[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-6618?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14050242#comment-14050242
]
Hadoop QA commented on HDFS-6618:
---------------------------------
{color:red}-1 overall{color}. Here are the results of testing the latest
attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12653582/HDFS-6618.inodeRemover.v2.patch
against trunk revision .
{color:green}+1 @author{color}. The patch does not contain any @author
tags.
{color:green}+1 tests included{color}. The patch appears to include 2 new
or modified test files.
{color:green}+1 javac{color}. The applied patch does not increase the
total number of javac compiler warnings.
{color:green}+1 javadoc{color}. There were no new javadoc warning messages.
{color:green}+1 eclipse:eclipse{color}. The patch built with
eclipse:eclipse.
{color:green}+1 findbugs{color}. The patch does not introduce any new
Findbugs (version 1.3.9) warnings.
{color:green}+1 release audit{color}. The applied patch does not increase
the total number of release audit warnings.
{color:red}-1 core tests{color}. The patch failed these unit tests in
hadoop-hdfs-project/hadoop-hdfs:
org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.TestBlockTokenWithDFS
{color:green}+1 contrib tests{color}. The patch passed contrib unit tests.
Test results:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/7272//testReport/
Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/7272//console
This message is automatically generated.
> Edit log corruption may still happen even after HDFS-6527
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-6618
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-6618
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 2.5.0
> Reporter: Kihwal Lee
> Priority: Blocker
> Attachments: HDFS-6618.AbstractList.patch,
> HDFS-6618.inodeRemover.patch, HDFS-6618.inodeRemover.v2.patch, HDFS-6618.patch
>
>
> After HDFS-6527, we have not seen the edit log corruption for weeks on
> multiple clusters until yesterday. Previously, we would see it within 30
> minutes on a cluster.
> But the same condition was reproduced even with HDFS-6527. The only
> explanation is that the RPC handler thread serving {{addBlock()}} was
> accessing stale parent value. Although nulling out parent is done inside the
> {{FSNamesystem}} and {{FSDirectory}} write lock, there is no memory barrier
> because there is no "synchronized" block involved in the process.
> I suggest making parent volatile.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
