metron-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ryan Merriman <merrim...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Batch Profiler Feature Branch
Date Thu, 27 Sep 2018 18:15:07 GMT
+1 from me.  Great work.

On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:41 PM Justin Leet <justinjleet@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm +1 on merging the feature branch into master. There's a lot of good
> work here, and it's definitely been nice to see the couple remaining
> improvements make it in.
>
> Thanks a lot for the contribution, this is great stuff!
>
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 6:26 PM Nick Allen <nick@nickallen.org> wrote:
>
> > Or support to be offered for merging this feature branch into master?
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 6:20 PM Nick Allen <nick@nickallen.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for the review.  With
> https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1209
> > complete,
> > > I think the feature branch is ready to be merged.  Sounds like I have
> > > Mike's support.  Anyone else have comments, concerns, questions?
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 10:33 PM Michael Miklavcic <
> > > michael.miklavcic@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I just made a couple minor comments on that PR, and I am in agreement
> > >> about
> > >> the readiness for merging with master. Good stuff Nick.
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 12:37 PM Nick Allen <nick@nickallen.org>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Here is a PR that adds the input time constraints to the Batch
> > Profiler
> > >> > (METRON-1787);  https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1209.
> > >> >
> > >> > It seems that the consensus is that this is probably the last
> feature
> > we
> > >> > need before merging the FB into master.  The other two can wait
> until
> > >> after
> > >> > the feature branch has been merged.  Let me know if you disagree.
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 1:55 PM Nick Allen <nick@nickallen.org>
> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Yeah, agreed.  Per use case 3, when deploying to production there
> > >> really
> > >> > > wouldn't be a huge overlap like 3 months of already profiled data.
> > >> Its
> > >> > day
> > >> > > 1, the profile was just deployed around the same time as you are
> > >> running
> > >> > > the Batch Profiler, so the overlap is in minutes, maybe hours.
> But
> > I
> > >> can
> > >> > > definitely see the usefulness of the feature for re-runs, etc as
> you
> > >> have
> > >> > > described.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Based on this discussion, I created a few JIRAs.  Thanks all for
> the
> > >> > great
> > >> > > feedback and keep it coming.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > [1] METRON-1787 - Input Time Constraints for Batch Profiler
> > >> > > [2] METRON-1788 - Fetch Profile Definitions from Zk for Batch
> > Profiler
> > >> > > [3] METRON-1789 - MPack Should Define Default Input Path for Batch
> > >> > > Profiler
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > --
> > >> > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-1787
> > >> > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-1788
> > >> > > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-1789
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 1:34 PM Michael Miklavcic <
> > >> > > michael.miklavcic@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >> I think we might want to allow the flexibility to choose the date
> > >> range
> > >> > >> then. I don't yet feel like I have a good enough understanding of
> > all
> > >> > the
> > >> > >> ways in which users would want to seed to force them to run the
> > batch
> > >> > job
> > >> > >> over all the data. It might also make it easier to deal with
> > >> > remediation,
> > >> > >> ie an error doesn't force you to re-run over the entire history.
> > Same
> > >> > goes
> > >> > >> for testing out the profile seeing batch job in the first place.
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 11:23 AM Nick Allen <nick@nickallen.org>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> > Assuming you have 9 months of data archived, yes.
> > >> > >> >
> > >> > >> > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 1:22 PM Michael Miklavcic <
> > >> > >> > michael.miklavcic@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > >> >
> > >> > >> > > So in the case of 3 - if you had 6 months of data that hadn't
> > >> been
> > >> > >> > profiled
> > >> > >> > > and another 3 that had been profiled (9 months total data),
> in
> > >> its
> > >> > >> > current
> > >> > >> > > form the batch job runs over all 9 months?
> > >> > >> > >
> > >> > >> > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 11:13 AM Nick Allen <
> > nick@nickallen.org>
> > >> > >> wrote:
> > >> > >> > >
> > >> > >> > > > > How do we establish "tm" from 1.1 above? Any concerns
> about
> > >> > >> overlap
> > >> > >> > or
> > >> > >> > > > gaps after the seeding is performed?
> > >> > >> > > >
> > >> > >> > > > Good point.  Right now, if the Streaming and Batch Profiler
> > >> > overlap
> > >> > >> the
> > >> > >> > > > last write wins.  And presumably the output of the
> Streaming
> > >> and
> > >> > >> Batch
> > >> > >> > > > Profiler are the same, so no worries, right? :)
> > >> > >> > > >
> > >> > >> > > > So it kind of works, but it is definitely not ideal for use
> > >> case
> > >> > >> 3.  I
> > >> > >> > > > could add --begin and --end args to constrain the time
> frame
> > >> over
> > >> > >> which
> > >> > >> > > the
> > >> > >> > > > Batch Profiler runs.  I do not have that in the feature
> > branch.
