[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-4663?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12668232#action_12668232
 ] 

Raghu Angadi commented on HADOOP-4663:
--------------------------------------

> The primary datanode then stamps all those "valid" replicas with a new 
> generation stamp and updates the namenode inode list with this new generation 
> stamp for this block.

Thanks that is useful. I am still trying deduce whether you are implying there 
will be a corruption or a valid replica.

As I see it, in this case there will be one replica with 'x+5' bytes with the 
new gen-stamp. But given that checksum does not match (no sync to native 
filesystem is done, all three datanodes are killed while they are in wrte() 
system call), looks like we end up with corruption.. right? I am missing 
something?

> Datanode should delete files under tmp when upgraded from 0.17
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-4663
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-4663
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>    Affects Versions: 0.18.0
>            Reporter: Raghu Angadi
>            Assignee: dhruba borthakur
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 0.19.1
>
>         Attachments: deleteTmp.patch, deleteTmp2.patch, deleteTmp_0.18.patch, 
> handleTmp1.patch
>
>
> Before 0.18, when Datanode restarts, it deletes files under data-dir/tmp  
> directory since these files are not valid anymore. But in 0.18 it moves these 
> files to normal directory incorrectly making them valid blocks. One of the 
> following would work :
> - remove the tmp files during upgrade, or
> - if the files under /tmp are in pre-18 format (i.e. no generation), delete 
> them.
> Currently effect of this bug is that, these files end up failing block 
> verification and eventually get deleted. But cause incorrect over-replication 
> at the namenode before that.
> Also it looks like our policy regd treating files under tmp needs to be 
> defined better. Right now there are probably one or two more bugs with it. 
> Dhruba, please file them if you rememeber.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply via email to