ZK介绍
ZK = zookeeper
ZK是微服务解决方案中拥有服务注册发现最为核心的环境,是微服务的基石。作为服务注册发现模块,并不是只有ZK一种产品,目前得到行业认可的还有:Eureka、Consul。
这里我们只聊ZK,这个工具本身很小zip包就几兆,安装非常傻瓜,能够支持集群部署。
官网地址:https://zookeeper.apache.org/
背景
在集群环境下ZK的leader&follower的概念,已经节点异常ZK面临的问题以及如何解决。ZK本身是java语言开发,也开源到Github上但官方文档对内部介绍的很少,零散的博客很多,有些写的很不错。
提问:
- zookeeper选举算法中的过半票数才提供正常服务,这是什么逻辑?
ZK集群单节点状态(每个节点有且只有一个状态),ZK的定位一定需要一个leader节点处于lading状态。
- looking:寻找leader状态,当前集群没有leader,进入leader选举流程。
- following:跟随者状态,接受leading节点同步和指挥。
- leading:领导者状态。
- observing:观察者状态,表名当前服务器是observer。
ZK投票处理策略
投票信息包含 :所选举leader的Serverid,Zxid,SelectionEpoch
- Epoch判断,自身logicEpoch与SelectionEpoch判断:大于、小于、等于。
- 优先检查ZXID。ZXID比较大的服务器优先作为Leader。
- 如果ZXID相同,那么就比较myid。myid较大的服务器作为Leader服务器。
过半选举算法
ZK中有三种选举算法,分别是LeaderElection,FastLeaderElection,AuthLeaderElection,FastLeaderElection和AuthLeaderElection是类似的选举算法,唯一区别是后者加入了认证信息, FastLeaderElection比LeaderElection更高效,后续的版本只保留FastLeaderElection。
理解:
在集群环境下多个节点启动,ZK首先需要在多个节点中选出一个节点作为leader并处于Leading状态,这样就面临一个选举问题,同时选举规则是什么样的。“过半选举算法”:投票选举中获得票数过半的节点胜出,即状态从looking变为leading,效率更高。
官网资料描述:Clustered (Multi-Server) Setup,如下图:
As long as a majority of the ensemble are up, the service will be available. Because Zookeeper requires a majority, it is best to use an odd number of machines. For example, with four machines ZooKeeper can only handle the failure of a single machine; if two machines fail, the remaining two machines do not constitute a majority. However, with five machines ZooKeeper can handle the failure of two machines.
以5台服务器讲解思路:
- 服务器1启动,此时只有它一台服务器启动了,它发出去的Vote没有任何响应,所以它的选举状态一直是LOOKING状态;
- 服务器2启动,它与最开始启动的服务器1进行通信,互相交换自己的选举结果,由于两者都没有历史数据,所以id值较大的服务器2胜出,但是由于没有达到超过半数以上的服务器都同意选举它(这个例子中的半数以上是3),所以服务器1,2还是继续保持LOOKING状态.
- 服务器3启动,根据前面的理论,分析有三台服务器选举了它,服务器3成为服务器1,2,3中的老大,所以它成为了这次选举的leader.
- 服务器4启动,根据前面的分析,理论上服务器4应该是服务器1,2,3,4中最大的,但是由于前面已经有半数以上的服务器选举了服务器3,所以它只能接收当小弟的命了.
- 服务器5启动,同4一样,当小弟.
假设5台中挂了2台(3、4),其中leader也挂掉:
leader和follower间有检查心跳,需要同步数据 Leader节点挂了,整个Zookeeper集群将暂停对外服务,进入新一轮Leader选举
1)服务器1、2、5发现与leader失联,状态转为looking,开始新的投票 2)服务器1、2、5分别开始投票并广播投票信息,自身Epoch自增; 3) 服务器1、2、5分别处理投票,判断出leader分别广播 4)根据投票处理逻辑会选出一台(2票过半) 5)各自服务器重新变更为leader、follower状态 6)重新提供服务
源码解析:
URL: FastLeaderElection
/**
* Starts a new round of leader election. Whenever our QuorumPeer
* changes its state to LOOKING, this method is invoked, and it
* sends notifications to all other peers.