> > >> > It
> > >> > >> > would
> > >> > >> > > > be easy enough to add though.
> > >> > >> > > >
> > >> > >> > > >
> > >> > >> > > >
> > >> > >> > > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 12:41 PM Michael Miklavcic <
> > >> > >> > > > michael.miklavcic@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > >> > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > Ok, makes sense. That's sort of what I was thinking as
> > well,
> > >> > Nick.
> > >> > >> > > > Pulling
> > >> > >> > > > > at this thread just a bit more...
> > >> > >> > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > >    1. I have an existing system that's been up a while,
> > and I
> > >> > have
> > >> > >> > > added
> > >> > >> > > > k
> > >> > >> > > > >    profiles - assume these are the first profiles I've
> > >> created.
> > >> > >> > > > >       1. I would have t0 - tm (where m is the time when
> the
> > >> > >> profiles
> > >> > >> > > were
> > >> > >> > > > >       first installed) worth of data that has not been
> > >> profiled
> > >> > >> yet.
> > >> > >> > > > >       2. The batch profiler process would be to take that
> > >> exact
> > >> > >> > profile
> > >> > >> > > > >       definition from ZK and run the batch loader with
> that
> > >> from
> > >> > >> the
> > >> > >> > > CLI.
> > >> > >> > > > >       3. Profiles are now up to date from t0 - tCurrent
> > >> > >> > > > >    2. I've already done #1 above. Time goes by and now I
> > >> want to
> > >> > >> add
> > >> > >> > a
> > >> > >> > > > new
> > >> > >> > > > >    profile.
> > >> > >> > > > >       1. Same first step above
> > >> > >> > > > >       2. I would run the batch loader with *only* that
> new
> > >> > profile
> > >> > >> > > > >       definition to seed?
> > >> > >> > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > Forgive me if I missed this in PR's and discussion in the
> > FB,
> > >> > but
> > >> > >> how
> > >> > >> > > do
> > >> > >> > > > we
> > >> > >> > > > > establish "tm" from 1.1 above? Any concerns about overlap
> > or
> > >> > gaps
> > >> > >> > after
> > >> > >> > > > the
> > >> > >> > > > > seeding is performed?
> > >> > >> > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 10:26 AM Nick Allen <
> > >> nick@nickallen.org
> > >> > >
> > >> > >> > > wrote:
> > >> > >> > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > I think more often than not, you would want to load
> your
> > >> > profile
> > >> > >> > > > > definition
> > >> > >> > > > > > from a file.  This is why I considered the 'load from
> Zk'
> > >> more
> > >> > >> of a
> > >> > >> > > > > > nice-to-have.
> > >> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > >    - In use case 1 and 2, this would definitely be the
> > >> case.
> > >> > >> The
> > >> > >> > > > > profiles
> > >> > >> > > > > >    I am working with are speculative and I am using the
> > >> batch
> > >> > >> > > profiler
> > >> > >> > > > to
> > >> > >> > > > > >    determine if they are worth keeping.  In this case,
> my
> > >> > >> > speculative
> > >> > >> > > > > > profiles
> > >> > >> > > > > >    would not be in Zk (yet).
> > >> > >> > > > > >    - In use case 3, I could see it go either way.  It
> > >> might be
> > >> > >> > useful
> > >> > >> > > > to
> > >> > >> > > > > >    load from Zk, but it certainly isn't a blocker.
> > >> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > So if the config does not correctly match the
> profiler
> > >> > config
> > >> > >> > held
> > >> > >> > > in
> > >> > >> > > > > ZK
> > >> > >> > > > > > and
> > >> > >> > > > > > the user runs the batch seeding job, what happens?
> > >> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > You would just get a profile that is slightly different
> > >> over
> > >> > the
> > >> > >> > > entire
> > >> > >> > > > > > time span.  This is not a new risk.  If the user
> changes
> > >> their
> > >> > >> > > Profile
> > >> > >> > > > > > definitions in Zk, the same thing would happen.
