That did it. Thanks.

> On Dec 24, 2015, at 9:21 AM, Loïc Chanel <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> 
> Hi Brian,
> 
> If this is just a display problem (the version shown by Ambari for the 
> component is not the right one, and Ambari keeps displaying that the upgrade 
> hasn't finished yet), I think you can solve it using the final steps of 
> manual upgrade documentation.
> 
> But before doing so, please really insure that all your components have been 
> properly upgraded by running for example hdfs version on all your hosts.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> 
> Loïc
> 
> Loïc CHANEL
> System & virtualization engineer
> TO - XaaS Ind - Worldline (Villeurbanne, France)
> 
> 2015-12-24 13:24 GMT+01:00 Brian Jeltema <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>>:
> I just upgraded to Ambari 2.1.2.1, and then did a rolling upgrade from HDP 
> 2.2 to HDP 2.3.2.
> 
> Because of internal name changes, I had to configure my cluster to use 
> customized names for
> some nodes, as described in
> http://docs.hortonworks.com/HDPDocuments/Ambari-2.1.2.0/bk_ambari_reference_guide/content/_how_to_customize_the_name_of_a_host.html
>  
> <http://docs.hortonworks.com/HDPDocuments/Ambari-2.1.2.0/bk_ambari_reference_guide/content/_how_to_customize_the_name_of_a_host.html>
> 
> It appears that the rolling upgrade does not support this. During the ‘core 
> component’ portion of the upgrade Ambari warned
> about problems upgrading the nodes with the custom names. Ambari claimed that 
> the upgrade of those
> nodes failed, though by inspection of the directories and links it seems 
> correct. So I chose to
> continue with the upgrade.
> 
> After finishing the upgrade, All nodes and services appear to be running 
> correctly, and from the logs it’s clear that
> the HDP 2.3.2 services are running. However, the Ambari ‘Stack and Versions’ 
> page show HDP 2.2 as ‘Current’,
> and HDP 2.3.2 as “Upgrade: in Process’. Also, the Version column on the Hosts 
> page shows the incorrect version
> on every node.
> 
> Is there a fix for this?
> 
> Brian
> 

Reply via email to