hadoop-hdfs-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Vinayakumar B (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HDFS-10587) Incorrect offset/length calculation in pipeline recovery causes block corruption
Date Thu, 14 Jul 2016 08:29:21 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10587?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15376563#comment-15376563
] 

Vinayakumar B commented on HDFS-10587:
--------------------------------------

bq. I don't see truncate on Sender's, Sender actually reports getVisibleLength()= 41186444.
Yes, thats correct. Thats while transferring the block, it displays 41186444 as visibleLength
and 41381376 as onDisk. Because of this, during trasnsfer it sends extra bytes to make up
the full chunk.

But once the transfer is complete, during pipeline recovery in {{recoverRbw()}} since the
bytesOnDisk > visibleLength, on disk bytes will be truncated to visibleLength. This will
happen in almost all Datanodes except the new DN added. So extra bytes sent to new DN will
not be overwritter, whereas in old DNs it will be written from packets.
{code}     // Truncate the potentially corrupt portion.
      // If the source was client and the last node in the pipeline was lost,
      // any corrupt data written after the acked length can go unnoticed.
      if (numBytes > bytesAcked) {
        final File replicafile = rbw.getBlockFile();
        truncateBlock(replicafile, rbw.getMetaFile(), numBytes, bytesAcked);
        rbw.setNumBytes(bytesAcked);
        rbw.setLastChecksumAndDataLen(bytesAcked, null);
      }{code}
But this step will be skipped in new DN as it has both visible and ondisk bytes as same due
to transfer.

> Incorrect offset/length calculation in pipeline recovery causes block corruption
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDFS-10587
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10587
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: datanode
>            Reporter: Wei-Chiu Chuang
>            Assignee: Wei-Chiu Chuang
>         Attachments: HDFS-10587.001.patch
>
>
> We found incorrect offset and length calculation in pipeline recovery may cause block
corruption and results in missing blocks under a very unfortunate scenario. 
> (1) A client established pipeline and started writing data to the pipeline.
> (2) One of the data node in the pipeline restarted, closing the socket, and some written
data were unacknowledged.
> (3) Client replaced the failed data node with a new one, initiating block transfer to
copy existing data in the block to the new datanode.
> (4) The block is transferred to the new node. Crucially, the entire block, including
the unacknowledged data, was transferred.
> (5) The last chunk (512 bytes) was not a full chunk, but the destination still reserved
the whole chunk in its buffer, and wrote the entire buffer to disk, therefore some written
data is garbage.
> (6) When the transfer was done, the destination data node converted the replica from
temporary to rbw, which made its visible length as the length of bytes on disk. That is to
say, it thought whatever was transferred was acknowledged. However, the visible length of
the replica is different (round up to the next multiple of 512) than the source of transfer.
[1]
> (7) Client then truncated the block in the attempt to remove unacknowledged data. However,
because the visible length is equivalent of the bytes on disk, it did not truncate unacknowledged
data.
> (8) When new data was appended to the destination, it skipped the bytes already on disk.
Therefore, whatever was written as garbage was not replaced.
> (9) the volume scanner detected corrupt replica, but due to HDFS-10512, it wouldn’t
tell NameNode to mark the replica as corrupt, so the client continued to form a pipeline using
the corrupt replica.
> (10) Finally the DN that had the only healthy replica was restarted. NameNode then update
the pipeline to only contain the corrupt replica.
> (11) Client continue to write to the corrupt replica, because neither client nor the
data node itself knows the replica is corrupt. When the restarted datanodes comes back, their
replica are stale, despite they are not corrupt. Therefore, none of the replica is good and
up to date.
> The sequence of events was reconstructed based on DataNode/NameNode log and my understanding
of code.
> Incidentally, we have observed the same sequence of events on two independent clusters.
> [1]
> The sender has the replica as follows:
> 2016-04-15 22:03:05,066 INFO org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.datanode.fsdataset.impl.FsDatasetImpl:
Recovering ReplicaBeingWritten, blk_1556997324_1100153495099, RBW
>   getNumBytes()     = 41381376
>   getBytesOnDisk()  = 41381376
>   getVisibleLength()= 41186444
>   getVolume()       = /hadoop-i/data/current
>   getBlockFile()    = /hadoop-i/data/current/BP-1043567091-10.1.1.1-1343682168507/current/rbw/blk_1556997324
>   bytesAcked=41186444
>   bytesOnDisk=41381376
> while the receiver has the replica as follows:
> 2016-04-15 22:03:05,068 INFO org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.datanode.fsdataset.impl.FsDatasetImpl:
Recovering ReplicaBeingWritten, blk_1556997324_1100153495099, RBW
>   getNumBytes()     = 41186816
>   getBytesOnDisk()  = 41186816
>   getVisibleLength()= 41186816
>   getVolume()       = /hadoop-g/data/current
>   getBlockFile()    = /hadoop-g/data/current/BP-1043567091-10.1.1.1-1343682168507/current/rbw/blk_1556997324
>   bytesAcked=41186816
>   bytesOnDisk=41186816



--
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