[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-17438?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17832977#comment-17832977
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on HDFS-17438:
---------------------------------------
goiri commented on code in PR #6655:
URL: https://github.com/apache/hadoop/pull/6655#discussion_r1546976890
##########
hadoop-hdfs-project/hadoop-hdfs-rbf/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hdfs/server/federation/resolver/TestNamenodeResolver.java:
##########
@@ -359,11 +359,12 @@ public void testRegistrationNamenodeSelection()
FederationNamenodeServiceState.ACTIVE);
// 1) ns0:nn0 - Standby (oldest)
- // 2) ns0:nn1 - Standby (newest)
- // 3) ns0:nn2 - Standby
- // Verify the selected entry is the newest standby entry
+ // 2) ns0:nn1 - Standby
+ // 3) ns0:nn2 - Standby (newest)
+ // Verify the selected entry is the oldest standby entry
assertTrue(namenodeResolver.registerNamenode(createNamenodeReport(
NAMESERVICES[0], NAMENODES[0], HAServiceState.STANDBY)));
+ Thread.sleep(1500);
Review Comment:
We shouldn't be adding waits like this, can we add a
GenericTestUtils#waitFor or similar?
> RBF: The newest STANDBY and UNAVAILABLE nn should be the lowest priority.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-17438
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-17438
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Jian Zhang
> Assignee: Jian Zhang
> Priority: Major
> Labels: pull-request-available
> Attachments: HDFS-17438.001.patch
>
>
> At present, when the status of all namenodes in an ns in the router is the
> same, the namenode which is the newest reported will be placed at the top of
> the cache. when the client accesses the ns through the router, it will first
> access the namenode.
> If multiple namenodes in this route are in an active state, or if there are
> namenodes with multiple observer states, the existing logic is not a problem,
> because the newest reported active or observer state namenode have a higher
> probability of being true active or observer compared to the namenode that
> reported active or observer state a long time ago.
> Similarly, the newest reported namenode with a status of standby or
> unavailable has a higher probability of being a standby or unavailable
> namenode compared to the namenode reported with a status of standby or
> unavailable a long time ago. Therefore, the newest nn reported as standby or
> unavailable status should have a lower priority for access, the oldest nn
> reported as standby or unavailable status should have a higher priority for
> access.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
