[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7165?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14178693#comment-14178693
]
Zhe Zhang commented on HDFS-7165:
---------------------------------
[~andrew.wang] Thanks for the review. While I look into the ClientProtocol
issue, here's a quite question:
bq. TestMissingBlocksAlert still has a whitespace-only change. Line 79-80 were
deleted.
The original file has 2 empty lines there. In general, if we see formatting
issues like that (indenting etc.), should we leave them there, correct them, or
ask the original author to correct them?
> Separate block metrics for files with replication count 1
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-7165
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7165
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Andrew Wang
> Assignee: Zhe Zhang
> Attachments: HDFS-7165-20141003-v1.patch,
> HDFS-7165-20141009-v1.patch, HDFS-7165-20141010-v1.patch,
> HDFS-7165-20141015-v1.patch
>
>
> We see a lot of escalations because someone has written teragen output with a
> replication factor of 1, a DN goes down, and a bunch of missing blocks show
> up. These are normally false positives, since teragen output is disposable,
> and generally speaking, users should understand this is true for all repl=1
> files.
> It'd be nice to be able to separate out these repl=1 missing blocks from
> missing blocks with higher replication factors..
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
