[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7537?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14334686#comment-14334686
]
Hadoop QA commented on HDFS-7537:
---------------------------------
{color:red}-1 overall{color}. Here are the results of testing the latest
attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12700346/HDFS-7537.1.patch
against trunk revision 1dba572.
{color:green}+1 @author{color}. The patch does not contain any @author
tags.
{color:red}-1 tests included{color}. The patch doesn't appear to include
any new or modified tests.
Please justify why no new tests are needed for this
patch.
Also please list what manual steps were performed to
verify this patch.
{color:green}+1 javac{color}. The applied patch does not increase the
total number of javac compiler warnings.
{color:green}+1 javadoc{color}. There were no new javadoc warning messages.
{color:green}+1 eclipse:eclipse{color}. The patch built with
eclipse:eclipse.
{color:green}+1 findbugs{color}. The patch does not introduce any new
Findbugs (version 2.0.3) warnings.
{color:green}+1 release audit{color}. The applied patch does not increase
the total number of release audit warnings.
{color:green}+1 core tests{color}. The patch passed unit tests in
hadoop-hdfs-project/hadoop-hdfs.
Test results:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/9653//testReport/
Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/9653//console
This message is automatically generated.
> fsck is confusing when dfs.namenode.replication.min > 1 && missing replicas
> && NN restart
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-7537
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7537
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: namenode
> Reporter: Allen Wittenauer
> Assignee: GAO Rui
> Attachments: HDFS-7537.1.patch, dfs-min-2-fsck.png, dfs-min-2.png
>
>
> If minimum replication is set to 2 or higher and some of those replicas are
> missing and the namenode restarts, it isn't always obvious that the missing
> replicas are the reason why the namenode isn't leaving safemode. We should
> improve the output of fsck and the web UI to make it obvious that the missing
> blocks are from unmet replicas vs. completely/totally missing.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
