1 / 30

Going Large-Scale in P2P Experiments Using the JXTA Distributed Framework

Going Large-Scale in P2P Experiments Using the JXTA Distributed Framework. Mathieu Jan & Sébastien Monnet Projet PARIS. Paris, 13 February 2004. Outline. How to test P2P systems at a large-scale? The JDF tool Experimenting with various network configurations

caitir
Download Presentation

Going Large-Scale in P2P Experiments Using the JXTA Distributed Framework

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Going Large-Scale in P2P Experiments Using the JXTA Distributed Framework Mathieu Jan & Sébastien Monnet Projet PARIS Paris, 13 February 2004

  2. Outline • How to test P2P systems at a large-scale? • The JDF tool • Experimenting with various network configurations • Experimenting with various volatility conditions • Ongoing and future work

  3. How to test P2P systems at a large-scale? • How to reproduce and test P2P systems? • Volatility • Heterogeneous architectures • Large-scale • Many papers on Gnutella, KaZaA, etc • Behavior not yet fully understood • Experiments on CFS, PAST, etc • Mostly simulation • Real experiments up to a few tens of physical nodes • Large-scale (thousands of node) via emulation • The methodology for testing in not discussed • Deployment • How to control the volatility? • A need for infrastructures

  4. Solutions used for testing P2P prototypes • Simulation • Results are reproducible • May require significant adaptations • Simplified model compared to the reality • Emulation • Configure network with various characteristics • Heterogeneity not fully captured • Results are not reproducible • Deployment and management • Experiments on real testbeds • Needed step when validating software • Real heterogeneity • Results are not reproducible • Deployment and management

  5. Conducting JXTA-based experiments with JDF (1/2) • A framework for automated testing of JXTA-based systems from a single node (control node) • http://jdf.jxta.org/ • Two modes • Run one distributed test • Multiple tests called batch mode (useful with crontab) • We added the support of PBS

  6. Conducting JXTA-based experiments with JDF (2/2) • Hypothesis • All the nodes must be “visible” by the control node • Requirements • Java Virtual Machine • Bourne shell • SSH/RSH configured to run with no password on each node • JDF: several shell scripts • Deployment of the needed resources for a test or several tests • Jar files and script used on each node • Configuration of JXTA peers • Launching peers • Collect logs and results files of each node • Analyze results on the control node • Cleanup deployed and generated files for the test • Kill remaining processes • Update resources for a test

  7. How to define a test using JDF? • An XML description file of the JXTA-based network • Type of peers (rendezvous, edge peers) • How peers are interconnected, etc • A set of Java classes describing the behavior of each peer • Extend the JDF’s framework (start, stop JXTA, etc) • A Java class for analyzing collected results • A file containing the list of nodes and the path of the JVM on each node

  8. Describing a simple JuxMem network (1/2) • Notion of profile • A set of peers having the same behavior • Instance attribute of profile • Specify the total number of nodes hosting this type of peer via the instance attribute • Instance attribute of peer • Specify the total number of peers of this type on 1 node • Simplest example: one cluster manager and 1 provider Cluster Manager A Provider A Cluster A group

  9. Describing a simple JuxMem network (2/2) <profile name=“clusterManagerA" instances="1“ > <peer base-name=“clusterManagerA" instances="1“ /> <rdvs is-rdv="true“ /> <transports> <tcp enabled="true" base-port="13000“ /> </transports> <bootstrap class="juxmem.service.test.load.ClusterManager“> <jvmarg value=“xxxx” /> <arg value=“xxx“ /> </bootstrap> </profile> <profile name="providerA" instances=“1“ > <peer base-name="providerA" instances="1“ /> <rdvs is-rdv="false"> <rdv cluster=“clusterManagerA"/> </rdvs> <transports> <tcp enabled="true" base-port="13000"/> </transports> <bootstrap class="juxmem.service.test.load.Provider" > <jvmarg value=“xxx“ /> <arg value=“xxxx“ /> <!-- memory provided for example --> </bootstrap> </profile>

  10. A more complex JuxMem network (1/2) cluster C group cluster A group juxmem group cluster B group

  11. A more complex JuxMem network (2/2) <profile name=“clusterManagerA" instances="1"> … </profile> <profile name=“clusterManagerB" instances="1"> … </profile> <profile name=“clusterManagerC" instances="1"> … </profile> <profile name="providerA" instances=“42“ > <peer base-name="providerA" instances=“4“ /> <rdv cluster=“clusterManagerA"/> … </profile> <profile name="providerB" instances=“42“ > <peer base-name="providerC" instances=“5“ /> <rdv cluster=“clusterManagerB"/> … </profile> <profile name="providerC" instances=“35“ > <peer base-name="providerC" instances=“6“ /> <rdv cluster=“clusterManagerC"/> … </profile>

