Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Lucene: Java-Dev

[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-532) [PATCH] Indexing on Hadoop distributed file system

 

 

Lucene java-dev RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


jira at apache

Nov 10, 2006, 7:22 AM

Post #1 of 6 (380 views)
Permalink
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-532) [PATCH] Indexing on Hadoop distributed file system

[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-532?page=comments#action_12448770 ]

Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-532:
-------------------------------------------

I think this is the same issue as LUCENE-532 (I just marked that one as a dup).

But there was one difference: does HDFS allow writing to the same file (eg "segments") more than once? I thought it did not because it's "write once"? Do we need to not do that (write to the same file more than once) to work with HDFS (lock-less gets us closer)?

> [PATCH] Indexing on Hadoop distributed file system
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-532
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-532
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Index
> Affects Versions: 1.9
> Reporter: Igor Bolotin
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: indexOnDFS.patch, SegmentTermEnum.patch, TermInfosWriter.patch
>
>
> In my current project we needed a way to create very large Lucene indexes on Hadoop distributed file system. When we tried to do it directly on DFS using Nutch FsDirectory class - we immediately found that indexing fails because DfsIndexOutput.seek() method throws UnsupportedOperationException. The reason for this behavior is clear - DFS does not support random updates and so seek() method can't be supported (at least not easily).
>
> Well, if we can't support random updates - the question is: do we really need them? Search in the Lucene code revealed 2 places which call IndexOutput.seek() method: one is in TermInfosWriter and another one in CompoundFileWriter. As we weren't planning to use CompoundFileWriter - the only place that concerned us was in TermInfosWriter.
>
> TermInfosWriter uses IndexOutput.seek() in its close() method to write total number of terms in the file back into the beginning of the file. It was very simple to change file format a little bit and write number of terms into last 8 bytes of the file instead of writing them into beginning of file. The only other place that should be fixed in order for this to work is in SegmentTermEnum constructor - to read this piece of information at position = file length - 8.
>
> With this format hack - we were able to use FsDirectory to write index directly to DFS without any problems. Well - we still don't index directly to DFS for performance reasons, but at least we can build small local indexes and merge them into the main index on DFS without copying big main index back and forth.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe [at] lucene
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help [at] lucene


jira at apache

Nov 10, 2006, 7:24 AM

Post #2 of 6 (341 views)
Permalink
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-532) [PATCH] Indexing on Hadoop distributed file system [In reply to]

[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-532?page=comments#action_12448774 ]

Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-532:
-------------------------------------------

Sorry, I meant "dup of LUCENE-704 " above.

> [PATCH] Indexing on Hadoop distributed file system
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-532
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-532
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Index
> Affects Versions: 1.9
> Reporter: Igor Bolotin
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: indexOnDFS.patch, SegmentTermEnum.patch, TermInfosWriter.patch
>
>
> In my current project we needed a way to create very large Lucene indexes on Hadoop distributed file system. When we tried to do it directly on DFS using Nutch FsDirectory class - we immediately found that indexing fails because DfsIndexOutput.seek() method throws UnsupportedOperationException. The reason for this behavior is clear - DFS does not support random updates and so seek() method can't be supported (at least not easily).
>
> Well, if we can't support random updates - the question is: do we really need them? Search in the Lucene code revealed 2 places which call IndexOutput.seek() method: one is in TermInfosWriter and another one in CompoundFileWriter. As we weren't planning to use CompoundFileWriter - the only place that concerned us was in TermInfosWriter.
>
> TermInfosWriter uses IndexOutput.seek() in its close() method to write total number of terms in the file back into the beginning of the file. It was very simple to change file format a little bit and write number of terms into last 8 bytes of the file instead of writing them into beginning of file. The only other place that should be fixed in order for this to work is in SegmentTermEnum constructor - to read this piece of information at position = file length - 8.
>
> With this format hack - we were able to use FsDirectory to write index directly to DFS without any problems. Well - we still don't index directly to DFS for performance reasons, but at least we can build small local indexes and merge them into the main index on DFS without copying big main index back and forth.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe [at] lucene
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help [at] lucene


jira at apache

Nov 10, 2006, 7:44 AM

Post #3 of 6 (347 views)
Permalink
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-532) [PATCH] Indexing on Hadoop distributed file system [In reply to]

[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-532?page=comments#action_12448780 ]

Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-532:
-------------------------------------------

Also: I like the idea of never doing "seek" when writing. The less functionality we rely on from the filesystem, the more portable Lucene will be. Since Lucene is so wonderfully simple, never using "seek" during write is in fact very feasible.

I think to do this we need to change the CFS file format, so that the offsets are stored at the end of the file. We actually can't pre-compute where the offsets will be because we can't make assumptions about how the file position changes when bytes are written: this is implementation specific. For example, if the Directory implementation does on-the-fly compression, then the file position will not be the number of bytes written. So I think we have to write at the end of the file.

