[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-2486?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13171586#comment-13171586
]
Hadoop QA commented on HDFS-2486:
---------------------------------
-1 overall. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12507779/HDFS-2486.patch
against trunk revision .
+1 @author. The patch does not contain any @author tags.
-1 tests included. 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.
-1 javadoc. The javadoc tool appears to have generated 90 warning messages.
+1 javac. The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac
compiler warnings.
+1 eclipse:eclipse. The patch built with eclipse:eclipse.
-1 findbugs. The patch appears to cause Findbugs (version 1.3.9) to fail.
+1 release audit. The applied patch does not increase the total number of
release audit warnings.
-1 core tests. The patch failed these unit tests:
org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.datanode.TestDataNodeMultipleRegistrations
+1 contrib tests. The patch passed contrib unit tests.
Test results:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/1720//testReport/
Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/1720//console
This message is automatically generated.
> Review issues with UnderReplicatedBlocks
> ----------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-2486
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-2486
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: name-node
> Affects Versions: 0.23.0
> Reporter: Steve Loughran
> Assignee: Uma Maheswara Rao G
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: HDFS-2486.patch
>
>
> Here are some things I've noted in the UnderReplicatedBlocks class that
> someone else should review and consider if the code is correct. If not, they
> are easy to fix.
> remove(Block block, int priLevel) is not synchronized, and as the inner
> classes are not, there is a risk of race conditions there.
> some of the code assumes that getPriority can return the value LEVEL, and if
> so does not attempt to queue the blocks. As this return value is not
> currently possible, those checks can be removed.
> The queue gives priority to blocks whose replication count is less than a
> third of its expected count over those that are "normally under replicated".
> While this is good for ensuring that files scheduled for large replication
> are replicated fast, it may not be the best strategy for maintaining data
> integrity. For that it may be better to give whichever blocks have only two
> replicas priority over blocks that may, for example, already have 3 out of 10
> copies in the filesystem.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
