hadoop-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Saumitra <saumitra.offic...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: HDFS file system size issue
Date Mon, 14 Apr 2014 04:08:37 GMT
Hi Biswajeet,

Non-dfs usage is ~100GB over the cluster. But still the number are nowhere near 1TB. 

Basically I wanted to point out discrepancy in name node status page and hadoop dfs -dus.
In my case, earlier one reports DFS usage as 1TB and later one reports it to be 35GB. What
are the factors that can cause this difference? And why is just 35GB data causing DFS to hit
its limits?

On 14-Apr-2014, at 8:31 am, Biswajit Nayak <biswajit.nayak@inmobi.com> wrote:

> Hi Saumitra,
> Could you please check the non-dfs usage. They also contribute to filling up the disk
> ~Biswa
> -----oThe important thing is not to stop questioning o-----
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 1:24 AM, Saumitra <saumitra.official@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
> We are running HDFS on 9-node hadoop cluster, hadoop version is 1.2.1. We are using default
HDFS block size.
> We have noticed that disks of slaves are almost full. From name node’s status page
(namenode:50070), we could see that disks of live nodes are 90% full and DFS Used% in cluster
summary page  is ~1TB.
> However hadoop dfs -dus / shows that file system size is merely 38GB. 38GB number looks
to be correct because we keep only few Hive tables and hadoop’s /tmp (distributed cache
and job outputs) in HDFS. All other data is cleaned up. I cross-checked this from hadoop dfs
-ls. Also I think that there is no internal fragmentation because the files in our Hive tables
are well-chopped in ~50MB chunks. Here are last few lines of hadoop fsck / -files -blocks
> Status: HEALTHY
>  Total size:	38086441332 B
>  Total dirs:	232
>  Total files:	802
>  Total blocks (validated):	796 (avg. block size 47847288 B)
>  Minimally replicated blocks:	796 (100.0 %)
>  Over-replicated blocks:	0 (0.0 %)
>  Under-replicated blocks:	6 (0.75376886 %)
>  Mis-replicated blocks:		0 (0.0 %)
>  Default replication factor:	2
>  Average block replication:	3.0439699
>  Corrupt blocks:		0
>  Missing replicas:		6 (0.24762692 %)
>  Number of data-nodes:		9
>  Number of racks:		1
> FSCK ended at Sun Apr 13 19:49:23 UTC 2014 in 135 milliseconds
> My question is that why disks of slaves are getting full even though there are only few
files in DFS?
> _____________________________________________________________
> The information contained in this communication is intended solely for the use of the
individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others authorized to receive it. It may contain
confidential or legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you
are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in reliance
on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by responding to this email
and then delete it from your system. The firm is neither liable for the proper and complete
transmission of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its receipt.

View raw message