[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-16531?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17525408#comment-17525408
]
Xiaoqiao He commented on HDFS-16531:
------------------------------------
Thanks [~ayushtkn] for your kind information.
Based on above code segment you mentioned above, I am not sure why skip set
same replication could impact the snapshot feature. My concern is that which
side (replication/snapshot) implement is not expected? Thanks.
BTW, revert this changes is the safest operation for me also. I just wonder to
dig the root cause. :)
> Avoid setReplication logging an edit record if old replication equals the new
> value
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-16531
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-16531
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: namenode
> Reporter: Stephen O'Donnell
> Assignee: Stephen O'Donnell
> Priority: Major
> Labels: pull-request-available
> Time Spent: 1h 20m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> I recently came across a NN log where about 800k setRep calls were made,
> setting the replication from 3 to 3 - ie leaving it unchanged.
> Even in a case like this, we log an edit record, an audit log, and perform
> some quota checks etc.
> I believe it should be possible to avoid some of the work if we check for
> oldRep == newRep and jump out of the method early.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