Any opinions or other suggestions?

> [PATCH] Indexing on Hadoop distributed file system
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-532
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-532
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Index
> Affects Versions: 1.9
> Reporter: Igor Bolotin
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: indexOnDFS.patch, SegmentTermEnum.patch, TermInfosWriter.patch
>
>
> In my current project we needed a way to create very large Lucene indexes on Hadoop distributed file system. When we tried to do it directly on DFS using Nutch FsDirectory class - we immediately found that indexing fails because DfsIndexOutput.seek() method throws UnsupportedOperationException. The reason for this behavior is clear - DFS does not support random updates and so seek() method can't be supported (at least not easily).
>
> Well, if we can't support random updates - the question is: do we really need them? Search in the Lucene code revealed 2 places which call IndexOutput.seek() method: one is in TermInfosWriter and another one in CompoundFileWriter. As we weren't planning to use CompoundFileWriter - the only place that concerned us was in TermInfosWriter.
>
> TermInfosWriter uses IndexOutput.seek() in its close() method to write total number of terms in the file back into the beginning of the file. It was very simple to change file format a little bit and write number of terms into last 8 bytes of the file instead of writing them into beginning of file. The only other place that should be fixed in order for this to work is in SegmentTermEnum constructor - to read this piece of information at position = file length - 8.
>
> With this format hack - we were able to use FsDirectory to write index directly to DFS without any problems. Well - we still don't index directly to DFS for performance reasons, but at least we can build small local indexes and merge them into the main index on DFS without copying big main index back and forth.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe [at] lucene
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help [at] lucene


jira at apache

Nov 10, 2006, 2:21 PM

Post #4 of 6 (349 views)
Permalink
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-532) [PATCH] Indexing on Hadoop distributed file system [In reply to]

[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-532?page=comments#action_12448877 ]

Andrzej Bialecki commented on LUCENE-532:
------------------------------------------

Hadoop cannot (yet) change file position when writing. All files are write-once, i.e. once they are closed they are pretty much immutable. They are also append-only - writing uses a subclass of OutputStream.

> [PATCH] Indexing on Hadoop distributed file system
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-532
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-532
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Index
> Affects Versions: 1.9
> Reporter: Igor Bolotin
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: indexOnDFS.patch, SegmentTermEnum.patch, TermInfosWriter.patch
>
>
> In my current project we needed a way to create very large Lucene indexes on Hadoop distributed file system. When we tried to do it directly on DFS using Nutch FsDirectory class - we immediately found that indexing fails because DfsIndexOutput.seek() method throws UnsupportedOperationException. The reason for this behavior is clear - DFS does not support random updates and so seek() method can't be supported (at least not easily).
>
> Well, if we can't support random updates - the question is: do we really need them? Search in the Lucene code revealed 2 places which call IndexOutput.seek() method: one is in TermInfosWriter and another one in CompoundFileWriter. As we weren't planning to use CompoundFileWriter - the only place that concerned us was in TermInfosWriter.
>
> TermInfosWriter uses IndexOutput.seek() in its close() method to write total number of terms in the file back into the beginning of the file. It was very simple to change file format a little bit and write number of terms into last 8 bytes of the file instead of writing them into beginning of file. The only other place that should be fixed in order for this to work is in SegmentTermEnum constructor - to read this piece of information at position = file length - 8.
>
> With this format hack - we were able to use FsDirectory to write index directly to DFS without any problems. Well - we still don't index directly to DFS for performance reasons, but at least we can build small local indexes and merge them into the main index on DFS without copying big main index back and forth.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe [at] lucene
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help [at] lucene


jira at apache

Nov 11, 2006, 8:03 AM

Post #5 of 6 (330 views)
Permalink
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-532) [PATCH] Indexing on Hadoop distributed file system [In reply to]

[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-532?page=comments#action_12448989 ]

Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-532:
-------------------------------------------

Alas, in trying to change the CFS format so that file offsets are stored at the end of the file, when implementing the corresponding changes to CompoundFileReader, I discovered that this approach isn't viable. I had been thinking the reader would look at the file length, subtract numEntry*sizeof(long), seek to there, and then read the offsets (longs). The problem is: we can't know sizeof(long) since this is dependent on the actual storage implementation, ie, for the same reasoning above. Ie we can't assume a byte = 1 file position, always.

So, then, the only solution I can think of (to avoid seek during write) would be to write to a separate file, for each *.cfs file, that contains the file offsets corresponding to the cfs file. Eg, if we have _1.cfs we would also have _1.cfsx which holds the file offsets. This is sort of costly if we care about # files (it doubles the number of files in the simple case of a bunch of segments w/ no deletes/separate norms).

Yonik had actually mentioned in LUCENE-704 that fixing CFS writing to not use seek was not very important, ie, it would be OK to not use compound files with HDFS as the store.

