This question already has an answer here:
Difference between spark standalone and local mode?
(1 answer)
Closed 4 years ago.
Can someone mention the difference regarding these factors
Number of nodes / Machines
Memory
Cores
Setup
Deployment
Advantages of each mode
When they should be used
Examples if possible
Also if I am running spark locally on single Laptop then is that Local mode or Standalone?
There is a huge difference between standalone and local.
Local - means that it runs on your pc locally i.e. not distributed.
Standalone - means that spark will handle resource management.
Standalone, for this I will give you some background so you can better understand what it means.
Spark is a distributed application which consume resources i.e. memory cpu and more...
lets assume that you run 2 spark applications at the same time, this can cause an error when allocating resources. for example it may happen that the first job consumes all the memory and the second job would fail because he doesn't have memory.
To resolve this issue you need to use some resource manager that will guarantee that your job can run without any problem with resources.
Standalone, means that spark will handle the management of the resources on the cluster. there are also other resource management tools like Yarn or Mesos.
Overall you have 3 options for managing resources on the cluster:
Mesos, Yarn , Standalone.
I would also mention that on a real Hadoop cluster, spark is not the only application that is running on your cluster, which means it is not the only consumer of resources. you can also run HBase,TEZ, IMPALA. Yarn would help you to allocate resources to all of those applications.
Related
what is the difference in using 1 vs 2 driver core in spark yarn cluster mode? If i use 2 driver cores in yarn cluster mode, then spark driver will be relaunched incase of failure? If so, how many retry if would do before failing?
Appreciate if anyone can share any article on this?
When you launch application in YARN cluster mode, it will create container for your driver.
This container - depending on your application - might need multiple cores and multiple gigs of memory. It all depends on how many sessions will connect to your Spark application at the same time and on complexity of your query.
If it looks like your query compiles slowly or your Spark Web UI/app hangs, it might be worth it to increase core count.
From the point of YARN, there is still only one driver container.
What features of YARN make it better than Spark Standalone mode for multi-tenant cluster running only Spark applications? Maybe besides authentication.
There are a lot of answers at Google, pretty much of them sounds wrong to me, so I'm not sure where is the truth.
For example:
DZone, Deep Dive Into Spark Cluster Management
Standalone is good for small Spark clusters, but it is not good for
bigger clusters (there is an overhead of running Spark daemons —
master + slave — in cluster nodes)
But other cluster managers also require running agents on cluster nodes. I.e. YARN's slaves are called node managers. They may consume even more memory than Spark's slaves (Spark default is 1 GB).
This answer
The Spark standalone mode requires each application to run an executor
on every node in the cluster; whereas with YARN, you choose the number
of executors to use
agains Spark Standalone # executor/cores control, that shows how you can specify number of consumed resources at Standalone mode.
Spark Standalone Mode documentation
The standalone cluster mode currently only supports a simple FIFO
scheduler across applications.
Against the fact Standalone mode can use Dynamic Allocation, and you can specify spark.dynamicAllocation.minExecutors & spark.dynamicAllocation.maxExecutors. Also I haven't found a note about Standalone doesn't support FairScheduler.
This answer
YARN directly handles rack and machine locality
How does YARN may know anything about data locality in my job? Suppose, I'm storing file locations at AWS Glue (used by EMR as Hive metastore). Inside Spark job I'm querying some-db.some-table. How YARN may know what executor is better for job assignment?
UPD: found another mention about YARN and data locality https://jaceklaskowski.gitbooks.io/mastering-apache-spark/spark-data-locality.html. Still doesn't matter in case of S3 for example.
The spark docs have the following paragraph that describes the difference between yarn client and yarn cluster:
There are two deploy modes that can be used to launch Spark applications on YARN. In cluster mode, the Spark driver runs inside an application master process which is managed by YARN on the cluster, and the client can go away after initiating the application. In client mode, the driver runs in the client process, and the application master is only used for requesting resources from YARN.
I'm assuming there are two choices for a reason. If so, how do you choose which one to use?
