hadoop-hdfs-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ming Ma (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HDFS-7993) Incorrect descriptions in fsck when nodes are decommissioned
Date Fri, 17 Apr 2015 01:37:59 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7993?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14499111#comment-14499111
] 

Ming Ma commented on HDFS-7993:
-------------------------------

bq. Can we do that in a separate JIRA?

I am fine with that.

Thanks, [~andreina]. The code looks good. Maybe some new unit tests will be useful?

> Incorrect descriptions in fsck when nodes are decommissioned
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDFS-7993
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7993
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 2.6.0
>            Reporter: Ming Ma
>            Assignee: J.Andreina
>         Attachments: HDFS-7993.1.patch, HDFS-7993.2.patch, HDFS-7993.3.patch, HDFS-7993.4.patch
>
>
> When you run fsck with "-files" or "-racks", you will get something like below if one
of the replicas is decommissioned.
> {noformat}
> blk_x len=y repl=3 [dn1, dn2, dn3, dn4]
> {noformat}
> That is because in NamenodeFsck, the repl count comes from live replicas count; while
the actual nodes come from LocatedBlock which include decommissioned nodes.
> Another issue in NamenodeFsck is BlockPlacementPolicy's verifyBlockPlacement verifies
LocatedBlock that includes decommissioned nodes. However, it seems better to exclude the decommissioned
nodes in the verification; just like how fsck excludes decommissioned nodes when it check
for under replicated blocks.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Mime
View raw message