hadoop-hdfs-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rushabh S Shah (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HDFS-8872) Reporting of missing blocks is different in fsck and namenode ui/metasave
Date Tue, 31 May 2016 15:43:13 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-8872?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15307937#comment-15307937
] 

Rushabh S Shah commented on HDFS-8872:
--------------------------------------

[~mingma]: any thoughts ?


> Reporting of missing blocks is different in fsck and namenode ui/metasave
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDFS-8872
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-8872
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 2.6.0
>            Reporter: Rushabh S Shah
>            Assignee: Rushabh S Shah
>
> Namenode ui and metasave will not report a block as missing if the only replica is on
decommissioning/decomissioned node while fsck will show it as MISSING.
> Since decommissioned node can be formatted/removed anytime, we can actually lose the
block.
> Its better to alert on namenode ui if the only copy is on decomissioned/decommissioning
node.



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

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-issues-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-issues-help@hadoop.apache.org


Mime
View raw message