[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7788?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14328124#comment-14328124
]
Hadoop QA commented on HDFS-7788:
---------------------------------
{color:green}+1 overall{color}. Here are the results of testing the latest
attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12699735/rushabh.patch
against trunk revision d49ae72.
{color:green}+1 @author{color}. The patch does not contain any @author
tags.
{color:green}+1 tests included{color}. The patch appears to include 2 new
or modified test files.
{color:green}+1 javac{color}. The applied patch does not increase the
total number of javac compiler warnings.
{color:green}+1 javadoc{color}. There were no new javadoc warning messages.
{color:green}+1 eclipse:eclipse{color}. The patch built with
eclipse:eclipse.
{color:green}+1 findbugs{color}. The patch does not introduce any new
Findbugs (version 2.0.3) warnings.
{color:green}+1 release audit{color}. The applied patch does not increase
the total number of release audit warnings.
{color:green}+1 core tests{color}. The patch passed unit tests in .
Test results:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/9621//testReport/
Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/9621//console
This message is automatically generated.
> Post-2.6 namenode may not start up with an image containing inodes created
> with an old release.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-7788
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7788
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Kihwal Lee
> Assignee: Rushabh S Shah
> Priority: Blocker
> Attachments: HDFS-7788-binary.patch, rushabh.patch
>
>
> Before HDFS-4305, which was fixed in 2.1.0-beta, clients could specify
> arbitrarily small preferred block size for a file including 0. This was
> normally done by faulty clients or failed creates, but it was possible.
> Until 2.5, reading a fsimage containing inodes with 0 byte preferred block
> size was allowed. So if a fsimage contained such an inode, the namenode would
> come up fine. In 2.6, the preferred block size is required be > 0. Because
> of this change, the image that worked with 2.5 may not work with 2.6.
> If a cluster ran a version of hadoop earlier than 2.1.0-beta before, it is
> under this risk even if it worked fine with 2.5.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