*/
public Vote lookForLeader() throws InterruptedException {
try {
self.jmxLeaderElectionBean = new LeaderElectionBean();
MBeanRegistry.getInstance().register(self.jmxLeaderElectionBean, self.jmxLocalPeerBean);
} catch (Exception e) {
LOG.warn("Failed to register with JMX", e);
self.jmxLeaderElectionBean = null;
}
self.start_fle = Time.currentElapsedTime();
try {
Map recvset = new HashMap();
Map outofelection = new HashMap();
int notTimeout = minNotificationInterval;
synchronized (this) {
logicalclock.incrementAndGet();
updateProposal(getInitId(), getInitLastLoggedZxid(), getPeerEpoch());
}
LOG.info("New election. My id = " + self.getId() + ", proposed zxid=0x" + Long.toHexString(proposedZxid));
sendNotifications();
SyncedLearnerTracker voteSet;
/*
* Loop in which we exchange notifications until we find a leader
*/
while ((self.getPeerState() == ServerState.LOOKING) && (!stop)) {
/*
* Remove next notification from queue, times out after 2 times
* the termination time
*/
Notification n = recvqueue.poll(notTimeout, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS);
/*
* Sends more notifications if haven't received enough.
* Otherwise processes new notification.
*/
if (n == null) {
if (manager.haveDelivered()) {
sendNotifications();
} else {
manager.connectAll();
}
/*
* Exponential backoff
*/
int tmpTimeOut = notTimeout * 2;
notTimeout = (tmpTimeOut < maxNotificationInterval ? tmpTimeOut : maxNotificationInterval);
LOG.info("Notification time out: " + notTimeout);
} else if (validVoter(n.sid) && validVoter(n.leader)) {
/*
* Only proceed if the vote comes from a replica in the current or next
* voting view for a replica in the current or next voting view.
*/
switch (n.state) {
case LOOKING:
if (getInitLastLoggedZxid() == -1) {
LOG.debug("Ignoring notification as our zxid is -1");
break;
}
if (n.zxid == -1) {
LOG.debug("Ignoring notification from member with -1 zxid {}", n.sid);
break;
}
// If notification > current, replace and send messages out
if (n.electionEpoch > logicalclock.get()) {
logicalclock.set(n.electionEpoch);
recvset.clear();
if (totalOrderPredicate(n.leader, n.zxid, n.peerEpoch, getInitId(), getInitLastLoggedZxid(), getPeerEpoch())) {
updateProposal(n.leader, n.zxid, n.peerEpoch);
} else {
updateProposal(getInitId(), getInitLastLoggedZxid(), getPeerEpoch());
}
sendNotifications();
} else if (n.electionEpoch < logicalclock.get()) {
if (LOG.isDebugEnabled()) {
LOG.debug(
"Notification election epoch is smaller than logicalclock. n.electionEpoch = 0x" + Long.toHexString(n.electionEpoch)
+ ", logicalclock=0x" + Long.toHexString(logicalclock.get()));
}
break;
} else if (totalOrderPredicate(n.leader, n.zxid, n.peerEpoch, proposedLeader, proposedZxid, proposedEpoch)) {
updateProposal(n.leader, n.zxid, n.peerEpoch);
sendNotifications();
}
if (LOG.isDebugEnabled()) {
LOG.debug("Adding vote: from=" + n.sid
+ ", proposed leader=" + n.leader
+ ", proposed zxid=0x" + Long.toHexString(n.zxid)
+ ", proposed election epoch=0x" + Long.toHexString(n.electionEpoch));
}
// don't care about the version if it's in LOOKING state
recvset.put(n.sid, new Vote(n.leader, n.zxid, n.electionEpoch, n.peerEpoch));
voteSet = getVoteTracker(recvset, new Vote(proposedLeader, proposedZxid, logicalclock.get(), proposedEpoch));
if (voteSet.hasAllQuorums()) {
// Verify if there is any change in the proposed leader
while ((n = recvqueue.poll(finalizeWait, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS)) != null) {
if (totalOrderPredicate(n.leader, n.zxid, n.peerEpoch, proposedLeader, proposedZxid, proposedEpoch)) {
recvqueue.put(n);
break;
}
}
/*
* This predicate is true once we don't read any new
* relevant message from the reception queue
*/
if (n == null) {
setPeerState(proposedLeader, voteSet);
Vote endVote = new Vote(proposedLeader, proposedZxid, logicalclock.get(), proposedEpoch);
leaveInstance(endVote);
return endVote;
}
}
break;
case OBSERVING:
LOG.debug("Notification from observer: {}", n.sid);
break;
case FOLLOWING:
case LEADING:
/*
* Consider all notifications from the same epoch
* together.
*/
if (n.electionEpoch == logicalclock.get()) {
recvset.put(n.sid, new Vote(n.leader, n.zxid, n.electionEpoch, n.peerEpoch));
voteSet = getVoteTracker(recvset, new Vote(n.version, n.leader, n.zxid, n.electionEpoch, n.peerEpoch, n.state));
if (voteSet.hasAllQuorums() && checkLeader(outofelection, n.leader, n.electionEpoch)) {
setPeerState(n.leader, voteSet);
Vote endVote = new Vote(n.leader, n.zxid, n.electionEpoch, n.peerEpoch);
leaveInstance(endVote);
return endVote;
}
}
/*
* Before joining an established ensemble, verify that
* a majority are following the same leader.