Please use facts to justify your response so that this question and answer(s) meet stackoverflow's requirements.
There are a few similar questions on stackoverflow, however those questions focus on the difference between the two approaches, but don't focus on when one approach is more suitable than the other.
A common deployment strategy is to submit your application from a gateway machine that is physically co-located with your worker machines (e.g. Master node in a standalone EC2 cluster). In this setup, client mode is appropriate. In client mode, the driver is launched directly within the spark-submit process which acts as a client to the cluster. The input and output of the application is attached to the console. Thus, this mode is especially suitable for applications that involve the REPL (e.g. Spark shell).
Alternatively, if your application is submitted from a machine far from the worker machines (e.g. locally on your laptop), it is common to use cluster mode to minimize network latency between the drivers and the executors. Note that cluster mode is currently not supported for Mesos clusters. Currently only YARN supports cluster mode for Python applications." -- Submitting Applications
What I understand from this is that both strategies use the cluster to distribute tasks; the difference is where the "driver program" runs: locally with spark-submit, or, also in the cluster.
When you should use either of them is detailed in the quote above, but I also did another thing: for big jars, I used rsync to copy them to the cluster (or even to master node) with 100 times the network speed, and then submitted from the cluster. This can be better than "cluster mode" for big jars. Note that client mode does not probably transfer the jar to the master. At that point the difference between the 2 is minimal. Probably client mode is better when the driver program is idle most of the time, to make full use of cores on the local machine and perhaps avoid transferring the jar to the master (even on loopback interface a big jar takes quite a bit of seconds). And with client mode you can transfer (rsync) the jar on any cluster node.
On the other hand, if the driver is very intensive, in cpu or I/O, cluster mode may be more appropriate, to better balance the cluster (in client mode, the local machine would run both the driver and as many workers as possible, making it over loaded and making it that local tasks will be slower, making it such that the whole job may end up waiting for a couple of tasks from the local machine).
Conclusion :
To sum up, if I am in the same local network with the cluster, I would
use the client mode and submit it from my laptop. If the cluster is
far away, I would either submit locally with cluster mode, or rsync
the jar to the remote cluster and submit it there, in client or
cluster mode, depending on how heavy the driver program is on
resources.*
AFAIK With the driver program running in the cluster, it is less vulnerable to remote disconnects crashing the driver and the entire spark job.This is especially useful for long running jobs such as stream processing type workloads.
Spark Jobs Running on YARN
When running Spark on YARN, each Spark executor runs as a YARN container. Where MapReduce schedules a container and fires up a JVM for each task, Spark hosts multiple tasks within the same container. This approach enables several orders of magnitude faster task startup time.
Spark supports two modes for running on YARN, “yarn-cluster” mode and “yarn-client” mode. Broadly, yarn-cluster mode makes sense for production jobs, while yarn-client mode makes sense for interactive and debugging uses where you want to see your application’s output immediately.
Understanding the difference requires an understanding of YARN’s Application Master concept. In YARN, each application instance has an Application Master process, which is the first container started for that application. The application is responsible for requesting resources from the ResourceManager, and, when allocated them, telling NodeManagers to start containers on its behalf. Application Masters obviate the need for an active client — the process starting the application can go away and coordination continues from a process managed by YARN running on the cluster.
In yarn-cluster mode, the driver runs in the Application Master. This means that the same process is responsible for both driving the application and requesting resources from YARN, and this process runs inside a YARN container. The client that starts the app doesn’t need to stick around for its entire lifetime.
yarn-cluster mode
The yarn-cluster mode is not well suited to using Spark interactively, but the yarn-client mode is. Spark applications that require user input, like spark-shell and PySpark, need the Spark driver to run inside the client process that initiates the Spark application. In yarn-client mode, the Application Master is merely present to request executor containers from YARN. The client communicates with those containers to schedule work after they start:
yarn-client mode
This table offers a concise list of differences between these modes:
Reference: https://blog.cloudera.com/blog/2014/05/apache-spark-resource-management-and-yarn-app-models/ - Apache Spark Resource Management and YARN App Models (web.archive.com mirror)
In yarn-cluster mode, the driver program will run on the node where application master is running where as in yarn-client mode the driver program will run on the node on which job is submitted on centralized gateway node.
