[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-8647?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14957361#comment-14957361
]
Brahma Reddy Battula commented on HDFS-8647:
--------------------------------------------
[~mingma] and [~vinayrpet]
Uploaded patch to address following comments....
{quote}The existing blockHasEnoughRacksStriped compares getRealDataBlockNum (#
of data blocks) with the number racks. But after the refactoring, it compares
getRealTotalBlockNum (# of total blocks) with the number racks,{quote}
{quote}
It might be easier to not to pass isStriped to verifyBlockPlacement. Instead,
have BlockPlacementPolicyRackFaultTolerant implement verifyBlockPlacement which
will use numberOfReplicas as the minRacks. This also makes the patch more
applicable to branch-2 which doesn't have striped EC
{quote}
> Abstract BlockManager's rack policy into BlockPlacementPolicy
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-8647
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-8647
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Ming Ma
> Assignee: Brahma Reddy Battula
> Attachments: HDFS-8647-001.patch, HDFS-8647-002.patch,
> HDFS-8647-003.patch, HDFS-8647-004.patch, HDFS-8647-004.patch,
> HDFS-8647-005.patch, HDFS-8647-006.patch
>
>
> Sometimes we want to have namenode use alternative block placement policy
> such as upgrade domains in HDFS-7541.
> BlockManager has built-in assumption about rack policy in functions such as
> useDelHint, blockHasEnoughRacks. That means when we have new block placement
> policy, we need to modify BlockManager to account for the new policy. Ideally
> BlockManager should ask BlockPlacementPolicy object instead. That will allow
> us to provide new BlockPlacementPolicy without changing BlockManager.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
