[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-1762?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Raghu Angadi updated HADOOP-1762:
---------------------------------
Attachment: HADOOP-1762-Opt2.patch
Thanks for the detailed review Konstantin, as always.
All changes except (2) above are included in the patch.
1. done.
2. Did not deprecate since we still need the constants (for backward
compatibility). Added a comment
3. Done. Left a detailed comment regd repeated messages.
4. Added comment regd why storageID is pretty safe.
Could you do a quick scan of the patch?
> Namenode does not need to store storageID and datanodeID persistently
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HADOOP-1762
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-1762
> Project: Hadoop
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: dfs
> Affects Versions: 0.14.0
> Reporter: Raghu Angadi
> Assignee: Raghu Angadi
> Attachments: HADOOP-1762-Opt2.patch, HADOOP-1762-Opt2.patch,
> HADOOP-1762-Opt2.patch, HADOOP-1762-Opt2.patch, HADOOP-1762-Opt2.patch,
> HADOOP-1762.patch
>
>
> Currently Namenode stores all the storage-ids it generates since the
> beginning (since last format). It allocates a new storageID everytime a new
> datanode comes online. It also stores all the known datanode ids since the
> beginning.
> It would be better if Namenode did not have to keep track of these. I will
> describe a proposal in the next comment.
> This has implecations regd how Namenode helps administrators identify 'dead
> datanodes' etc. These issues are addressed in HADOOP-1138.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