Both answers by Ram and Chavati/Wai Lee are useful and helpful, but here I just want to added a couple of other points:
Much has been written about the proximity of driver to the executors, and that is a big factor. The other factors are:
Will the driver process be around until execution of job is finished?
How's returned data being handled?
#1. In spark client mode, the driver process must be up and running the whole time when the spark job is in execution. So if you have a truly long job that say take many hours to run, you need to make sure the driver process is still up and running, and that the driver session is not auto-logout.
On the other hand, after submitting a job to run in cluster mode, the process can go away. The cluster mode will keep running. So this is typically how a production job will run: the job can be triggered by a timer, or by an external event and then the job will run to its completion without worrying about the lifetime of the process submitting the spark job.
#2. In client mode, you can call sc.collect() to gather all the data back from all executors, and then write/save the returned data to a local Linux file on local disk. Now this may not work for cluster mode, as the 'driver' typically run in a different remote host. The data written up therefore need to be persisted in a common mounted volume (such as GPFS, NFS) or in distributed file system like HDFS. If the job is running under Hadoop/YARN, the more common way for cluster mode is simply ask each executor to persist the data to HDFS, and not to run collect( ) at all. Collect() actually have scalability issue when there are a large number of executors returning large amount of data - it can overwhelm the driver process.
I'm running a Spark Streaming process on a 16 CPU's 64 GB RAM host with Mesos.
When I'm running it using Mesos as a cluster manager (by setting --master mesos://leader.mesos:5050) it's running much slower than when it is run in local mode (--master local[4]).
I can't find the reason for that and I have no clue. One of the things I've noticed is that there is one specific task that is taking significantly more time on Mesos than in Local.
The weird thing (maybe that should be the questions' title) is that the task itself takes 6s and its stage (it has only one stage) takes less than a second. See attached pictures (Mesos (1) and (2)). How come? Isn't a job equal to the sum of its parts?
Local:
Mesos:
(1)
(2)
Another note: I did manage to run this exact same Spark Streaming process on another Mesos cluster, and it runs in a sensible amount of time, pretty much like in the local mode described above. The only difference that I can think of is that this cluster has more than one host, and that Spark is running with 2 executors rather than 1. (I couldn't find a way to run more than 1 executor on the same host on Mesos). Is this may be the reason?
Any clues would be much appreciated.
Spark can run over Mesos in two modes: coarse-grained (default) and fine-grained (see documentation).
In coarse-grained mode Spark launches exactly one executor on each machine it was assigned to by Mesos. Inside this task Spark launches other mini-tasks. It has the benefit of lower startup overhead (in your case you don't want to change this mode).
Could you be more specific about your streaming job? Is it CPU, disk, or network bounded? You can easily compare performance if you run some of Spark examples.
If your task is CPU intensive you might consider setting spark.mesos.extra.cores. By default Spark tries to acquire all cores that are being offered by Mesos. So, if there's no other task running on that cluster it shouldn't be a problem.
I am new to Apache Spark, and I just learned that Spark supports three types of cluster:
Standalone - meaning Spark will manage its own cluster
YARN - using Hadoop's YARN resource manager
Mesos - Apache's dedicated resource manager project
I think I should try Standalone first. In the future, I need to build a large cluster (hundreds of instances).
Which cluster type should I choose?
Spark Standalone Manager : A simple cluster manager included with Spark that makes it easy to set up a cluster. By default, each application uses all the available nodes in the cluster.
A few benefits of YARN over Standalone & Mesos:
YARN allows you to dynamically share and centrally configure the same pool of cluster resources between all frameworks that run on YARN.
You can take advantage of all the features of YARN schedulers for categorizing, isolating, and prioritizing workloads.
