Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-mapreduce-issues-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 94967 invoked from network); 23 Feb 2010 12:04:48 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 23 Feb 2010 12:04:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 94053 invoked by uid 500); 23 Feb 2010 12:04:48 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-mapreduce-issues-archive@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 93994 invoked by uid 500); 23 Feb 2010 12:04:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact mapreduce-issues-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: mapreduce-issues@hadoop.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list mapreduce-issues@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 93984 invoked by uid 99); 23 Feb 2010 12:04:48 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 23 Feb 2010 12:04:48 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2000.0 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.140] (HELO brutus.apache.org) (140.211.11.140) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 23 Feb 2010 12:04:48 +0000 Received: from brutus.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by brutus.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB8CC29A0015 for ; Tue, 23 Feb 2010 04:04:27 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <578299351.460411266926667963.JavaMail.jira@brutus.apache.org> Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 12:04:27 +0000 (UTC) From: "Hadoop QA (JIRA)" To: mapreduce-issues@hadoop.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (MAPREDUCE-1510) RAID should regenerate parity files if they get deleted In-Reply-To: <938046116.377181266548547899.JavaMail.jira@brutus.apache.org> 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/MAPREDUCE-1510?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12837212#action_12837212 ] Hadoop QA commented on MAPREDUCE-1510: -------------------------------------- -1 overall. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12436685/MAPREDUCE-1510.1.patch against trunk revision 915223. +1 @author. The patch does not contain any @author tags. +1 tests included. The patch appears to include 3 new or modified tests. +1 javadoc. The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages. +1 javac. The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac compiler warnings. +1 findbugs. The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs warnings. +1 release audit. The applied patch does not increase the total number of release audit warnings. -1 core tests. The patch failed core unit tests. -1 contrib tests. The patch failed contrib unit tests. Test results: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Mapreduce-Patch-h6.grid.sp2.yahoo.net/476/testReport/ Findbugs warnings: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Mapreduce-Patch-h6.grid.sp2.yahoo.net/476/artifact/trunk/build/test/findbugs/newPatchFindbugsWarnings.html Checkstyle results: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Mapreduce-Patch-h6.grid.sp2.yahoo.net/476/artifact/trunk/build/test/checkstyle-errors.html Console output: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Mapreduce-Patch-h6.grid.sp2.yahoo.net/476/console This message is automatically generated. > RAID should regenerate parity files if they get deleted > ------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: MAPREDUCE-1510 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-1510 > Project: Hadoop Map/Reduce > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: contrib/raid > Reporter: Rodrigo Schmidt > Assignee: Rodrigo Schmidt > Attachments: MAPREDUCE-1510.1.patch, MAPREDUCE-1510.patch > > > Currently, if a source file has a replication factor lower or equal to that expected by RAID, the file is skipped and no parity file is generated. I don't think this is a good behavior since parity files can get wrongly deleted, leaving the source file with a low replication factor. In that case, raid should be able to recreate the parity file. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.