[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-1762?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12527595
]
Hadoop QA commented on HADOOP-1762:
-----------------------------------
-1 overall. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12365780/HADOOP-1762-Opt2.patch
against trunk revision r575578.
@author +1. The patch does not contain any @author tags.
javadoc +1. The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages.
javac +1. The applied patch does not generate any new compiler warnings.
findbugs +1. The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs warnings.
core tests +1. The patch passed core unit tests.
contrib tests -1. The patch failed contrib unit tests.
Test results:
http://lucene.zones.apache.org:8080/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/765/testReport/
Findbugs warnings:
http://lucene.zones.apache.org:8080/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/765/artifact/trunk/build/test/findbugs/newPatchFindbugsWarnings.html
Checkstyle results:
http://lucene.zones.apache.org:8080/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/765/artifact/trunk/build/test/checkstyle-errors.html
Console output:
http://lucene.zones.apache.org:8080/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/765/console
This message is automatically generated.
> 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-Opt2.patch, HADOOP-1762.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.
