[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-8884?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14702839#comment-14702839
 ] 

Hadoop QA commented on HDFS-8884:
---------------------------------

\\
\\
| (x) *{color:red}-1 overall{color}* |
\\
\\
|| Vote || Subsystem || Runtime || Comment ||
| {color:red}-1{color} | pre-patch |  16m  1s | Findbugs (version ) appears to 
be broken on trunk. |
| {color:green}+1{color} | @author |   0m  0s | The patch does not contain any 
@author tags. |
| {color:green}+1{color} | tests included |   0m  0s | The patch appears to 
include 1 new or modified test files. |
| {color:green}+1{color} | javac |   8m  7s | There were no new javac warning 
messages. |
| {color:green}+1{color} | javadoc |  10m  8s | There were no new javadoc 
warning messages. |
| {color:green}+1{color} | release audit |   0m 23s | The applied patch does 
not increase the total number of release audit warnings. |
| {color:green}+1{color} | checkstyle |   0m 34s | There were no new checkstyle 
issues. |
| {color:green}+1{color} | whitespace |   0m  0s | The patch has no lines that 
end in whitespace. |
| {color:green}+1{color} | install |   1m 34s | mvn install still works. |
| {color:green}+1{color} | eclipse:eclipse |   0m 34s | The patch built with 
eclipse:eclipse. |
| {color:green}+1{color} | findbugs |   2m 34s | The patch does not introduce 
any new Findbugs (version 3.0.0) warnings. |
| {color:green}+1{color} | native |   3m 16s | Pre-build of native portion |
| {color:red}-1{color} | hdfs tests | 175m 21s | Tests failed in hadoop-hdfs. |
| | | 218m 37s | |
\\
\\
|| Reason || Tests ||
| Failed unit tests | hadoop.hdfs.TestAppendSnapshotTruncate |
|   | hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.ha.TestFailureToReadEdits |
| Timed out tests | org.apache.hadoop.cli.TestHDFSCLI |
\\
\\
|| Subsystem || Report/Notes ||
| Patch URL | 
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12751189/HDFS-8884.002.patch |
| Optional Tests | javadoc javac unit findbugs checkstyle |
| git revision | trunk / 22dc5fc |
| hadoop-hdfs test log | 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/12040/artifact/patchprocess/testrun_hadoop-hdfs.txt
 |
| Test Results | 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/12040/testReport/ |
| Java | 1.7.0_55 |
| uname | Linux asf904.gq1.ygridcore.net 3.13.0-36-lowlatency #63-Ubuntu SMP 
PREEMPT Wed Sep 3 21:56:12 UTC 2014 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux |
| Console output | 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/12040/console |


This message was automatically generated.

> Fail-fast check in BlockPlacementPolicyDefault#chooseTarget
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDFS-8884
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-8884
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Yi Liu
>            Assignee: Yi Liu
>         Attachments: HDFS-8884.001.patch, HDFS-8884.002.patch
>
>
> In current BlockPlacementPolicyDefault, when choosing datanode storage to 
> place block, we have following logic:
> {code}
>         final DatanodeStorageInfo[] storages = DFSUtil.shuffle(
>             chosenNode.getStorageInfos());
>         int i = 0;
>         boolean search = true;
>         for (Iterator<Map.Entry<StorageType, Integer>> iter = storageTypes
>             .entrySet().iterator(); search && iter.hasNext(); ) {
>           Map.Entry<StorageType, Integer> entry = iter.next();
>           for (i = 0; i < storages.length; i++) {
>             StorageType type = entry.getKey();
>             final int newExcludedNodes = addIfIsGoodTarget(storages[i],
> {code}
> We will iterate (actually two {{for}}, although they are usually small value) 
> all storages of the candidate datanode even the datanode itself is not good 
> (e.g. decommissioned, stale, too busy..), since currently we do all the check 
> in {{addIfIsGoodTarget}}.
> We can fail-fast: check the datanode related conditions first, if the 
> datanode is not good, then no need to shuffle and iterate the storages. Then 
> it's more efficient.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to