[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-9236?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14959255#comment-14959255
]
Hadoop QA commented on HDFS-9236:
---------------------------------
\\
\\
| (x) *{color:red}-1 overall{color}* |
\\
\\
|| Vote || Subsystem || Runtime || Comment ||
| {color:red}-1{color} | pre-patch | 20m 34s | Pre-patch trunk has 1 extant
Findbugs (version 3.0.0) warnings. |
| {color:green}+1{color} | @author | 0m 0s | The patch does not contain any
@author tags. |
| {color:green}+1{color} | tests included | 0m 0s | The patch appears to
include 1 new or modified test files. |
| {color:green}+1{color} | javac | 8m 40s | There were no new javac warning
messages. |
| {color:green}+1{color} | javadoc | 11m 3s | There were no new javadoc
warning messages. |
| {color:red}-1{color} | release audit | 0m 19s | The applied patch generated
1 release audit warnings. |
| {color:red}-1{color} | checkstyle | 1m 32s | The applied patch generated 1
new checkstyle issues (total was 142, now 141). |
| {color:green}+1{color} | whitespace | 0m 0s | The patch has no lines that
end in whitespace. |
| {color:green}+1{color} | install | 1m 36s | mvn install still works. |
| {color:green}+1{color} | eclipse:eclipse | 0m 35s | The patch built with
eclipse:eclipse. |
| {color:green}+1{color} | findbugs | 2m 43s | The patch does not introduce
any new Findbugs (version 3.0.0) warnings. |
| {color:green}+1{color} | native | 3m 37s | Pre-build of native portion |
| {color:red}-1{color} | hdfs tests | 65m 37s | Tests failed in hadoop-hdfs. |
| | | 116m 20s | |
\\
\\
|| Reason || Tests ||
| Failed unit tests | hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.TestDiskspaceQuotaUpdate |
| | hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.TestStartup |
| | hadoop.hdfs.server.datanode.TestReadOnlySharedStorage |
| | hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.ha.TestDNFencing |
| | hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.TestSaveNamespace |
| | hadoop.hdfs.server.datanode.TestDnRespectsBlockReportSplitThreshold |
| | hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.TestListCorruptFileBlocks |
| | hadoop.hdfs.server.datanode.TestDataNodeRollingUpgrade |
| | hadoop.hdfs.util.TestByteArrayManager |
| | hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.TestHDFSConcat |
| | hadoop.hdfs.qjournal.client.TestQuorumJournalManager |
| | hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.TestUnderReplicatedBlocks |
| | hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.TestFsckWithMultipleNameNodes |
\\
\\
|| Subsystem || Report/Notes ||
| Patch URL |
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12766810/HDFS-9236.002.patch |
| Optional Tests | javadoc javac unit findbugs checkstyle |
| git revision | trunk / dc45a7a |
| Pre-patch Findbugs warnings |
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/13005/artifact/patchprocess/trunkFindbugsWarningshadoop-hdfs.html
|
| Release Audit |
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/13005/artifact/patchprocess/patchReleaseAuditProblems.txt
|
| checkstyle |
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/13005/artifact/patchprocess/diffcheckstylehadoop-hdfs.txt
|
| hadoop-hdfs test log |
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/13005/artifact/patchprocess/testrun_hadoop-hdfs.txt
|
| Test Results |
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/13005/testReport/ |
| Java | 1.7.0_55 |
| uname | Linux asf909.gq1.ygridcore.net 3.13.0-36-lowlatency #63-Ubuntu SMP
PREEMPT Wed Sep 3 21:56:12 UTC 2014 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux |
| Console output |
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/13005/console |
This message was automatically generated.
> Missing sanity check for block size during block recovery
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-9236
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-9236
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: HDFS
> Affects Versions: 2.7.1
> Reporter: Tony Wu
> Assignee: Tony Wu
> Attachments: HDFS-9236.001.patch, HDFS-9236.002.patch
>
>
> Ran into an issue while running test against faulty data-node code.
> Currently in DataNode.java:
> {code:java}
> /** Block synchronization */
> void syncBlock(RecoveringBlock rBlock,
> List<BlockRecord> syncList) throws IOException {
> …
> // Calculate the best available replica state.
> ReplicaState bestState = ReplicaState.RWR;
> …
> // Calculate list of nodes that will participate in the recovery
> // and the new block size
> List<BlockRecord> participatingList = new ArrayList<BlockRecord>();
> final ExtendedBlock newBlock = new ExtendedBlock(bpid, blockId,
> -1, recoveryId);
> switch(bestState) {
> …
> case RBW:
> case RWR:
> long minLength = Long.MAX_VALUE;
> for(BlockRecord r : syncList) {
> ReplicaState rState = r.rInfo.getOriginalReplicaState();
> if(rState == bestState) {
> minLength = Math.min(minLength, r.rInfo.getNumBytes());
> participatingList.add(r);
> }
> }
> newBlock.setNumBytes(minLength);
> break;
> …
> }
> …
> nn.commitBlockSynchronization(block,
> newBlock.getGenerationStamp(), newBlock.getNumBytes(), true, false,
> datanodes, storages);
> }
> {code}
> This code is called by the DN coordinating the block recovery. In the above
> case, it is possible for none of the rState (reported by DNs with copies of
> the replica being recovered) to match the bestState. This can either be
> caused by faulty DN code or stale/modified/corrupted files on DN. When this
> happens the DN will end up reporting the minLengh of Long.MAX_VALUE.
> Unfortunately there is no check on the NN for replica length. See
> FSNamesystem.java:
> {code:java}
> void commitBlockSynchronization(ExtendedBlock oldBlock,
> long newgenerationstamp, long newlength,
> boolean closeFile, boolean deleteblock, DatanodeID[] newtargets,
> String[] newtargetstorages) throws IOException {
> …
> if (deleteblock) {
> Block blockToDel = ExtendedBlock.getLocalBlock(oldBlock);
> boolean remove = iFile.removeLastBlock(blockToDel) != null;
> if (remove) {
> blockManager.removeBlock(storedBlock);
> }
> } else {
> // update last block
> if(!copyTruncate) {
> storedBlock.setGenerationStamp(newgenerationstamp);
>
> //>>>> XXX block length is updated without any check <<<<//
> storedBlock.setNumBytes(newlength);
> }
> …
> if (closeFile) {
> LOG.info("commitBlockSynchronization(oldBlock=" + oldBlock
> + ", file=" + src
> + (copyTruncate ? ", newBlock=" + truncatedBlock
> : ", newgenerationstamp=" + newgenerationstamp)
> + ", newlength=" + newlength
> + ", newtargets=" + Arrays.asList(newtargets) + ") successful");
> } else {
> LOG.info("commitBlockSynchronization(" + oldBlock + ") successful");
> }
> }
> {code}
> After this point the block length becomes Long.MAX_VALUE. Any subsequent
> block report (even with correct length) will cause the block to be marked as
> corrupted. Since this is block could be the last block of the file. If this
> happens and the client goes away, NN won’t be able to recover the lease and
> close the file because the last block is under-replicated.
> I believe we need to have a sanity check for block size on both DN and NN to
> prevent such case from happening.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
