[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-4165?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14153191#comment-14153191
]
Hudson commented on HDFS-4165:
------------------------------
SUCCESS: Integrated in Hadoop-Hdfs-trunk #1887 (See
[https://builds.apache.org/job/Hadoop-Hdfs-trunk/1887/])
Move HDFS-4165 from trunk to 2.6.0 in CHANGES.txt. (wang: rev
371ef4cefc65996e41f7072c4f396fe14d2375b1)
* hadoop-hdfs-project/hadoop-hdfs/CHANGES.txt
> Faulty sanity check in FsDirectory.unprotectedSetQuota
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-4165
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-4165
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: namenode
> Affects Versions: 3.0.0
> Reporter: Binglin Chang
> Assignee: Binglin Chang
> Priority: Trivial
> Fix For: 2.6.0
>
> Attachments: HDFS-4165.patch
>
>
> According to the documentation:
> The quota can have three types of values : (1) 0 or more will set
> the quota to that value, (2) {@link HdfsConstants#QUOTA_DONT_SET} implies
> the quota will not be changed, and (3) {@link HdfsConstants#QUOTA_RESET}
> implies the quota will be reset. Any other value is a runtime error.
> sanity check in FsDirectory.unprotectedSetQuota should use
> {code}
> nsQuota != HdfsConstants.QUOTA_RESET
> {code}
> rather than
> {code}
> nsQuota < HdfsConstants.QUOTA_RESET
> {code}
> Since HdfsConstants.QUOTA_RESET is defined to be -1, there is not any problem
> for this code, but it is better to do it right.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
