[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-5891?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12712706#action_12712706
]
Hadoop QA commented on HADOOP-5891:
-----------------------------------
-1 overall. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12408775/hadoop-5891.txt
against trunk revision 778289.
+1 @author. The patch does not contain any @author tags.
-1 tests included. The patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified
tests.
Please justify why no tests are needed for this patch.
+1 javadoc. The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages.
+1 javac. The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac
compiler warnings.
+1 findbugs. The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs warnings.
+1 Eclipse classpath. The patch retains Eclipse classpath integrity.
+1 release audit. The applied patch does not increase the total number of
release audit warnings.
+1 core tests. The patch passed core unit tests.
-1 contrib tests. The patch failed contrib unit tests.
Test results:
http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch-vesta.apache.org/396/testReport/
Findbugs warnings:
http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch-vesta.apache.org/396/artifact/trunk/build/test/findbugs/newPatchFindbugsWarnings.html
Checkstyle results:
http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch-vesta.apache.org/396/artifact/trunk/build/test/checkstyle-errors.html
Console output:
http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch-vesta.apache.org/396/console
This message is automatically generated.
> If dfs.http.address is default, SecondaryNameNode can't find NameNode
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HADOOP-5891
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-5891
> Project: Hadoop Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: dfs
> Reporter: Todd Lipcon
> Assignee: Todd Lipcon
> Attachments: hadoop-5891.txt
>
>
> As detailed in this blog post:
> http://www.cloudera.com/blog/2009/02/10/multi-host-secondarynamenode-configuration/
> if dfs.http.address is not configured, and the 2NN is a different machine
> from the NN, the 2NN fails to connect.
> In SecondaryNameNode.getInfoServer, the 2NN should notice a "0.0.0.0"
> dfs.http.address and, in that case, pull the hostname out of fs.default.name.
> This would fix the default configuration to work properly for most users.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