  12. Usage of JDF’s scripts • runAll.sh [<flags>] <list-of-hosts> <network-descriptor> • -debug: show all script commands executed • -unsecure: use rsh instead of ssh • -cleanup: cleanup JDF directory on each host • -bundle: create bundle for distribution • -install: install distribution bundle • -update: update files on each peer • -config: configure JXTA network • -kill: kill existing JDF processes • -run: run test • -nohup: run and return without waiting for peers to exit • -analyze: analyze test results • -log: keep test results and log4j logs from peers • batchAll.sh [<flags>] <file-listing-each-test-directories>

  13. Experimental results with JDF (1/2) • Experimental setup • Distributed ASCI Supercomputer 2 (DAS-2) managed by PBS (The Netherlands) • 5 clusters for a total number of 200 Dual 1-GHz Pentium-III nodes • Site mainly used: 72 nodes • SSH/SCP used • Experiments with JDF on up to 64 nodes • Deployment of JXTA + JDF + JuxMem • Configuration of JuxMem peers • Update only JuxMem

  14. Experimental results with JDF (2/2)

  15. Standard JDF vs Optimized JDF

  16. Launching peers • For each peer a JVM is started • Several JXTA can not share the same JVM • How to deal with connections between edge and rendezvous peers? • Rendezvous peers must be started before edge peers • JDF uses the notion of delay • Time to wait before launching peers • Need a mechanism for distributed synchronization

  17. Getting the logs and the results • Framework of JDF • Start and stop JXTA (net peergroup as well as custom groups as in JuxMem) • Store the results in a property file • Retrieve log files generated on each node • Library used: Log4j • Files starting with log. • Retrieve result files on each node • The specified analyze class is called • Display results

  18. Experimenting with various volatility conditions • Goals • Provide multiple failure conditions • Experiment various failure detection techniques • Experiment various replication strategies • Identify class of application and system states • Adapt fault tolerance mechanisms

  19. Providing multiple failure conditions • Go large scale • Control faults upon thousands of nodes • Precision • Possibility to kill a node at a given time/state • Some nodes may be “fail-safe” • Easy to use • Changing the failure model should not affect the code being tested

  20. Failure injection: going large scale • Using statistical distributions • Advantages • Ease of use : permit to generate multiple failure dates automatically • Suitable large scale • Which statistical distributions ? • Exponential (to model life expectancy) • Uniform (to choose between numerous nodes)

  21. Failure injection: precision • Why ? • Play the role of the enemy • Kill a node that handles a lock • Kill multiple nodes during some data replication • Model reality • Some nodes may be almost “fail-safe” • A particular node may have a very high MTBF • How ? • Combine statistical flows and a more precise configuration file

  22. Failure injection in JDF: design • Add a unique configuration file • Generated by a set of tools • Using “The Probability/Statistics Object Library” (http://www.math.uah.edu/psol) • Deployed on each node by JDF • Launch a new Java thread • Reads the configuration file • Sleeps for a while • Kills its node at a given time

  23. Failure injection: execution flow New Killer().start() read suicide kill Configuration file (fi.properties) write kill Thread Killer write Main flow (test class) Result file (fi.results)

  24. Failure injection: sample experiment • 64 peers running on 64 nodes • Creating fi.properties for an initial MTBF of 1 minute • Each node life time follows an exponential law with a rate of 1/64 • With JDF it becomes easy to use • java –cp .:PSOL.jar CreateFiProperties 60000 • new fi.Killer.start();// in the test class • runAll.sh -cleanup –with-nfs -install -config -run -analyze -log paraci_01-64 test.xml

  25. Failure injection: sample experiment

  26. Failure injection: ongoing work • Time deviation • Initial time (t0) • Clocks drift • Tools to precisely specify fi.properties • Suicide interface (event handler) • More flexibility

  27. Failure detection and replication strategies • Running the same test multiple times • Failure detection • Change the failure detection techniques • Tune the Δ (delay between heartbeats) • Which Δ for which MTBF • Replication strategies • Adapt replication degree to “current” MTBF (level of risk) • Experiment multiple replication strategies in various conditions (failures/detection)

  28. Fault tolerance in JuxMem road map • Finalize failure injection tools • Experiment Marin Bertier’s failure detectors with JXTA/JDF • Integrate of the failure detectors in JuxMem • Experiment with various replication strategies • Automatic adaptation

  29. Ongoing work • Improving JDF • There is a lot to do  • Enable concurrent tests via PBS • Submitting issues to bugzilla • Write more tests for JuxMem • Measuring the cost of elementary operations in JuxMem • Various consistency protocols at large-scale • Benchmarking other elementary steps of JDF • Launch peers • Collect result and log files • Use of emulation tools like Dummynet or NIST NET • Visit of Fabio Picconi at IRISA

  30. Future work • Hierarchical deployment • Ka-run/Taktuk-like (ID IMAG) • Distributed synchronization mechanism • Support more complex tests • Allow the use of JDF over Globus • Support other protocols than SSH/RSH • Especially when updating resources

More Related