[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7537?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14336321#comment-14336321
]
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/12700691/HDFS-7537.2.patch
against trunk revision 6cbd9f1.
{color:green}+1 @author{color}. The patch does not contain any @author
tags.
{color:green}+1 tests included{color}. The patch appears to include 1 new
or modified test files.
{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:red}-1 core tests{color}. The patch failed these unit tests in
hadoop-hdfs-project/hadoop-hdfs:
org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.TestLeaseRecovery2
Test results:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/9663//testReport/
Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/9663//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, HDFS-7537.2.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)
