different approach.
>>
>>
>> Any feedback and suggestions are highly appreciated!
>>
>> --
>>
>> Rong
>>
>> [1]
>>
>> https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.9.2/hadoop-mapreduce-client/hadoop-mapreduce-client-hs/HistoryServerRest.html
>>
>> [2]
>>
>> https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-release-1.9/monitoring/historyserver.html
>>
>> [3]
>>
>> https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.9.2/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-common/yarn-default.xml#yarn.nodemanager.log.retain-seconds
>>
>> [4]
>>
>> https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/cluster-administration/logging/#cluster-level-logging-architectures
>> [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14317
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Improve history server with log support
Posted by SHI Xiaogang <sh...@gmail.com>.
Hi Rong Rong,
Thanks for the proposal. We are also suffering from some pains brought by
history server. To address them, we propose a trace system, which is very
similar to the metric system, for historical information.
A trace is semi-structured information about events in Flink. Useful traces
include:
* job traces: which contain the job graph of submitted jobs.
* schedule traces: A schedule trace is typically composed of the
information of task slots. They are generated when a job finishes, fails,
or is canceled. As a job may restart mutliple times, a job typically has
multiple schedule traces.
* checkpoint traces: which are generated when a checkpoint completes or
fails.
* task manager traces: which are generated when a task manager terminates.
Users can access the link to aggregated logs intaskmanager traces.
Users can use TraceReport to collect traces in Flink and export them to
external storage (e.g., ElasticSearch). By retrieving traces when
exceptions happen, we can improve user experience in altering.
Regards,
Xiaogang
Rong Rong <wa...@gmail.com> 于2020年2月13日周四 上午9:41写道：
> Hi All,
>
> Recently we have been experimenting using Flink’s history server as a
> centralized debugging service for completed streaming jobs.
>
> Specifically, we dynamically generate links to access log files on the YARN
> host; in the meantime, we use the Flink history server to show job graphs,
> exceptions and other info of the completed jobs[2].
>
> This causes some pain for our users, namely: It is inconvenient to go to
> YARN host to access logs; then go to Flink history server for the other
> information.
>
> Thus we would like to propose an improvement to the currently Flink history
> server:
>
> -
>
> To support dynamic links to residual log files from the host machine
> within the retention period [3];
> -
>
> To support dynamic links to aggregated log files provided by the
> cluster, if supported: such as Hadoop HistoryServer[1], or Kubernetes
> cluster level logging[4]?
> -
>
> Similar integration with Hadoop HistoryServer was already proposed
> before[5] with slightly different approach.
>
>
> Any feedback and suggestions are highly appreciated!
>
> --
>
> Rong
>
> [1]
>
> https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.9.2/hadoop-mapreduce-client/hadoop-mapreduce-client-hs/HistoryServerRest.html
>
> [2]
>
> https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-release-1.9/monitoring/historyserver.html
>
> [3]
>
> https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.9.2/hadoop-yarn/hadoop-yarn-common/yarn-default.xml#yarn.nodemanager.log.retain-seconds
>
> [4]
>
> https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/cluster-administration/logging/#cluster-level-logging-architectures
> [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14317
>