[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-15?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12748029#action_12748029
]
Hadoop QA commented on HDFS-15:
-------------------------------
-1 overall. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12417685/HDFS-15.5.patch
against trunk revision 807818.
+1 @author. The patch does not contain any @author tags.
+1 tests included. The patch appears to include 5 new or modified tests.
+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 release audit. The applied patch does not increase the total number of
release audit warnings.
-1 core tests. The patch failed core unit tests.
+1 contrib tests. The patch passed contrib unit tests.
Test results:
http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hdfs-Patch-vesta.apache.org/90/testReport/
Findbugs warnings:
http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hdfs-Patch-vesta.apache.org/90/artifact/trunk/build/test/findbugs/newPatchFindbugsWarnings.html
Checkstyle results:
http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hdfs-Patch-vesta.apache.org/90/artifact/trunk/build/test/checkstyle-errors.html
Console output:
http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hdfs-Patch-vesta.apache.org/90/console
This message is automatically generated.
> All replicas of a block end up on only 1 rack
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-15
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-15
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Hairong Kuang
> Assignee: Jitendra Nath Pandey
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 0.21.0
>
> Attachments: HDFS-15.4.patch, HDFS-15.5.patch, HDFS-15.patch,
> HDFS-15.patch.2, HDFS-15.patch.3
>
>
> HDFS replicas placement strategy guarantees that the replicas of a block
> exist on at least two racks when its replication factor is greater than one.
> But fsck still reports that the replicas of some blocks end up on one rack.
> The cause of the problem is that decommission and corruption handling only
> check the block's replication factor but not the rack requirement. When an
> over-replicated block loses a replica due to decomission, corruption, or
> heartbeat lost, namenode does not take any action to guarantee that remaining
> replicas are on different racks.
>
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