> > >> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 12:15 PM Michael Miklavcic <
> > >> > >> > > > > > michael.miklavcic@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > I think I'm torn on this, specifically because it's
> > batch
> > >> > and
> > >> > >> > would
> > >> > >> > > > > > > generally be run as-needed. Justin, can you elaborate
> > on
> > >> > your
> > >> > >> > > > concerns
> > >> > >> > > > > > > there? This feels functionally very similar to our
> flat
> > >> file
> > >> > >> > > loaders,
> > >> > >> > > > > > which
> > >> > >> > > > > > > all have inputs for config from the CLI only. On the
> > >> other
> > >> > >> hand,
> > >> > >> > > our
> > >> > >> > > > > flat
> > >> > >> > > > > > > file loaders are not typically seeding an existing
> > >> > structure.
> > >> > >> My
> > >> > >> > > > > concern
> > >> > >> > > > > > of
> > >> > >> > > > > > > a local file profiler config stems from this stated
> > goal:
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > The goal would be to enable “profile seeding” which
> > >> allows
> > >> > >> > > profiles
> > >> > >> > > > > to
> > >> > >> > > > > > be
> > >> > >> > > > > > > populated from a time before the profile was created.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > So if the config does not correctly match the
> profiler
> > >> > config
> > >> > >> > held
> > >> > >> > > in
> > >> > >> > > > > ZK
> > >> > >> > > > > > > and the user runs the batch seeding job, what
> happens?
> > >> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 10:06 AM Justin Leet <
> > >> > >> > > justinjleet@gmail.com>
> > >> > >> > > > > > > wrote:
> > >> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > The profile not being able to read from ZK feels
> > like a
> > >> > >> fairly
> > >> > >> > > > > > > substantial,
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > if subtle, set of potential problems.  I'd like to
> > see
> > >> > that
> > >> > >> in
> > >> > >> > > > either
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > before merging or at least pretty soon after
> merging.
> > >> Is
> > >> > >> it a
> > >> > >> > > lot
> > >> > >> > > > of
> > >> > >> > > > > > > work
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > to add that functionality based on where things are
> > >> right
> > >> > >> now?
> > >> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 9:59 AM Nick Allen <
> > >> > >> nick@nickallen.org
> > >> > >> > >
> > >> > >> > > > > wrote:
> > >> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > Here is another limitation that I just thought.
> It
> > >> can
> > >> > >> only
> > >> > >> > > read
> > >> > >> > > > a
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > profile
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > definition from a file.  It probably also makes
> > >> sense to
> > >> > >> add
> > >> > >> > an
> > >> > >> > > > > > option
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > that
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > allows it to read the current Profiler
> > configuration
> > >> > from
> > >> > >> > > > > Zookeeper.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > Is it worth setting up a default config that
> > pulls
> > >> > from
> > >> > >> the
> > >> > >> > > > main
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > indexing
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > output?
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > Yes, I think that makes sense.  We want the Batch
> > >> > >> Profiler to
> > >> > >> > > > point
> > >> > >> > > > > > to
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > the
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > right HDFS URL, no matter where/how Metron is
> > >> deployed.
> > >> > >> When
> > >> > >> > > > > Metron
> > >> > >> > > > > > > gets
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > spun-up on a cluster, I should be able to just
> run
> > >> the
> > >> > >> Batch
> > >> > >> > > > > Profiler
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > without having to fuss with the input path.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 9:46 AM Justin Leet <
> > >> > >> > > > justinjleet@gmail.com
> > >> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > Re:
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >  * You do not configure the Batch Profiler in
> > >> > >> Ambari.  It
> > >> > >> > > is
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > configured
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > and executed completely from the
> command-line.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > Is it worth setting up a default config that
> > pulls
> > >> > from
> > >> > >> the
> > >> > >> > > > main
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > indexing
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > output?  I'm a little on the fence about it,
> but
> > it
> > >> > >> seems
> > >> > >> > > like
> > >> > >> > > > > > making
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > the
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > most common case more or less built-in would be
> > >> nice.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > Having said that, I do not consider that a
> > >> requirement
> > >> > >> for
> > >> > >> > > > > merging
> > >> > >> > > > > > > the
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > feature branch.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 11:23 AM James Sirota <
> > >> > >> > > > > jsirota@apache.org>
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > I think what you have outlined above is a
> good
> > >> > initial
> > >> > >> > stab
> > >> > >> > > > at
> > >> > >> > > > > > the
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > feature.  Manual install of spark is not a
> big
> > >> deal.
> > >> > >> > > > > Configuring
> > >> > >> > > > > > > via
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > command line while we mature this feature is
> ok
> > >> as
> > >> > >> well.
