hadoop-hdfs-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Hadoop QA (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HDFS-9922) Upgrade Domain placement policy status marks a good block in violation when there are decommissioned nodes
Date Tue, 02 May 2017 19:39:04 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-9922?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15993580#comment-15993580
] 

Hadoop QA commented on HDFS-9922:
---------------------------------

| (x) *{color:red}-1 overall{color}* |
\\
\\
|| Vote || Subsystem || Runtime || Comment ||
| {color:blue}0{color} | {color:blue} reexec {color} | {color:blue} 13m 57s{color} | {color:blue}
Docker mode activated. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} @author {color} | {color:green}  0m  0s{color} |
{color:green} The patch does not contain any @author tags. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} test4tests {color} | {color:green}  0m  0s{color}
| {color:green} The patch appears to include 2 new or modified test files. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvninstall {color} | {color:green}  9m 23s{color}
| {color:green} branch-2.8 passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} compile {color} | {color:green}  0m 47s{color} |
{color:green} branch-2.8 passed with JDK v1.8.0_131 {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} compile {color} | {color:green}  0m 43s{color} |
{color:green} branch-2.8 passed with JDK v1.7.0_121 {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} checkstyle {color} | {color:green}  0m 20s{color}
| {color:green} branch-2.8 passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvnsite {color} | {color:green}  0m 56s{color} |
{color:green} branch-2.8 passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvneclipse {color} | {color:green}  0m 16s{color}
| {color:green} branch-2.8 passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} findbugs {color} | {color:green}  2m  4s{color} |
{color:green} branch-2.8 passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javadoc {color} | {color:green}  0m 43s{color} |
{color:green} branch-2.8 passed with JDK v1.8.0_131 {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javadoc {color} | {color:green}  1m  4s{color} |
{color:green} branch-2.8 passed with JDK v1.7.0_121 {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvninstall {color} | {color:green}  0m 46s{color}
| {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} compile {color} | {color:green}  0m 47s{color} |
{color:green} the patch passed with JDK v1.8.0_131 {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javac {color} | {color:green}  0m 47s{color} | {color:green}
the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} compile {color} | {color:green}  0m 44s{color} |
{color:green} the patch passed with JDK v1.7.0_121 {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javac {color} | {color:green}  0m 44s{color} | {color:green}
the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} checkstyle {color} | {color:green}  0m 17s{color}
| {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvnsite {color} | {color:green}  0m 52s{color} |
{color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvneclipse {color} | {color:green}  0m 12s{color}
| {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} whitespace {color} | {color:green}  0m  0s{color}
| {color:green} The patch has no whitespace issues. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} findbugs {color} | {color:green}  2m 12s{color} |
{color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javadoc {color} | {color:green}  0m 40s{color} |
{color:green} the patch passed with JDK v1.8.0_131 {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javadoc {color} | {color:green}  0m 58s{color} |
{color:green} the patch passed with JDK v1.7.0_121 {color} |
| {color:red}-1{color} | {color:red} unit {color} | {color:red} 56m 45s{color} | {color:red}
hadoop-hdfs in the patch failed with JDK v1.7.0_121. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} asflicense {color} | {color:green}  0m 31s{color}
| {color:green} The patch does not generate ASF License warnings. {color} |
| {color:black}{color} | {color:black} {color} | {color:black}150m  7s{color} | {color:black}
{color} |
\\
\\
|| Reason || Tests ||
| JDK v1.7.0_121 Failed junit tests | hadoop.hdfs.server.datanode.TestFsDatasetCache |
|   | hadoop.hdfs.TestClientProtocolForPipelineRecovery |
\\
\\
|| Subsystem || Report/Notes ||
| Docker |  Image:yetus/hadoop:5970e82 |
| JIRA Issue | HDFS-9922 |
| JIRA Patch URL | https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12866009/HDFS-9922.branch-2.8.001.patch
|
| Optional Tests |  asflicense  compile  javac  javadoc  mvninstall  mvnsite  unit  findbugs
 checkstyle  |
| uname | Linux 94628fcd32db 3.13.0-107-generic #154-Ubuntu SMP Tue Dec 20 09:57:27 UTC 2016
x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux |
| Build tool | maven |
| Personality | /testptch/hadoop/patchprocess/precommit/personality/provided.sh |
| git revision | branch-2.8 / 305a9d8 |
| Default Java | 1.7.0_121 |
| Multi-JDK versions |  /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-oracle:1.8.0_131 /usr/lib/jvm/java-7-openjdk-amd64:1.7.0_121
|
| findbugs | v3.0.0 |
| unit | https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/19270/artifact/patchprocess/patch-unit-hadoop-hdfs-project_hadoop-hdfs-jdk1.7.0_121.txt
|
| JDK v1.7.0_121  Test Results | https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/19270/testReport/
|
| modules | C: hadoop-hdfs-project/hadoop-hdfs U: hadoop-hdfs-project/hadoop-hdfs |
| Console output | https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/19270/console |
| Powered by | Apache Yetus 0.5.0-SNAPSHOT   http://yetus.apache.org |


This message was automatically generated.



> Upgrade Domain placement policy status marks a good block in violation when there are
decommissioned nodes
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDFS-9922
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-9922
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>            Reporter: Chris Trezzo
>            Assignee: Chris Trezzo
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 2.9.0, 3.0.0-alpha1
>
>         Attachments: HDFS-9922.branch-2.8.001.patch, HDFS-9922-trunk-v1.patch, HDFS-9922-trunk-v2.patch,
HDFS-9922-trunk-v3.patch, HDFS-9922-trunk-v4.patch
>
>
> When there are replicas of a block on a decommissioned node, BlockPlacementStatusWithUpgradeDomain#isUpgradeDomainPolicySatisfied
returns false when it should return true. This is because numberOfReplicas is the number of
in-service replicas for the block and upgradeDomains.size() is the number of upgrade domains
across all replicas of the block. Specifically, we hit this scenario when numberOfReplicas
is equal to upgradeDomainFactor and upgradeDomains.size() is greater than numberOfReplicas.
> {code}
> private boolean isUpgradeDomainPolicySatisfied() {
>     if (numberOfReplicas <= upgradeDomainFactor) {
>       return (numberOfReplicas == upgradeDomains.size());
>     } else {
>       return upgradeDomains.size() >= upgradeDomainFactor;
>     }
>   }
> {code}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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