hadoop-hdfs-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Yuanbo Liu (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HDFS-10999) Use more generic "low redundancy" blocks instead of "under replicated" blocks
Date Wed, 19 Oct 2016 09:20:58 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10999?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15588153#comment-15588153
] 

Yuanbo Liu commented on HDFS-10999:
-----------------------------------

I guess some monitor scripts are based on "fsck" command. Admins may write some similar code
{code}
fsck|grep "Under-replicated"
{code}
or key-value formatter in their scripts. Changing the old key name will force them changing
their monitor scripts. This is my understanding about Allen's concern on incompatible issue.

> Use more generic "low redundancy" blocks instead of "under replicated" blocks
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDFS-10999
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10999
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: erasure-coding
>    Affects Versions: 3.0.0-alpha1
>            Reporter: Wei-Chiu Chuang
>            Assignee: Yuanbo Liu
>              Labels: supportability
>
> Per HDFS-9857, it seems in the Hadoop 3 world, people prefer the more generic term "low
redundancy" to the old-fashioned "under replicated". But this term is still being used in
messages in several places, such as web ui, dfsadmin and fsck. We should probably change them
to avoid confusion.
> File this jira to discuss it.



--
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