[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7993?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14500482#comment-14500482
]
Ming Ma commented on HDFS-7993:
-------------------------------
Could the test fail if the node becomes decommissioned right after it checks
{{isDecommissionInProgress}}? Otherwise, it looks good.
{noformat}
if (!checkDecommissionInProgress && datanodeInfo != null
&& datanodeInfo.isDecommissionInProgress()) {
String fsckOut = runFsck(conf, 0, true, testFile, "-files", "-blocks",
"-replicaDetails");
assertTrue(fsckOut.contains("(DECOMMISSIONING)"));
checkDecommissionInProgress = true;
}
{noformat}
> Incorrect descriptions in fsck when nodes are decommissioned
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-7993
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7993
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 2.6.0
> Reporter: Ming Ma
> Assignee: J.Andreina
> Attachments: HDFS-7993.1.patch, HDFS-7993.2.patch, HDFS-7993.3.patch,
> HDFS-7993.4.patch, HDFS-7993.5.patch
>
>
> When you run fsck with "-files" or "-racks", you will get something like
> below if one of the replicas is decommissioned.
> {noformat}
> blk_x len=y repl=3 [dn1, dn2, dn3, dn4]
> {noformat}
> That is because in NamenodeFsck, the repl count comes from live replicas
> count; while the actual nodes come from LocatedBlock which include
> decommissioned nodes.
> Another issue in NamenodeFsck is BlockPlacementPolicy's verifyBlockPlacement
> verifies LocatedBlock that includes decommissioned nodes. However, it seems
> better to exclude the decommissioned nodes in the verification; just like how
> fsck excludes decommissioned nodes when it check for under replicated blocks.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
