[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7430?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14223998#comment-14223998
 ] 

Colin Patrick McCabe commented on HDFS-7430:
--------------------------------------------

* Fix issue with {{stats.nextBlockPoolScanStartMs}}

* {{VolumeScanner#Statistics}} should have a {{toString}} method.

* {{TestOverReplicatedBlocks}}: test needs a slightly different way of manually 
triggering the block scanner

* {{BlockReportTestBase}}: 
{{DFSConfigKeys.DFS_DATANODE_DIRECTORYSCAN_INTERVAL_KEY}} is in seconds, but 
the test was treating it as milliseconds.

* {{SnapshotTestHelper}}: the old {{setLevel2OFF}} function for 
programmatically changing unit test logging no longer works (and throws an 
exception), because some of the loggers are actually slf4j loggers, not log4j.  
Got rid of {{setLevel2OFF}} and added a more sophisticated set of methods to 
{{GenericTestUtils}} that can programmatically disable or change logging for 
either commons-logging, slf4j, or log4j loggers, without making the caller care 
about which is which.

> Refactor the BlockScanner to use O(1) memory and use multiple threads
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDFS-7430
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7430
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>    Affects Versions: 2.7.0
>            Reporter: Colin Patrick McCabe
>            Assignee: Colin Patrick McCabe
>         Attachments: HDFS-7430.002.patch, HDFS-7430.003.patch, memory.png
>
>
> We should update the BlockScanner to use a constant amount of memory by 
> keeping track of what block was scanned last, rather than by tracking the 
> scan status of all blocks in memory.  Also, instead of having just one 
> thread, we should have a verification thread per hard disk (or other volume), 
> scanning at a configurable rate of bytes per second.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to