I am trying to find the most efficient way to process files in AWS.
Read a json, xml, csv from S3 bucket
Map it to another type of json, xml, csv
Save it to S3 bucket
Right now we are using Java with AWS lambdas but we write lots of code.
AWS Data Glue looks good but my experience with MS BizTalk is even better.
Is there any service that can help me with this?
There are many options available within AWS for reading from one file format and writing it to another file format in s3 bucket. Below are some options -
A) AWS SDK for Pandas (DataWrangler) which is an open source Python library from AWS ProServe. You can run this either from a Lambda, or any other server. It provides several out of the box connectors for reading, writing data from various sources and sinks. This option may be used if the volumes are low. It also provides the flexibility to use this from Amazon Lambda or any other server where the SDK can be installed.
B) AWS Glue either using Spark or Python which is a is a serverless data integration service. This also provides a drag and drop option using the Glue Studio to generate data pipelines using many out of the box transformations. One can control the processing windows by using the desired number of Data Processing Units (DPUs). It also has the Glue Workflow for orchestration.
C) EMR which is a PetaByte scale AWS Service that one can use for high volume distributed data processing, machine learning, interactive analytics using open source frameworks like Apache Spark.
Which option one would choose would depend on the use cases one is trying to solve and the requirements. Other factors like volume of data, processing window, low code\no code options, cost, etc. would help decide which option to leverage.
I have a set of parquet files on S3 (parquet files get refreshed every 1/2 hr). we have a working spark job which internally creates an SQL and runs it on the parquet files.
We have a parallel system where the data is also replicated on Elastic search.
The requirement is to expose a REST api to check if the ES queries generated result into the same result set as the spark SQLs. ES is easy, as ES gives a REST endpoint. the problem is with SPARK --Because every time i have to spin a new job write the output to a json file; have another micro-service which reads the spark output json and streams it over REST.
Instead i was thinking if
we can run a jetty server in spark driver. Run spark in client mode. Now spark runs 24X7
Jetty will expose the rest api from spark driver. The dataframes etc are all in spark context (meaning i will save spark startup time here). Essentially it takes request runs the sql against the available dataframes in the spark context.
The jetty server should support multiple concurrent requests.
we wil refresh the dataframes every 1/2 hr
is there a better solution over this. any pros and corns of the approach? please let me know. Any code samples will be of great help.
I am working on a project using PySpark and I am blocked because I want to share data between different Spark applications. The situation is that we have a running java server which can handles incoming requests with a thread pool, and each thread has a corresponding python process. We want to use pandas on Spark, but have it so that any of the python processes can access the same data in spark. For example, in a python process, we created a SparkSession, read some data, modified the data using pandas on Spark api and we want to get access to that data in a different python process. The core problem is how to share data between different SparkSession or how to let different python process connect to the same SparkSession. I researched a bit but it seems impossible to share data between different python process without using external DB or connect to the same SparkSession. Generally, is this possible / what would be the recommended way to do this with the least impact on performance?
I am new to both PySpark and AWS EMR. I have been given a small project where I need to scrub large amounts of data files every hour and build aggregated data sets based on them. These data files are stored on S3 and I can utilize some of the basic functions in Spark (like filter and map) to derive the aggregated data. To save on egress costs and after performing some CBA analysis, I decided to create an EMR cluster and make pypark calls. The concept is working fine using Lambda functions triggered by file created in the S3 bucket. I am writing the output files back to S3.
But I am not able to comprehend the need for the 3 node EMR cluster I created and its use for me. How can I use the Hadoop file system to my advantage here and all the storage that is made available on the nodes?
How do I view (if possible) the utilization of the slave/core nodes in the cluster? How do I know they are used, how often, etc etc? I am executing the pyspark code on the master node.
Are there alternatives to EMR that I can use with pyspark?
Is there any good documentation available to get a better understanding.
