[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7707?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14298003#comment-14298003
]
Yongjun Zhang commented on HDFS-7707:
-------------------------------------
One possible solution I thought about is, whenever we need to delete a
fileOrDirX, do
* check permission recursively,
* if it's permitted to delete fileOrDirX,
** rename it to a unique name fileOrDirX_to_be_deleted that client won't be
using,
** delete fileOrDirX_to_be_deleted.
This will cause some confusion in the edit log though. Also if fileOrDirX is
not permitted to be deleted, some sub dir / file in it may be deleted, so this
operation need to be done at allowed dir/file in a recursively fashion, which
may not be clean.
> Edit log corruption due to delayed block removal again
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-7707
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7707
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: namenode
> Affects Versions: 2.6.0
> Reporter: Yongjun Zhang
> Assignee: Yongjun Zhang
>
> Edit log corruption is seen again, even with the fix of HDFS-6825.
> Prior to HDFS-6825 fix, if dirX is deleted recursively, an OP_CLOSE can get
> into edit log for the fileY under dirX, thus corrupting the edit log
> (restarting NN with the edit log would fail).
> What HDFS-6825 does to fix this issue is, to detect whether fileY is already
> deleted by checking the ancestor dirs on it's path, if any of them doesn't
> exist, then fileY is already deleted, and don't put OP_CLOSE to edit log for
> the file.
> For this new edit log corruption, what I found was, the client first deleted
> dirX recursively, then create another dir with exactly the same name as dirX
> right away. Because HDFS-6825 count on the namespace checking (whether dirX
> exists in its parent dir) to decide whether a file has been deleted, the
> newly created dirX defeats this checking, thus OP_CLOSE for the already
> deleted file gets into the edit log, due to delayed block removal.
> What we need to do is to have a more robust way to detect whether a file has
> been deleted.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
