[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-16420?focusedWorklogId=708346&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:worklog-tabpanel#worklog-708346
]
ASF GitHub Bot logged work on HDFS-16420:
-----------------------------------------
Author: ASF GitHub Bot
Created on: 13/Jan/22 14:28
Start Date: 13/Jan/22 14:28
Worklog Time Spent: 10m
Work Description: tomscut commented on a change in pull request #3880:
URL: https://github.com/apache/hadoop/pull/3880#discussion_r784007211
##########
File path:
hadoop-hdfs-project/hadoop-hdfs/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hdfs/server/blockmanagement/TestReplicationPolicy.java
##########
@@ -1018,6 +1018,69 @@ public void testChooseReplicaToDelete() throws Exception
{
assertEquals(chosen, storages[1]);
}
+ /**
+ * Test for the chooseReplicaToDelete are processed based on
+ * EC and STRIPED Policy.
+ */
+ @Test
+ public void testStripedChooseReplicaToDelete() throws Exception {
+ List<DatanodeStorageInfo> replicaList = new ArrayList<>();
+ List<DatanodeStorageInfo> candidate = new ArrayList<>();
+ final Map<String, List<DatanodeStorageInfo>> rackMap
+ = new HashMap<String, List<DatanodeStorageInfo>>();
+
+ replicaList.add(storages[0]);
+ replicaList.add(storages[1]);
+ replicaList.add(storages[2]);
+ replicaList.add(storages[4]);
+
+ candidate.add(storages[0]);
+ candidate.add(storages[2]);
+ candidate.add(storages[4]);
+
+ // Refresh the last update time for all the datanodes
+ for (int i = 0; i < dataNodes.length; i++) {
+ DFSTestUtil.resetLastUpdatesWithOffset(dataNodes[i], 0);
+ }
+
+ List<DatanodeStorageInfo> first = new ArrayList<>();
+ List<DatanodeStorageInfo> second = new ArrayList<>();
+ striptedPolicy.splitNodesWithRack(replicaList, candidate, rackMap, first,
+ second);
+ // storages[0] and storages[1] are in first set as their rack has two
Review comment:
The whole thing looks good to me. We should modify several comments.
##########
File path:
hadoop-hdfs-project/hadoop-hdfs/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hdfs/server/blockmanagement/TestReplicationPolicy.java
##########
@@ -1018,6 +1018,69 @@ public void testChooseReplicaToDelete() throws Exception
{
assertEquals(chosen, storages[1]);
}
+ /**
+ * Test for the chooseReplicaToDelete are processed based on
+ * EC and STRIPED Policy.
+ */
+ @Test
+ public void testStripedChooseReplicaToDelete() throws Exception {
+ List<DatanodeStorageInfo> replicaList = new ArrayList<>();
+ List<DatanodeStorageInfo> candidate = new ArrayList<>();
+ final Map<String, List<DatanodeStorageInfo>> rackMap
+ = new HashMap<String, List<DatanodeStorageInfo>>();
+
+ replicaList.add(storages[0]);
+ replicaList.add(storages[1]);
+ replicaList.add(storages[2]);
+ replicaList.add(storages[4]);
+
+ candidate.add(storages[0]);
+ candidate.add(storages[2]);
+ candidate.add(storages[4]);
+
+ // Refresh the last update time for all the datanodes
+ for (int i = 0; i < dataNodes.length; i++) {
+ DFSTestUtil.resetLastUpdatesWithOffset(dataNodes[i], 0);
+ }
+
+ List<DatanodeStorageInfo> first = new ArrayList<>();
+ List<DatanodeStorageInfo> second = new ArrayList<>();
+ striptedPolicy.splitNodesWithRack(replicaList, candidate, rackMap, first,
+ second);
+ // storages[0] and storages[1] are in first set as their rack has two
+ // replica nodes, while storages[2] and dataNodes[5] are in second set.
