[ 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)