[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10530?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15929217#comment-15929217
]
Manoj Govindassamy commented on HDFS-10530:
-------------------------------------------
Thanks for the review and commit help [~andrew.wang].
Sure, will file a jira to track parity block not written out on insufficient
DNs. And, will track all other logging related issued in a separate Jira.
> BlockManager reconstruction work scheduling should correctly adhere to EC
> block placement policy
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-10530
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10530
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: namenode
> Reporter: Rui Gao
> Assignee: Manoj Govindassamy
> Labels: hdfs-ec-3.0-nice-to-have
> Fix For: 3.0.0-alpha3
>
> Attachments: HDFS-10530.1.patch, HDFS-10530.2.patch,
> HDFS-10530.3.patch, HDFS-10530.4.patch, HDFS-10530.5.patch
>
>
> This issue was found by [~tfukudom].
> Under RS-DEFAULT-6-3-64k EC policy,
> 1. Create an EC file, the file was witten to all the 5 racks( 2 dns for each)
> of the cluster.
> 2. Reconstruction work would be scheduled if the 6th rack is added.
> 3. While adding the 7th rack or more racks will not trigger reconstruction
> work.
> Based on default EC block placement policy defined in
> âBlockPlacementPolicyRackFaultTolerant.javaâ, EC file should be able to be
> scheduled to distribute to 9 racks if possible.
> In *BlockManager#isPlacementPolicySatisfied(BlockInfo storedBlock)* ,
> *numReplicas* of striped blocks might should be *getRealTotalBlockNum()*,
> instead of *getRealDataBlockNum()*.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