+ assertEquals(1, first.size());
+ assertEquals(2, second.size());
+ List<StorageType> excessTypes = new ArrayList<>();
+ {
+ // test returning null
+ excessTypes.add(StorageType.SSD);
+ assertNull(((BlockPlacementPolicyDefault) striptedPolicy)
+ .chooseReplicaToDelete(first, second, excessTypes, rackMap));
+ }
+ excessTypes.add(StorageType.DEFAULT);
+ DatanodeStorageInfo chosen = ((BlockPlacementPolicyDefault) striptedPolicy)
+ .chooseReplicaToDelete(first, second, excessTypes, rackMap);
+ // Within all storages, storages[5] with least free space
Review comment:
Update this comment.
##########
File path:
hadoop-hdfs-project/hadoop-hdfs/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hdfs/server/blockmanagement/TestReplicationPolicy.java
##########
@@ -1018,6 +1018,69 @@ public void testChooseReplicaToDelete() throws Exception
{
assertEquals(chosen, storages[1]);
}
+ /**
+ * Test for the chooseReplicaToDelete are processed based on
+ * EC and STRIPED Policy.
+ */
+ @Test
+ public void testStripedChooseReplicaToDelete() throws Exception {
+ List<DatanodeStorageInfo> replicaList = new ArrayList<>();
+ List<DatanodeStorageInfo> candidate = new ArrayList<>();
+ final Map<String, List<DatanodeStorageInfo>> rackMap
+ = new HashMap<String, List<DatanodeStorageInfo>>();
+
+ replicaList.add(storages[0]);
+ replicaList.add(storages[1]);
+ replicaList.add(storages[2]);
+ replicaList.add(storages[4]);
+
+ candidate.add(storages[0]);
+ candidate.add(storages[2]);
+ candidate.add(storages[4]);
+
+ // Refresh the last update time for all the datanodes
+ for (int i = 0; i < dataNodes.length; i++) {
+ DFSTestUtil.resetLastUpdatesWithOffset(dataNodes[i], 0);
+ }
+
+ List<DatanodeStorageInfo> first = new ArrayList<>();
+ List<DatanodeStorageInfo> second = new ArrayList<>();
+ striptedPolicy.splitNodesWithRack(replicaList, candidate, rackMap, first,
+ second);
+ // storages[0] and storages[1] are in first set as their rack has two
+ // replica nodes, while storages[2] and dataNodes[5] are in second set.
+ assertEquals(1, first.size());
+ assertEquals(2, second.size());
+ List<StorageType> excessTypes = new ArrayList<>();
+ {
+ // test returning null
+ excessTypes.add(StorageType.SSD);
+ assertNull(((BlockPlacementPolicyDefault) striptedPolicy)
+ .chooseReplicaToDelete(first, second, excessTypes, rackMap));
+ }
+ excessTypes.add(StorageType.DEFAULT);
+ DatanodeStorageInfo chosen = ((BlockPlacementPolicyDefault) striptedPolicy)
+ .chooseReplicaToDelete(first, second, excessTypes, rackMap);
+ // Within all storages, storages[5] with least free space
+ assertEquals(chosen, storages[0]);
+ striptedPolicy.adjustSetsWithChosenReplica(rackMap, first, second, chosen);
+ assertEquals(0, first.size());
+ assertEquals(2, second.size());
+
+ // Within first set, storages[1] with less free space
Review comment:
Update this comment.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
Issue Time Tracking
-------------------
Worklog Id: (was: 708346)
Time Spent: 50m (was: 40m)
> ec + balancer may cause missing block
> -------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-16420
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-16420
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: liubingxing
> Priority: Critical
> Labels: pull-request-available
> Attachments: image-2022-01-10-17-31-35-910.png,
> image-2022-01-10-17-32-56-981.png
>
> Time Spent: 50m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> We have a similar problem as HDFS-16297 described.
> In our cluster, we used {color:#de350b}ec(6+3) + balancer with version
> 3.1.0{color}, and the {color:#de350b}missing block{color} happened.
