[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-9599?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15224757#comment-15224757
]
Hudson commented on HDFS-9599:
------------------------------
FAILURE: Integrated in Hadoop-trunk-Commit #9551 (See
[https://builds.apache.org/job/Hadoop-trunk-Commit/9551/])
HDFS-9599. TestDecommissioningStatus.testDecommissionStatus occasionally
(iwasakims: rev 154d2532cf015e9ab9141864bd3ab0d6100ef597)
*
hadoop-hdfs-project/hadoop-hdfs/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hdfs/server/namenode/TestDecommissioningStatus.java
> TestDecommissioningStatus.testDecommissionStatus occasionally fails
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-9599
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-9599
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: namenode
> Environment: Jenkins
> Reporter: Wei-Chiu Chuang
> Assignee: Lin Yiqun
> Attachments: HDFS-9599.001.patch, HDFS-9599.002.patch
>
>
> From test result of a recent jenkins nightly
> https://builds.apache.org/job/Hadoop-Hdfs-trunk/2663/testReport/junit/org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode/TestDecommissioningStatus/testDecommissionStatus/
> The test failed because the number of under replicated blocks is 4, instead
> of 3.
> Looking at the log, there is a strayed block, which might have caused the
> faillure:
> {noformat}
> 2015-12-23 00:42:05,820 [Block report processor] INFO BlockStateChange
> (BlockManager.java:processReport(2131)) - BLOCK* processReport:
> blk_1073741825_1001 on node 127.0.0.1:57382 size 16384 does not belong to any
> file
> {noformat}
> The block size 16384 suggests this is left over from the sibling test case
> testDecommissionStatusAfterDNRestart. This can happen, because the same
> minidfs cluster is reused between tests.
> The test implementation should do a better job isolating tests.
> Another case of failure is when the load factor comes into play, and a block
> can not find sufficient data nodes to place replica. In this test, the
> runtime should not consider load factor:
> {noformat}
> conf.setBoolean(DFSConfigKeys.DFS_NAMENODE_REPLICATION_CONSIDERLOAD_KEY,
> false);
> {noformat}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
