[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7537?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14334555#comment-14334555
]
Tsz Wo Nicholas Sze commented on HDFS-7537:
-------------------------------------------
Thanks Gao. Some comments on the patch:
- When numUnderMinimalRelicatedBlocks > 0, we should also print the value of
minReplication, e.g.
{code}
if (numUnderMinimalRelicatedBlocks > 0) {
res.append("\n UNDER MIN REPL'D BLOCKS:\t")
.append(numUnderMinimalRelicatedBlocks).append(" (")
.append(DFSConfigKeys.DFS_NAMENODE_REPLICATION_MIN_KEY)
.append(" = ").append(minReplication).append(")"); //need to pass
minReplication to Result.
{code}
- We should change Result.isHealthy() to return false when
numUnderMinimalRelicatedBlocks > 0.
- I wonder if it is easy to add a unit test? See TestFsck to get some idea.
- We do not use the tab character in hadoop. Please replace it with spaces
(indentation is two spaces).
> fsck is confusing when dfs.namenode.replication.min > 1 && missing replicas
> && NN restart
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-7537
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7537
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: namenode
> Reporter: Allen Wittenauer
> Assignee: GAO Rui
> Attachments: HDFS-7537.1.patch, dfs-min-2-fsck.png, dfs-min-2.png
>
>
> If minimum replication is set to 2 or higher and some of those replicas are
> missing and the namenode restarts, it isn't always obvious that the missing
> replicas are the reason why the namenode isn't leaving safemode. We should
> improve the output of fsck and the web UI to make it obvious that the missing
> blocks are from unmet replicas vs. completely/totally missing.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
