Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hadoop-hdfs-issues-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-hdfs-issues-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4EDC610E2F for ; Fri, 17 Apr 2015 11:33:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 45846 invoked by uid 500); 17 Apr 2015 11:33:00 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-hdfs-issues-archive@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 45795 invoked by uid 500); 17 Apr 2015 11:33:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact hdfs-issues-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: hdfs-issues@hadoop.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list hdfs-issues@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 45771 invoked by uid 99); 17 Apr 2015 11:33:00 -0000 Received: from arcas.apache.org (HELO arcas.apache.org) (140.211.11.28) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Apr 2015 11:33:00 +0000 Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 11:33:00 +0000 (UTC) From: "J.Andreina (JIRA)" To: hdfs-issues@hadoop.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Updated] (HDFS-7993) Incorrect descriptions in fsck when nodes are decommissioned MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7993?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] J.Andreina updated HDFS-7993: ----------------------------- Attachment: HDFS-7993.5.patch > 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, HDFS-7993.5.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)