The Spark standalone mode requires each application to run an executor on every node in the cluster; whereas with YARN, you choose the number of executors to use
YARN directly handles rack and machine locality in your requests, which is convenient.
The resource request model is, oddly, backwards in Mesos. In YARN, you (the framework) request containers with a given specification and give locality preferences. In Mesos you get resource "offers" and choose to accept or reject those based on your own scheduling policy. The Mesos model is a arguably more flexible, but seemingly more work for the person implementing the framework.
If you have a big Hadoop cluster already in place, YARN is better choice.
The Standalone manager requires the user configure each of the nodes with the shared secret. Mesos’ default authentication module, Cyrus SASL, can be replaced with a custom module. YARN has security for authentication, service level authorization, authentication for Web consoles and data confidentiality. Hadoop authentication uses Kerberos to verify that each user and service is authenticated by Kerberos.
High availability is offered by all three cluster managers but Hadoop YARN doesn’t need to run a separate ZooKeeper Failover Controller.
Useful links:
spark documentation page
agildata article
I think the best to answer that are those who work on Spark. So, from Learning Spark
Start with a standalone cluster if this is a new deployment.
Standalone mode is the easiest to set up and will provide almost all
the same features as the other cluster managers if you are only
running Spark.
If you would like to run Spark alongside other applications, or to use
richer resource scheduling capabilities (e.g. queues), both YARN and
Mesos provide these features. Of these, YARN will likely be
preinstalled in many Hadoop distributions.
One advantage of Mesos over both YARN and standalone mode is its
fine-grained sharing option, which lets interactive applications such
as the Spark shell scale down their CPU allocation between commands.
This makes it attractive in environments where multiple users are
running interactive shells.
In all cases, it is best to run Spark on the same nodes as HDFS for
fast access to storage. You can install Mesos or the standalone
cluster manager on the same nodes manually, or most Hadoop
distributions already install YARN and HDFS together.
Standalone is pretty clear as other mentioned it should be used only when you have spark only workload.
Between yarn and mesos, One thing to consider is the fact that unlike mapreduce, spark job grabs executors and hold it for entire lifetime of a job. where in mapreduce a job can get and release mappers and reducers over lifetime.
if you have long running spark jobs which during the lifetime of a job doesn't fully utilize all the resources it got in beginning, you may want to share those resources to other app and that you can only do either via Mesos or Spark dynamic scheduling. https://spark.apache.org/docs/2.0.2/job-scheduling.html#scheduling-across-applications
So with yarn, only way have dynamic allocation for spark is by using spark provided dynamic allocation. Yarn won't interfere in that while Mesos will. Again this whole point is only important if you have a long running spark application and you would like to scale it up and down dynamically.
In this case and similar dilemmas in data engineering, there are many side questions to be answered before choosing one distribution method over another.
For example, if you are not running your processing engine on more than 3 nodes, you usually are not facing too big of a problem to handle so your margin of performance tuning between YARN and SparkStandalone (based on experience) will not clarify your decision. Because usually you will try to make your pipeline simple, specially when your services are not self-managed by cloud and bugs and failures happen often.
I choose standalone for relatively small or not-complex pipelines but if I'm feeling alright and have a Hadoop cluster already in place, I prefer to take advantage of all the extra configs that Hadoop(Yarn) can give me.
Mesos has more sophisticated scheduling design, allowing applications like Spark to negotiate with it. It's more suitable for the diversity of applications today. I found this site really insightful:
https://www.oreilly.com/ideas/a-tale-of-two-clusters-mesos-and-yarn
"... YARN is optimized for scheduling Hadoop jobs, which are historically (and still typically) batch jobs with long run times. This means that YARN was not designed for long-running services, nor for short-lived interactive queries (like small and fast Spark jobs), and while it’s possible to have it schedule other kinds of workloads, this is not an ideal model. The resource demands, execution model, and architectural demands of MapReduce are very different from those of long-running services, such as web servers or SOA applications, or real-time workloads like those of Spark or Storm..."