> We got the block(blk_-9223372036824119008) info from fsck, only 5 live
> replications and multiple redundant replications.
> {code:java}
> blk_-9223372036824119008_220037616 len=133370338 MISSING! Live_repl=5
> blk_-9223372036824119007:DatanodeInfoWithStorage,
> blk_-9223372036824119002:DatanodeInfoWithStorage,
> blk_-9223372036824119001:DatanodeInfoWithStorage,
> blk_-9223372036824119000:DatanodeInfoWithStorage,
> blk_-9223372036824119004:DatanodeInfoWithStorage,
> blk_-9223372036824119004:DatanodeInfoWithStorage,
> blk_-9223372036824119004:DatanodeInfoWithStorage,
> blk_-9223372036824119004:DatanodeInfoWithStorage,
> blk_-9223372036824119004:DatanodeInfoWithStorage,
> blk_-9223372036824119004:DatanodeInfoWithStorage {code}
>
> We searched the log from all datanode, and found that the internal blocks of
> blk_-9223372036824119008 were deleted almost at the same time.
>
> {code:java}
> 08:15:58,550 INFO impl.FsDatasetAsyncDiskService
> (FsDatasetAsyncDiskService.java:run(333)) - Deleted
> BP-1606066499-xxxx-1606188026755 blk_-9223372036824119008_220037616 URI
> file:/data15/hadoop/hdfs/data/current/BP-1606066499-xxxx-1606188026755/current/finalized/subdir19/subdir9/blk_-9223372036824119008
> 08:16:21,214 INFO impl.FsDatasetAsyncDiskService
> (FsDatasetAsyncDiskService.java:run(333)) - Deleted
> BP-1606066499-xxxx-1606188026755 blk_-9223372036824119006_220037616 URI
> file:/data4/hadoop/hdfs/data/current/BP-1606066499-xxxx-1606188026755/current/finalized/subdir19/subdir9/blk_-9223372036824119006
> 08:16:55,737 INFO impl.FsDatasetAsyncDiskService
> (FsDatasetAsyncDiskService.java:run(333)) - Deleted
> BP-1606066499-xxxx-1606188026755 blk_-9223372036824119005_220037616 URI
> file:/data2/hadoop/hdfs/data/current/BP-1606066499-xxxx-1606188026755/current/finalized/subdir19/subdir9/blk_-9223372036824119005
> {code}
>
> The total number of internal blocks deleted during 08:15-08:17 are as follows
> ||internal block||index|| delete num||
> |blk_-9223372036824119008
> blk_-9223372036824119006
> blk_-9223372036824119005
> blk_-9223372036824119004
> blk_-9223372036824119003
> blk_-9223372036824119000 |0
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> 8| 1
> 1
> 1
> 50
> 1
> 1|
>
> {color:#ff0000}During 08:15 to 08:17, we restarted 2 datanode and triggered
> full block report immediately.{color}
>
> There are 2 questions:
> 1. Why are there so many replicas of this block?
> 2. Why delete the internal block with only one copy?
> The reasons for the first problem may be as follows:
> 1. We set the full block report period of some datanode to 168 hours.
> 2. We have done a namenode HA operation.
> 3. After namenode HA, the state of storage became
> {color:#ff0000}stale{color}, and the state not change until next full block
> report.
> 4. The balancer copied the replica without deleting the replica from source
> node, because the source node have the stale storage, and the request was put
> into {color:#ff0000}postponedMisreplicatedBlocks{color}.
> 5. Balancer continues to copy the replica, eventually resulting in multiple
> copies of a replica
> !image-2022-01-10-17-31-35-910.png|width=642,height=269!
> The set of {color:#ff0000}rescannedMisreplicatedBlocks{color} have so many
> block to remove.
> !image-2022-01-10-17-32-56-981.png|width=745,height=124!
> As for the second question, we checked the code of
> {color:#de350b}processExtraRedundancyBlock{color}, but didn't find any
> problem.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
