[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-2964?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14380294#comment-14380294
]
Hadoop QA commented on HDFS-2964:
---------------------------------
{color:red}-1 overall{color}. Here are the results of testing the latest
attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12707244/HDFS-2964-2.patch
against trunk revision c906a1d.
{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:red}-1 javac{color:red}. The patch appears to cause the build to
fail.
Console output:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/10065//console
This message is automatically generated.
> No notice in any logs if dfs.datanode.du.reserved is greater than available
> disk space
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-2964
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-2964
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: datanode
> Affects Versions: 2.6.0
> Reporter: Robert J Berger
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: HDFS-2964-1.patch, HDFS-2964-2.patch, HDFS-2964.patch
>
>
> We spent a long time tracking down why a test hdfs cluster seemed to be
> running fine, but would not allow the mapred system to come up complaining
> that "could only be replicated to 0 nodes, instead of 1".
> There were no namenode or datanode errors in any of the logs. hadoop fsck
> said everything was good. At first glance dfsadmin -report looked good. It
> wasn't until I realized that there was 0 Capacity available that we poked
> around and found
> https://groups.google.com/a/cloudera.org/group/scm-users/msg/a4252d6623adbc2d
> which mentioned that the "reserverd space" might be greater than the disk
> space available. And we did find that our dfs.datanode.du.reserved was indeed
> higher than our actual since we were only testing a small cluster.
> It seems that there should be some warning or error in the logs that say that.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