Thanks
Spark is a framework for distributed computing. It can process larger than memory datasets and split the workload in chunks onto multiple workers in parallel. By default EMR creates 1 master node and 2 worker nodes. The disk space on the spark nodes is typically not used directly. Spark can use the space to cache temp results.
To use a Hadoop filesystem, you need to start a hdfs service in aws .
However s3 is also distributed storage. It is supported by Hadoop libraries. Spark EMR ships with Hadoop drivers and support S3 out of the box. Using spark with S3 is perfectly valid storage solution and will be good enough for a lot of basic data processing tasks.
The is a spark manager UI in AWS EMR. You can see each running spark application session and current job. By clicking on the job you can see how many executors are used. Whether those executors run on all nodes depends on your spark memory and cpu configuration. Tuning those is a really big topic. There are good hints here on SO.
There is also a hardware monitoring tab, showing cpu and memory usage for each node.
The spark code is always executed on the master node. But it just creates a DAG plan on that node and shifts the actual work to the worker nodes according to the plan. Hence the guides speak of submitting the spark application rather than executing.
Yes. You can start your own spark cluster on normal ec2 instances. There is even a standalone mode , allowing to start spark on only one machine. It is quite some footprint, that is installed then. And you still need to tune the memory, cpu and executor settings. So it is quite a complexity compared to just implement some multiprocessing in python or use dask. However there are valid reasons to do so. It allows to use all cores on one machine. And it allows you to use a well known , good documented api. The same one, which can be used to process petabytes of data. The linked article above, explains the motivation.
Another possibility is to use AWS Glue. It is serverless spark. The
service will submit your jobs to some on demand spark nodes on AWS,
where you have no control over. Similar to how lambda functions run
on random AWS EC2 instances. However glue has some limitations. With
pyspark on glue, you cannot install python libs with c-extensions
e.g numpy, pandas, most of ml libs. Also Glue forces you to create
schema mapping of your data in Athena catalog. But standalone spark
can just process those on the fly.
Databricks also offers a separate serverless spark solution outside of AWS. It is more sophisticated in my opinion. It also allows custom c-extensions.
Big part of official documentation is focusing on the different data processing apis and not on the internals of apache spark. There are some good notes on spark internals on github. I assume every good book will cover some inner workings on spark. AWS EMR is just an automated spark cluster with yarn orchestrator. (Unfortunately, never read some good book on spark, got some info here and there, so cannot recommend one)
I'm trying to give useful information but I am far from being a data engineer.
I am currently using the python library pandas to execute a long series of transformation to my data which has a lot of inputs (currently CSV and excel files). The outputs are several excel files. I would like to be able to execute scheduled monitored batch jobs with parallel computation (I mean not as sequential as what I'm doing with pandas), once a month.
I don't really know Beam or Airflow, I quickly read through the docs and it seems that both can achieve that. Which one should I use ?
The other answers are quite technical and hard to understand. I was in your position before so I'll explain in simple terms.
Airflow can do anything. It has BashOperator and PythonOperator which means it can run any bash script or any Python script.
It is a way to organize (setup complicated data pipeline DAGs), schedule, monitor, trigger re-runs of data pipelines, in a easy-to-view and use UI.
Also, it is easy to setup and everything is in familiar Python code.
Doing pipelines in an organized manner (i.e using Airflow) means you don't waste time debugging a mess of data processing (cron) scripts all over the place.
Nowadays (roughly year 2020 onwards), we call it an orchestration tool.
Apache Beam is a wrapper for the many data processing frameworks (Spark, Flink etc.) out there.
The intent is so you just learn Beam and can run on multiple backends (Beam runners).
If you are familiar with Keras and TensorFlow/Theano/Torch, the relationship between Keras and its backends is similar to the relationship between Beam and its data processing backends.
Google Cloud Platform's Cloud Dataflow is one backend for running Beam on.
They call it the Dataflow runner.
GCP's offering, Cloud Composer, is a managed Airflow implementation as a service, running in a Kubernetes cluster in Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE).