> > >> > >> > > > > Doesn't
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > look
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > like
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > configuration steps are too hard.  I think
> you
> > >> > should
> > >> > >> > > merge.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > James
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > 19.09.2018, 08:15, "Nick Allen" <
> > >> nick@nickallen.org
> > >> > >:
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to open a discussion to get
> the
> > >> Batch
> > >> > >> > > Profiler
> > >> > >> > > > > > > feature
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > branch
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > merged into master as part of METRON-1699
> [1]
> > >> > Create
> > >> > >> > > Batch
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > Profiler.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > All
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > of the work that I had in mind for our
> first
> > >> draft
> > >> > >> of
> > >> > >> > the
> > >> > >> > > > > Batch
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > Profiler
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > has been completed. Please take a look
> > through
> > >> > what
> > >> > >> I
> > >> > >> > > have
> > >> > >> > > > > and
> > >> > >> > > > > > > let
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > me
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > know
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > if there are other features that you think
> > are
> > >> > >> required
> > >> > >> > > > > > *before*
> > >> > >> > > > > > > we
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > merge.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Previous list discussions on this topic
> > include
> > >> > [2]
> > >> > >> and
> > >> > >> > > > [3].
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > (Q) What can I do with the feature branch?
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >   * With the Batch Profiler, you can
> > >> backfill/seed
> > >> > >> > > profiles
> > >> > >> > > > > > using
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > archived
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > telemetry. This enables the following types
> > of
> > >> use
> > >> > >> > cases.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >       1. As a Security Data Scientist, I
> want
> > >> to
> > >> > >> > > understand
> > >> > >> > > > > the
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > historical
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > behaviors and trends of a profile that I
> have
> > >> > >> created
> > >> > >> > so
> > >> > >> > > > > that I
> > >> > >> > > > > > > can
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > determine if I have created a feature set
> > that
> > >> has
> > >> > >> > > > predictive
> > >> > >> > > > > > > value
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > for
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > model building.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >       2. As a Security Data Scientist, I
> want
> > >> to
> > >> > >> > > understand
> > >> > >> > > > > the
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > historical
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > behaviors and trends of a profile that I
> have
> > >> > >> created
> > >> > >> > so
> > >> > >> > > > > that I
> > >> > >> > > > > > > can
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > determine if I have defined the profile
> > >> correctly
> > >> > >> and
> > >> > >> > > > > created a
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > feature
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > set
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > that matches reality.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >       3. As a Security Platform Engineer, I
> > >> want
> > >> > to
> > >> > >> > > > generate
> > >> > >> > > > > a
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > profile
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > using archived telemetry when I deploy a
> new
> > >> model
> > >> > >> to
> > >> > >> > > > > > production
> > >> > >> > > > > > > so
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > that
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > models depending on that profile can
> function
> > >> on
> > >> > >> day 1.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >   * METRON-1699 [1] includes a more
> detailed
> > >> > >> > description
> > >> > >> > > of
> > >> > >> > > > > the
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > feature.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > (Q) What work was completed?
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >   * The Batch Profiler runs on Spark and
> was
> > >> > >> > implemented
> > >> > >> > > in
> > >> > >> > > > > > Java
> > >> > >> > > > > > > to
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > remain
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > consistent with our current Java-heavy code
> > >> base.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >   * The Batch Profiler is executed from the
> > >> > >> > command-line.
> > >> > >> > > > It
> > >> > >> > > > > > can
> > >> > >> > > > > > > be
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > launched using a script or by calling
> > >> > >> `spark-submit`,
> > >> > >> > > which
> > >> > >> > > > > may
> > >> > >> > > > > > > be
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > useful
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > for advanced users.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >   * Input telemetry can be consumed from
> > >> multiple
> > >> > >> > > sources;
> > >> > >> > > > > for
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > example
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > HDFS
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > or the local file system.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >   * Input telemetry can be consumed in
> > multiple
> > >> > >> > formats;
> > >> > >> > > > for
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > example
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > JSON
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > or ORC.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >   * The 'output' profile measurements are
> > >> > persisted
> > >> > >> in
> > >> > >> > > > HBase
> > >> > >> > > > > > and
> > >> > >> > > > > > > is
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > consistent with the Storm Profiler.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >   * It can be run on any underlying engine
> > >> > >> supported by
> > >> > >> > > > > Spark.
