Mailing-List: contact common-user-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: common-user@hadoop.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of Patai.Sangbutsarakum@turn.com
 designates 69.12.158.147 as permitted sender)
From: Patai Sangbutsarakum <Patai.Sangbutsarakum@turn.com>
To: "common-user@hadoop.apache.org" <common-user@hadoop.apache.org>
Subject: Re: rack awareness and safemode
Thread-Topic: rack awareness and safemode
Thread-Index: AQHNBtbn2Irr4j8tf0awSYCnGekA+ZZ0F2cA//+eaYA=
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 20:38:12 +0000
Message-ID: <CB8E37C1.2D1F4%patai@turn.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAKb7Ddith9H-YCUXWpo9EJAteV=+v75uoAB7o8M=KberCFmqkA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2429AEC774C1374B88404A8AD1425337@turn.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0

Thanks for your reply and script. Hopefully it still apply to 0.20.203
As far as I play with test cluster. The balancer would take care of
replica placement.
I just don't want to fall into the situation that the hdfs sit in the
safemode
for hours and users can't use hadoop and start yelping.

Let's hear from others.


Thanks=20
Patai


On 3/20/12 1:27 PM, "John Meagher" <john.meagher@gmail.com> wrote:

>ere's the script I used (all sorts of caveats about it assuming a
>replication factor of 3 and no real error handling, etc)...
>
>for f in `hadoop fsck / | grep "Replica placement policy is violated"
>| head -n80000 | awk -F: '{print $1}'`; do
>    hadoop fs -setrep -w 4 $f
>    hadoop fs -setrep 3 $f
>done
>
>