Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-core-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 97323 invoked from network); 11 Mar 2008 06:22:16 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 11 Mar 2008 06:22:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 71372 invoked by uid 500); 11 Mar 2008 06:22:12 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-core-dev-archive@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 71343 invoked by uid 500); 11 Mar 2008 06:22:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact core-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: core-dev@hadoop.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list core-dev@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 71333 invoked by uid 99); 11 Mar 2008 06:22:12 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 10 Mar 2008 23:22:12 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1998.8 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,FS_REPLICA X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.140] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (140.211.11.140) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 06:21:32 +0000 Received: from brutus (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brutus.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66F36234C092 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2008 23:20:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <477211009.1205216446420.JavaMail.jira@brutus> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 23:20:46 -0700 (PDT) From: "Hadoop QA (JIRA)" To: core-dev@hadoop.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (HADOOP-2559) DFS should place one replica per rack MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-2559?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12577317#action_12577317 ] Hadoop QA commented on HADOOP-2559: ----------------------------------- +1 overall. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12377544/HADOOP-2559-1.patch against trunk revision 619744. @author +1. The patch does not contain any @author tags. tests included +1. The patch appears to include 3 new or modified tests. javadoc +1. The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages. javac +1. The applied patch does not generate any new javac compiler warnings. release audit +1. The applied patch does not generate any new release audit warnings. findbugs +1. The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs warnings. core tests +1. The patch passed core unit tests. contrib tests +1. The patch passed contrib unit tests. Test results: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/1933/testReport/ Findbugs warnings: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/1933/artifact/trunk/build/test/findbugs/newPatchFindbugsWarnings.html Checkstyle results: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/1933/artifact/trunk/build/test/checkstyle-errors.html Console output: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/1933/console This message is automatically generated. > DFS should place one replica per rack > ------------------------------------- > > Key: HADOOP-2559 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-2559 > Project: Hadoop Core > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: dfs > Reporter: Runping Qi > Assignee: lohit vijayarenu > Attachments: HADOOP-2559-1.patch, HADOOP-2559-1.patch, HADOOP-2559-2.patch, Patch1_Block_Report.png.jpg, Patch1_Rack_Node_Mapping.jpg, Patch2 Block Report.jpg, Patch2_Rack_Node_Mapping.jpg, Trunk_Block_Report.png, Trunk_Rack_Node_Mapping.jpg > > > Currently, when writing out a block, dfs will place one copy to a local data node, one copy to a rack local node > and another one to a remote node. This leads to a number of undesired properties: > 1. The block will be rack-local to two tacks instead of three, reducing the advantage of rack locality based scheduling by 1/3. > 2. The Blocks of a file (especiallya large file) are unevenly distributed over the nodes: One third will be on the local node, and two thirds on the nodes on the same rack. This may make some nodes full much faster than others, > increasing the need of rebalancing. Furthermore, this also make some nodes become "hot spots" if those big > files are popular and accessed by many applications. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.