[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7979?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14387320#comment-14387320
]
Colin Patrick McCabe commented on HDFS-7979:
--------------------------------------------
bq. I don't think there's anything actually wrong with a zero value.
The block report ID is initialized to zero when the NN first creates the object
representing the DN storage. By never sending 0 as a block report ID, we
ensure that we don't appear to be continuing an existing block report on the
first full block report. I realize this is a very unlikely scenario, but why
add more failure cases when it's easy to exclude them?
> Initialize block report IDs with a random number
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-7979
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7979
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: datanode
> Affects Versions: 2.7.0
> Reporter: Andrew Wang
> Assignee: Andrew Wang
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: HDFS-7979.001.patch, HDFS-7979.002.patch
>
>
> Right now block report IDs use system nanotime. This isn't that random, so
> let's start it at a random number for some more safety.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
