[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-2791?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13192831#comment-13192831
]
Sanjay Radia commented on HDFS-2791:
------------------------------------
>Case 2 ....
I agree that it it is safer to ignore it if the gen-stamp AND length match
rather than mark the replica as corrupt.
>HA case .. block will be marked as corrupt till next full block report.
Isn't this addressed by one of 2 events:
* the AddBlock from the DN arrive at the NNB shortly after the Block report
containing RBW. (but it may get lost)
* The Op_Add contains the block location ( I don't think it contains the block
location).
> If block report races with closing of file, replica is incorrectly marked
> corrupt
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-2791
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-2791
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: data-node, name-node
> Affects Versions: 0.22.0, 0.23.0
> Reporter: Todd Lipcon
> Assignee: Todd Lipcon
> Attachments: hdfs-2791-test.txt, hdfs-2791.txt, hdfs-2791.txt,
> hdfs-2791.txt
>
>
> The following sequence of events results in a replica mistakenly marked
> corrupt:
> 1. Pipeline is open with 2 replicas
> 2. DN1 generates a block report but is slow in sending to the NN (eg some
> flaky network). It gets "stuck" right before the block report RPC.
> 3. Client closes the file.
> 4. DN2 is fast and sends blockReceived to the NN. NN marks the block as
> COMPLETE
> 5. DN1's block report proceeds, and includes the block in an RBW state.
> 6. (x) NN incorrectly marks the replica as corrupt, since it is an RBW
> replica on a COMPLETE block.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
