[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-6621?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14124963#comment-14124963
]
Hadoop QA commented on HDFS-6621:
---------------------------------
{color:red}-1 overall{color}. Here are the results of testing the latest
attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12667080/HDFS-6621.patch_3
against trunk revision d1fa582.
{color:green}+1 @author{color}. The patch does not contain any @author
tags.
{color:red}-1 tests included{color}. 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.
{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:red}-1 findbugs{color}. The patch appears to introduce 1 new
Findbugs (version 2.0.3) 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.web.TestWebHdfsFileSystemContract
org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.namenode.ha.TestPipelinesFailover
{color:green}+1 contrib tests{color}. The patch passed contrib unit tests.
Test results:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/7934//testReport/
Findbugs warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/7934//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshadoop-hdfs.html
Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/7934//console
This message is automatically generated.
> Hadoop Balancer prematurely exits iterations
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-6621
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-6621
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: balancer
> Affects Versions: 2.2.0, 2.4.0
> Environment: Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 5.8 with Hadoop
> 2.4.0
> Reporter: Benjamin Bowman
> Labels: balancer
> Attachments: HDFS-6621.patch, HDFS-6621.patch_2, HDFS-6621.patch_3
>
>
> I have been having an issue with the balancing being too slow. The issue was
> not with the speed with which blocks were moved, but rather the balancer
> would prematurely exit out of it's balancing iterations. It would move ~10
> blocks or 100 MB then exit the current iteration (in which it said it was
> planning on moving about 10 GB).
> I looked in the Balancer.java code and believe I found and solved the issue.
> In the dispatchBlocks() function there is a variable,
> "noPendingBlockIteration", which counts the number of iterations in which a
> pending block to move cannot be found. Once this number gets to 5, the
> balancer exits the overall balancing iteration. I believe the desired
> functionality is 5 consecutive no pending block iterations - however this
> variable is never reset to 0 upon block moves. So once this number reaches 5
> - even if there have been thousands of blocks moved in between these no
> pending block iterations - the overall balancing iteration will prematurely
> end.
> The fix I applied was to set noPendingBlockIteration = 0 when a pending block
> is found and scheduled. In this way, my iterations do not prematurely exit
> unless there is 5 consecutive no pending block iterations. Below is a copy
> of my dispatchBlocks() function with the change I made.
> {code}
> private void dispatchBlocks() {
> long startTime = Time.now();
> long scheduledSize = getScheduledSize();
> this.blocksToReceive = 2*scheduledSize;
> boolean isTimeUp = false;
> int noPendingBlockIteration = 0;
> while(!isTimeUp && getScheduledSize()>0 &&
> (!srcBlockList.isEmpty() || blocksToReceive>0)) {
> PendingBlockMove pendingBlock = chooseNextBlockToMove();
> if (pendingBlock != null) {
> noPendingBlockIteration = 0;
> // move the block
> pendingBlock.scheduleBlockMove();
> continue;
> }
> /* Since we can not schedule any block to move,
> * filter any moved blocks from the source block list and
> * check if we should fetch more blocks from the namenode
> */
> filterMovedBlocks(); // filter already moved blocks
> if (shouldFetchMoreBlocks()) {
> // fetch new blocks
> try {
> blocksToReceive -= getBlockList();
> continue;
> } catch (IOException e) {
> LOG.warn("Exception while getting block list", e);
> return;
> }
> } else {
> // source node cannot find a pendingBlockToMove, iteration +1
> noPendingBlockIteration++;
> // in case no blocks can be moved for source node's task,
> // jump out of while-loop after 5 iterations.
> if (noPendingBlockIteration >= MAX_NO_PENDING_BLOCK_ITERATIONS) {
> setScheduledSize(0);
> }
> }
> // check if time is up or not
> if (Time.now()-startTime > MAX_ITERATION_TIME) {
> isTimeUp = true;
> continue;
> }
> /* Now we can not schedule any block to move and there are
> * no new blocks added to the source block list, so we wait.
> */
> try {
> synchronized(Balancer.this) {
> Balancer.this.wait(1000); // wait for targets/sources to be idle
> }
> } catch (InterruptedException ignored) {
> }
> }
> }
> }
> {code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
