[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-3597?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Harsh J updated HDFS-3597:
--------------------------
Labels: upgrade (was: )
> SNN can fail to start on upgrade
> --------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-3597
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-3597
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: name-node
> Affects Versions: 2.0.0-alpha
> Reporter: Andy Isaacson
> Assignee: Andy Isaacson
> Priority: Minor
> Labels: upgrade
> Fix For: 0.23.3, 2.0.2-alpha
>
> Attachments: hdfs-3597-2.txt, hdfs-3597-3.txt, hdfs-3597-4.txt,
> hdfs-3597.txt
>
>
> When upgrading from 1.x to 2.0.0, the SecondaryNameNode can fail to start up:
> {code}
> 2012-06-16 09:52:33,812 ERROR
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.SecondaryNameNode: Exception in
> doCheckpoint
> java.io.IOException: Inconsistent checkpoint fields.
> LV = -40 namespaceID = 64415959 cTime = 1339813974990 ; clusterId =
> CID-07a82b97-8d04-4fdd-b3a1-f40650163245 ; blockpoolId =
> BP-1792677198-172.29.121.67-1339813967723.
> Expecting respectively: -19; 64415959; 0; ; .
> at
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.CheckpointSignature.validateStorageInfo(CheckpointSignature.java:120)
> at
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.SecondaryNameNode.doCheckpoint(SecondaryNameNode.java:454)
> at
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.SecondaryNameNode.doWork(SecondaryNameNode.java:334)
> at
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.SecondaryNameNode$2.run(SecondaryNameNode.java:301)
> at
> org.apache.hadoop.security.SecurityUtil.doAsLoginUserOrFatal(SecurityUtil.java:438)
> at
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.SecondaryNameNode.run(SecondaryNameNode.java:297)
> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:662)
> {code}
> The error check we're hitting came from HDFS-1073, and it's intended to
> verify that we're connecting to the correct NN. But the check is too strict
> and considers "different metadata version" to be the same as "different
> clusterID".
> I believe the check in {{doCheckpoint}} simply needs to explicitly check for
> and handle the update case.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