*/
outofelection.put(n.sid, new Vote(n.version, n.leader, n.zxid, n.electionEpoch, n.peerEpoch, n.state));
voteSet = getVoteTracker(outofelection, new Vote(n.version, n.leader, n.zxid, n.electionEpoch, n.peerEpoch, n.state));
if (voteSet.hasAllQuorums() && checkLeader(outofelection, n.leader, n.electionEpoch)) {
synchronized (this) {
logicalclock.set(n.electionEpoch);
setPeerState(n.leader, voteSet);
}
Vote endVote = new Vote(n.leader, n.zxid, n.electionEpoch, n.peerEpoch);
leaveInstance(endVote);
return endVote;
}
break;
default:
LOG.warn("Notification state unrecoginized: " + n.state + " (n.state), " + n.sid + " (n.sid)");
break;
}
} else {
if (!validVoter(n.leader)) {
LOG.warn("Ignoring notification for non-cluster member sid {} from sid {}", n.leader, n.sid);
}
if (!validVoter(n.sid)) {
LOG.warn("Ignoring notification for sid {} from non-quorum member sid {}", n.leader, n.sid);
}
}
}
return null;
} finally {
try {
if (self.jmxLeaderElectionBean != null) {
MBeanRegistry.getInstance().unregister(self.jmxLeaderElectionBean);
}
} catch (Exception e) {
LOG.warn("Failed to unregister with JMX", e);
}
self.jmxLeaderElectionBean = null;
LOG.debug("Number of connection processing threads: {}", manager.getConnectionThreadCount());
}
}
/*
* We return true if one of the following three cases hold:
* 1- New epoch is higher
* 2- New epoch is the same as current epoch, but new zxid is higher
* 3- New epoch is the same as current epoch, new zxid is the same
* as current zxid, but server id is higher.
*/
return ((newEpoch > curEpoch)
|| ((newEpoch == curEpoch)
&& ((newZxid > curZxid)
|| ((newZxid == curZxid)
&& (newId > curId)))));
脑裂问题
脑裂问题出现在集群中leader死掉,follower选出了新leader而原leader又复活了的情况下,因为ZK的过半机制是允许损失一定数量的机器而扔能正常提供给服务,当leader死亡判断不一致时就会出现多个leader。
方案:
ZK的过半机制一定程度上也减少了脑裂情况的出现,起码不会出现三个leader同时。ZK中的Epoch机制(时钟)每次选举都是递增+1,当通信时需要判断epoch是否一致,小于自己的则抛弃,大于自己则重置自己,等于则选举;
// If notification > current, replace and send messages out
if (n.electionEpoch > logicalclock.get()) {
logicalclock.set(n.electionEpoch);
recvset.clear();
if (totalOrderPredicate(n.leader, n.zxid, n.peerEpoch, getInitId(), getInitLastLoggedZxid(), getPeerEpoch())) {
updateProposal(n.leader, n.zxid, n.peerEpoch);
} else {
updateProposal(getInitId(), getInitLastLoggedZxid(), getPeerEpoch());
}
sendNotifications();
} else if (n.electionEpoch < logicalclock.get()) {
if (LOG.isDebugEnabled()) {
LOG.debug(
"Notification election epoch is smaller than logicalclock. n.electionEpoch = 0x" + Long.toHexString(n.electionEpoch)
+ ", logicalclock=0x" + Long.toHexString(logicalclock.get()));
}
break;
} else if (totalOrderPredicate(n.leader, n.zxid, n.peerEpoch, proposedLeader, proposedZxid, proposedEpoch)) {
updateProposal(n.leader, n.zxid, n.peerEpoch);
sendNotifications();
}
归纳
在日常的ZK运维时需要注意以上场景在极端情况下出现问题,特别是脑裂的出现,可以采用:
过半选举策略下部署原则:
- 服务器群部署要单数,如:3、5、7、...,单数是最容易选出leader的配置量。
- ZK允许节点最大损失数,原则就是“保证过半选举正常”,多了就是浪费。
详细的算法逻辑是很复杂要考虑很多情况,其中有个Epoch的概念(自增长),分为:LogicEpoch和ElectionEpoch,每次投票都有判断每个投票周期是否一致等等。
在思考ZK策略时经常遇到这样的问题(上文中两块),梳理了一下思路以便于理解也作为后续回顾,特别感谢下面几篇博文的支持,感谢分享;
作者:Owen Jia
可以关注他的博客:Owen Blog