> > >> > >> > > > > > I
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > have
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > tested it both in 'local' mode and on a
> YARN
> > >> > >> cluster.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >   * It is installed automatically by the
> > Metron
> > >> > >> MPack.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >   * A README was added that documents usage
> > >> > >> > instructions.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >   * The existing Profiler code was
> refactored
> > >> so
> > >> > >> that
> > >> > >> > as
> > >> > >> > > > much
> > >> > >> > > > > > > code
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > as
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > possible is shared between the 3 Profiler
> > >> ports;
> > >> > >> Storm,
> > >> > >> > > the
> > >> > >> > > > > > > Stellar
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > REPL,
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > and Spark. For example, the logic which
> > >> determines
> > >> > >> the
> > >> > >> > > > > > timestamp
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > of a
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > message was refactored so that it could be
> > >> reused
> > >> > by
> > >> > >> > all
> > >> > >> > > > > ports.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >       * metron-profiler-common: The common
> > >> > Profiler
> > >> > >> > code
> > >> > >> > > > > shared
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > amongst
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > each port.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >       * metron-profiler-storm: Profiler on
> > >> Storm
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >       * metron-profiler-spark: Profiler on
> > >> Spark
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >       * metron-profiler-repl: Profiler on
> the
> > >> > >> Stellar
> > >> > >> > > REPL
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >       * metron-profiler-client: The client
> > code
> > >> > for
> > >> > >> > > > > retrieving
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > profile
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > data; for example PROFILE_GET.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >   * There are 3 separate RPM and DEB
> packages
> > >> now
> > >> > >> > created
> > >> > >> > > > for
> > >> > >> > > > > > the
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > Profiler.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >       * metron-profiler-storm-*.rpm
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >       * metron-profiler-spark-*.rpm
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >       * metron-profiler-repl-*.rpm
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >   * The Profiler integration tests were
> > >> enhanced
> > >> > to
> > >> > >> > > > leverage
> > >> > >> > > > > > the
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > Profiler
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Client logic to validate the results.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >   * Review METRON-1699 [1] for a complete
> > >> > >> break-down of
> > >> > >> > > the
> > >> > >> > > > > > tasks
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > that
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > have
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > been completed on the feature branch.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > (Q) What limitations exist?
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >   * You must manually install Spark to use
> > the
> > >> > Batch
> > >> > >> > > > > Profiler.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > The
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > Metron
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > MPack does not treat Spark as a Metron
> > >> dependency
> > >> > >> and
> > >> > >> > so
> > >> > >> > > > does
> > >> > >> > > > > > not
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > install
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > it automatically.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >   * You do not configure the Batch Profiler
> > in
> > >> > >> Ambari.
> > >> > >> > It
> > >> > >> > > > is
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > configured
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > and executed completely from the
> > command-line.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >   * To run the Batch Profiler in 'Full
> Dev',
> > >> you
> > >> > >> have
> > >> > >> > to
> > >> > >> > > > take
> > >> > >> > > > > > the
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > following
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > manual steps. Some of these are arguably
> > >> > limitations
> > >> > >> > with
> > >> > >> > > > how
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > Ambari
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > installs Spark 2 in the version of HDP that
> > we
> > >> > run.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >       1. Install Spark 2 using Ambari.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >       2. Tell Spark how to talk with HBase.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >>  SPARK_HOME=/usr/hdp/current/spark2-client
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >         cp
> > >> > >> > > > /usr/hdp/current/hbase-client/conf/hbase-site.xml
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > $SPARK_HOME/conf/
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >       3. Create the Spark History directory
> > in
> > >> > HDFS.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >         export HADOOP_USER_NAME=hdfs
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >         hdfs dfs -mkdir /spark2-history
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >       4. Change the default input path to
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > `hdfs://localhost:8020/...`
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > to
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > match the port defined by HDP, instead of
> > port
> > >> > 9000.
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > [1]
> > >> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-1699
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > [2]
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > >
> > >> > >> > > >
> > >> > >> > >
> > >> > >> >
> > >> > >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/da81c1227ffda3a47eb2e5bb4d0b162dd6d36006241c4ba4b659587b@%3Cdev.metron.apache.org%3E
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > [3]
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > >
> > >> > >> > > >
> > >> > >> > >
> > >> > >> >
> > >> > >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/d28d18cc9358f5d9c276c7c304ff4ee601041fb47bfc97acb6825083@%3Cdev.metron.apache.org%3E
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > -------------------
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > Thank you,
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > James Sirota
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > PMC- Apache Metron
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > jsirota AT apache DOT org
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > >> > > > >
> > >> > >> > > >
> > >> > >> > >
> > >> > >> >
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message