So you can either:
manual Airflow implementation, doing data processing on the instance itself (if your data is small (or your instance is powerful enough), you can process data on the machine running Airflow. This is why many are confused if Airflow can process data or not)
manual Airflow implementation calling Beam jobs
Cloud Composer (managed Airflow as a service) calling jobs in Cloud Dataflow
Cloud Composer running data processing containers in Composer's Kubernetes cluster environment itself, using Airflow's KubernetesPodOperator (KPO)
Cloud Composer running data processing containers in Composer's Kubernetes cluster environment with Airflow's KPO, but this time in a better isolated fashion by creating a new node-pool and specifying that the KPO pods are to be run in the new node-pool
My personal experience:
Airflow is lightweight and not difficult to learn (easy to implement), you should use it for your data pipelines whenever possible.
Also, since many companies are looking for experience using Airflow, if you're looking to be a data engineer you should probably learn it
Also, managed Airflow (I've only used GCP's Composer so far) is much more convenient than running Airflow yourself, and managing the airflow webserver and scheduler processes.
Apache Airflow and Apache Beam look quite similar on the surface. Both of them allow you to organise a set of steps that process your data and both ensure the steps run in the right order and have their dependencies satisfied. Both allow you to visualise the steps and dependencies as a directed acyclic graph (DAG) in a GUI.
But when you dig a bit deeper there are big differences in what they do and the programming models they support.
Airflow is a task management system. The nodes of the DAG are tasks and Airflow makes sure to run them in the proper order, making sure one task only starts once its dependency tasks have finished. Dependent tasks don't run at the same time but only one after another. Independent tasks can run concurrently.
Beam is a dataflow engine. The nodes of the DAG form a (possibly branching) pipeline. All the nodes in the DAG are active at the same time, and they pass data elements from one to the next, each doing some processing on it.
The two have some overlapping use cases but there are a lot of things only one of the two can do well.
Airflow manages tasks, which depend on one another. While this dependency can consist of one task passing data to the next one, that is not a requirement. In fact Airflow doesn't even care what the tasks do, it just needs to start them and see if they finished or failed. If tasks need to pass data to one another you need to co-ordinate that yourself, telling each task where to read and write its data, e.g. a local file path or a web service somewhere. Tasks can consist of Python code but they can also be any external program or a web service call.
In Beam, your step definitions are tightly integrated with the engine. You define the steps in a supported programming language and they run inside a Beam process. Handling the computation in an external process would be difficult if possible at all*, and is certainly not the way Beam is supposed to be used. Your steps only need to worry about the computation they're performing, not about storing or transferring the data. Transferring the data between different steps is handled entirely by the framework.
In Airflow, if your tasks process data, a single task invocation typically does some transformation on the entire dataset. In Beam, the data processing is part of the core interfaces so it can't really do anything else. An invocation of a Beam step typically handles a single or a few data elements and not the full dataset. Because of this Beam also supports unbounded length datasets, which is not something Airflow can natively cope with.
Another difference is that Airflow is a framework by itself, but Beam is actually an abstraction layer. Beam pipelines can run on Apache Spark, Apache Flink, Google Cloud Dataflow and others. All of these support a more or less similar programming model. Google has also cloudified Airflow into a service as Google Cloud Compose by the way.
*Apache Spark's support for Python is actually implemented by running a full Python interpreter in a subprocess, but this is implemented at the framework level.
Apache Airflow is not a data processing engine.
Airflow is a platform to programmatically author, schedule, and
monitor workflows.
Cloud Dataflow is a fully-managed service on Google Cloud that can be used for data processing. You can write your Dataflow code and then use Airflow to schedule and monitor Dataflow job. Airflow also allows you to retry your job if it fails (number of retries is configurable). You can also configure in Airflow if you want to send alerts on Slack or email, if your Dataflow pipeline fails.
I am doing the same as you with airflow, and I've got very good results. I am not very sure about the following: Beam is machine learning focused and airflow is for anything you want.
Finally you can create a hive with kubernetes +airflow.