[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-9083?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15037293#comment-15037293
]
Xiaoyu Yao commented on HDFS-9083:
----------------------------------
The 2.7 patch caused failure of TestBalancer#testBalancerWithPinnedBlocks. The
test was passing without this patch.
[~shahrs87], can you take a look?
Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM warning: ignoring option MaxPermSize=768m;
support was removed in 8.0
Running org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.balancer.TestBalancer
Tests run: 1, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 12.888 sec <<<
FAILURE! - in org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.balancer.TestBalancer
testBalancerWithPinnedBlocks(org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.balancer.TestBalancer)
Time elapsed: 12.748 sec <<< FAILURE!
java.lang.AssertionError: expected:<-3> but was:<0>
at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:88)
at org.junit.Assert.failNotEquals(Assert.java:743)
at org.junit.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:118)
at org.junit.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:555)
at org.junit.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:542)
at
org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.balancer.TestBalancer.testBalancerWithPinnedBlocks(TestBalancer.java:362)
Results :
Failed tests:
TestBalancer.testBalancerWithPinnedBlocks:362 expected:<-3> but was:<0>
> Replication violates block placement policy.
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-9083
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-9083
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: namenode
> Affects Versions: 2.6.0
> Reporter: Rushabh S Shah
> Assignee: Rushabh S Shah
> Priority: Blocker
> Fix For: 2.7.2, 2.6.3
>
> Attachments: HDFS-9083-branch-2.6.patch, HDFS-9083-branch-2.7.patch
>
>
> Recently we are noticing many cases in which all the replica of the block are
> residing on the same rack.
> During the block creation, the block placement policy was honored.
> But after node failure event in some specific manner, the block ends up in
> such state.
> On investigating more I found out that BlockManager#blockHasEnoughRacks is
> dependent on the config (net.topology.script.file.name)
> {noformat}
> if (!this.shouldCheckForEnoughRacks) {
> return true;
> }
> {noformat}
> We specify DNSToSwitchMapping implementation (our own custom implementation)
> via net.topology.node.switch.mapping.impl and no longer use
> net.topology.script.file.name config.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