Does anyone see a better approach?

> [PATCH] Indexing on Hadoop distributed file system
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-532
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-532
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Index
> Affects Versions: 1.9
> Reporter: Igor Bolotin
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: indexOnDFS.patch, SegmentTermEnum.patch, TermInfosWriter.patch
>
>
> In my current project we needed a way to create very large Lucene indexes on Hadoop distributed file system. When we tried to do it directly on DFS using Nutch FsDirectory class - we immediately found that indexing fails because DfsIndexOutput.seek() method throws UnsupportedOperationException. The reason for this behavior is clear - DFS does not support random updates and so seek() method can't be supported (at least not easily).
>
> Well, if we can't support random updates - the question is: do we really need them? Search in the Lucene code revealed 2 places which call IndexOutput.seek() method: one is in TermInfosWriter and another one in CompoundFileWriter. As we weren't planning to use CompoundFileWriter - the only place that concerned us was in TermInfosWriter.
>
> TermInfosWriter uses IndexOutput.seek() in its close() method to write total number of terms in the file back into the beginning of the file. It was very simple to change file format a little bit and write number of terms into last 8 bytes of the file instead of writing them into beginning of file. The only other place that should be fixed in order for this to work is in SegmentTermEnum constructor - to read this piece of information at position = file length - 8.
>
> With this format hack - we were able to use FsDirectory to write index directly to DFS without any problems. Well - we still don't index directly to DFS for performance reasons, but at least we can build small local indexes and merge them into the main index on DFS without copying big main index back and forth.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe [at] lucene
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help [at] lucene


jira at apache

Nov 13, 2006, 11:00 AM

Post #6 of 6 (323 views)
Permalink
[jira] Commented: (LUCENE-532) [PATCH] Indexing on Hadoop distributed file system [In reply to]

[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-532?page=comments#action_12449446 ]

Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-532:
-------------------------------------------

Thank you for the patch & unit test!

This is actually the same approach that I started with. But I ruled
it out because I don't think it's safe to do arithmetic (ie, adding
lengths to compute positions) on file positions.

Meaning, one can imagine a Directory implementation that's doing some
kind of compression where on writing N bytes the file position does
not in fact advance by N bytes. Or maybe an implementation that must
escape certain bytes, or it's writing to XML or using some kind of
alternate coding system, or something along these lines. I don't know
if such Directory implementations exist today, but, I don't want to
break them if they do nor preclude them in the future.

And so the only value you should ever pass to "seek()" is a value you
previously obtained by calling "getFilePosition()". The current
javadocs for these methods seem to imply this.

However, on looking into this question further ... I do see that there
are places now where Lucene already does arithmetic on file positions.
For example in accessing a *.fdx file or *.tdx file we assume we can
find a given entry at FORMAT_SIZE + 8 * index file position.

Maybe it is OK to make the definition of Directory.seek() stricter, by
requiring that in fact the position we pass to seek is always the same
as "the number of bytes written", thereby allowing us to do arithmetic
based on bytes/length and call seek with such values? I'm nervous
about making this API change.

I think this is the open question. Does anyone have any input to help
answer this question?

Lucene currently makes this assumption, albeit in a fairly contained
way I think (most other calls to seek seem to be values previously
obtained by getFilePosition()).


> [PATCH] Indexing on Hadoop distributed file system
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-532
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-532
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Index
> Affects Versions: 1.9
> Reporter: Igor Bolotin
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: cfs-patch.txt, indexOnDFS.patch, SegmentTermEnum.patch, TermInfosWriter.patch
>
>
> In my current project we needed a way to create very large Lucene indexes on Hadoop distributed file system. When we tried to do it directly on DFS using Nutch FsDirectory class - we immediately found that indexing fails because DfsIndexOutput.seek() method throws UnsupportedOperationException. The reason for this behavior is clear - DFS does not support random updates and so seek() method can't be supported (at least not easily).
>
> Well, if we can't support random updates - the question is: do we really need them? Search in the Lucene code revealed 2 places which call IndexOutput.seek() method: one is in TermInfosWriter and another one in CompoundFileWriter. As we weren't planning to use CompoundFileWriter - the only place that concerned us was in TermInfosWriter.
>
> TermInfosWriter uses IndexOutput.seek() in its close() method to write total number of terms in the file back into the beginning of the file. It was very simple to change file format a little bit and write number of terms into last 8 bytes of the file instead of writing them into beginning of file. The only other place that should be fixed in order for this to work is in SegmentTermEnum constructor - to read this piece of information at position = file length - 8.
>
> With this format hack - we were able to use FsDirectory to write index directly to DFS without any problems. Well - we still don't index directly to DFS for performance reasons, but at least we can build small local indexes and merge them into the main index on DFS without copying big main index back and forth.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe [at] lucene
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help [at] lucene

Lucene java-dev RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.