Mailing-List: contact hdfs-issues-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: hdfs-issues@hadoop.apache.org
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 08:44:53 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Junping Du (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: hdfs-issues@hadoop.apache.org
Message-ID: <JIRA.12669352.1379543716917.160910.1379580293097@arcas>
In-Reply-To: <JIRA.12669352.1379543716917@arcas>
References: <JIRA.12669352.1379543716917@arcas>
Subject: [jira] [Commented] (HDFS-5225) datanode keeps logging the same 'is
 no longer in the dataset' message over and over again
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-5225?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13771699#comment-13771699 ] 

Junping Du commented on HDFS-5225:
----------------------------------

Hi Tsuyoshi, I think this fix may also work as this is the only unsynchronized block that accessing blockInfoSet. However, why don't you merge the synchronized block with above code block which is synchronized also. It would be nice if you can have a unit test to reproduce the bug and verify the patch can fix it.
                
> datanode keeps logging the same 'is no longer in the dataset' message over and over again
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDFS-5225
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-5225
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: datanode
>    Affects Versions: 2.1.1-beta
>            Reporter: Roman Shaposhnik
>         Attachments: HDFS-5225.1.patch
>
>
> I was running the usual Bigtop testing on 2.1.1-beta RC1 with the following configuration: 4 nodes fully distributed cluster with security on.
> All of a sudden my DN ate up all of the space in /var/log logging the following message repeatedly:
> {noformat}
> 2013-09-18 20:51:12,046 INFO org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.datanode.BlockPoolSliceScanner: BP-1884637155-10.224.158.152-1379524544853:blk_1073742189_1369 is no longer in the dataset
> {noformat}
> It wouldn't answer to a jstack and jstack -F ended up being useless.
> Here's what I was able to find in the NameNode logs regarding this block ID:
> {noformat}
> fgrep -rI 'blk_1073742189' hadoop-hdfs-namenode-ip-10-224-158-152.log
> 2013-09-18 18:03:16,972 INFO org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.StateChange: BLOCK* allocateBlock: /user/jenkins/testAppendInputWedSep18180222UTC2013/test4.fileWedSep18180222UTC2013._COPYING_. BP-1884637155-10.224.158.152-1379524544853 blk_1073742189_1369{blockUCState=UNDER_CONSTRUCTION, primaryNodeIndex=-1, replicas=[ReplicaUnderConstruction[10.83.107.80:1004|RBW], ReplicaUnderConstruction[10.34.74.206:1004|RBW], ReplicaUnderConstruction[10.224.158.152:1004|RBW]]}
> 2013-09-18 18:03:17,222 INFO BlockStateChange: BLOCK* addStoredBlock: blockMap updated: 10.224.158.152:1004 is added to blk_1073742189_1369{blockUCState=UNDER_CONSTRUCTION, primaryNodeIndex=-1, replicas=[ReplicaUnderConstruction[10.83.107.80:1004|RBW], ReplicaUnderConstruction[10.34.74.206:1004|RBW], ReplicaUnderConstruction[10.224.158.152:1004|RBW]]} size 0
> 2013-09-18 18:03:17,222 INFO BlockStateChange: BLOCK* addStoredBlock: blockMap updated: 10.34.74.206:1004 is added to blk_1073742189_1369{blockUCState=UNDER_CONSTRUCTION, primaryNodeIndex=-1, replicas=[ReplicaUnderConstruction[10.83.107.80:1004|RBW], ReplicaUnderConstruction[10.34.74.206:1004|RBW], ReplicaUnderConstruction[10.224.158.152:1004|RBW]]} size 0
> 2013-09-18 18:03:17,224 INFO BlockStateChange: BLOCK* addStoredBlock: blockMap updated: 10.83.107.80:1004 is added to blk_1073742189_1369{blockUCState=UNDER_CONSTRUCTION, primaryNodeIndex=-1, replicas=[ReplicaUnderConstruction[10.83.107.80:1004|RBW], ReplicaUnderConstruction[10.34.74.206:1004|RBW], ReplicaUnderConstruction[10.224.158.152:1004|RBW]]} size 0
> 2013-09-18 18:03:17,899 INFO org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.FSNamesystem: updatePipeline(block=BP-1884637155-10.224.158.152-1379524544853:blk_1073742189_1369, newGenerationStamp=1370, newLength=1048576, newNodes=[10.83.107.80:1004, 10.34.74.206:1004, 10.224.158.152:1004], clientName=DFSClient_NONMAPREDUCE_-450304083_1)
> 2013-09-18 18:03:17,904 INFO org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.FSNamesystem: updatePipeline(BP-1884637155-10.224.158.152-1379524544853:blk_1073742189_1369) successfully to BP-1884637155-10.224.158.152-1379524544853:blk_1073742189_1370
> 2013-09-18 18:03:18,540 INFO org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.FSNamesystem: updatePipeline(block=BP-1884637155-10.224.158.152-1379524544853:blk_1073742189_1370, newGenerationStamp=1371, newLength=2097152, newNodes=[10.83.107.80:1004, 10.34.74.206:1004, 10.224.158.152:1004], clientName=DFSClient_NONMAPREDUCE_-450304083_1)
> 2013-09-18 18:03:18,548 INFO org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.FSNamesystem: updatePipeline(BP-1884637155-10.224.158.152-1379524544853:blk_1073742189_1370) successfully to BP-1884637155-10.224.158.152-1379524544853:blk_1073742189_1371
> 2013-09-18 18:03:26,150 INFO BlockStateChange: BLOCK* addToInvalidates: blk_1073742189_1371 10.83.107.80:1004 10.34.74.206:1004 10.224.158.152:1004 
> 2013-09-18 18:03:26,847 INFO org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.StateChange: BLOCK* InvalidateBlocks: ask 10.34.74.206:1004 to delete [blk_1073742178_1359, blk_1073742183_1362, blk_1073742184_1363, blk_1073742186_1366, blk_1073742188_1368, blk_1073742189_1371]
> 2013-09-18 18:03:29,848 INFO org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.StateChange: BLOCK* InvalidateBlocks: ask 10.224.158.152:1004 to delete [blk_1073742177_1353, blk_1073742178_1359, blk_1073742179_1355, blk_1073742180_1356, blk_1073742181_1358, blk_1073742182_1361, blk_1073742185_1364, blk_1073742187_1367, blk_1073742188_1368, blk_1073742189_1371]
> 2013-09-18 18:03:29,848 INFO org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.StateChange: BLOCK* InvalidateBlocks: ask 10.83.107.80:1004 to delete [blk_1073742177_1353, blk_1073742178_1359, blk_1073742179_1355, blk_1073742180_1356, blk_1073742181_1358, blk_1073742182_1361, blk_1073742183_1362, blk_1073742184_1363, blk_1073742185_1364, blk_1073742186_1366, blk_1073742187_1367, blk_1073742188_1368, blk_1073742189_1371]
> {noformat}
> This seems to suggest that the block was successfully deleted, but then DN got into a death spiral inside of a scanner.
> I can keep the cluster running for a few days if anybody is willing to take a look. Ask me for creds via a personal email.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira