hadoop-common-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Pete Wyckoff (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (HADOOP-4298) File corruption when reading with fuse-dfs
Date Tue, 30 Sep 2008 06:11:44 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-4298?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12635679#action_12635679

Pete Wyckoff commented on HADOOP-4298:

bq. I hand-altered the fuse-dfs makefile to use 64-bit instead of the hardcoded -m32.

you mean src/c++/llibhdfs/Makefile, right?

> File corruption when reading with fuse-dfs
> ------------------------------------------
>                 Key: HADOOP-4298
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-4298
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: contrib/fuse-dfs
>    Affects Versions: 0.18.1
>         Environment: CentOs 4.6 final; kernel 2.6.9-67.ELsmp; FUSE 2.7.4; hadoop 0.18.1;
> I hand-altered the fuse-dfs makefile to use 64-bit instead of the hardcoded -m32.
>            Reporter: Brian Bockelman
>            Priority: Critical
>             Fix For: 0.18.2
> I pulled a 5GB data file into Hadoop using the following command:
> hadoop fs -put /scratch/886B9B3D-6A85-DD11-A9AB-000423D6CA6E.root /user/brian/testfile
> I have HDFS mounted in /mnt/hadoop using fuse-dfs.
> However, when I try to md5sum the file in place (md5sum /mnt/hadoop) or copy the file
back to local disk using "cp" then md5sum it, the checksum is incorrect.
> When I pull the file using normal hadoop means (hadoop fs -get /user/brian/testfile /scratch),
the md5sum is correct.
> When I repeat the test with a smaller file (512MB, on the theory that there is a problem
with some 2GB limit somewhere), the problem remains.
> When I repeat the test, the md5sum is consistently wrong - i.e., some part of the corruption
is deterministic, and not the apparent fault of a bad disk.
> CentOs 4.6 is, unfortunately, not the apparent culprit.  When checking on CentOs 5.x,
I could recreate the corruption issue.  The second node was also a 64-bit compile and CentOs
5.2 (`uname -r` returns 2.6.18-92.1.10.el5).
> Thanks for looking into this,
> Brian

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

View raw message