[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5270?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13228251#comment-13228251
]
Hadoop QA commented on HBASE-5270:
----------------------------------
-1 overall. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12518153/HBASE-5270v11.patch
against trunk revision .
+1 @author. The patch does not contain any @author tags.
+1 tests included. The patch appears to include 9 new or modified tests.
+1 javadoc. The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages.
+1 javac. The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac
compiler warnings.
-1 findbugs. The patch appears to introduce 161 new Findbugs (version
1.3.9) warnings.
+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.hbase.mapreduce.TestHFileOutputFormat
org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapred.TestTableMapReduce
org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestImportTsv
Test results:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/1172//testReport/
Findbugs warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/1172//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarnings.html
Console output:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/1172//console
This message is automatically generated.
> Handle potential data loss due to concurrent processing of processFaileOver
> and ServerShutdownHandler
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-5270
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5270
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: master
> Reporter: Zhihong Yu
> Assignee: chunhui shen
> Fix For: 0.92.2
>
> Attachments: 5270-90-testcase.patch, 5270-90-testcasev2.patch,
> 5270-90.patch, 5270-90v2.patch, 5270-90v3.patch, 5270-testcase.patch,
> 5270-testcasev2.patch, HBASE-5270v11.patch, hbase-5270.patch,
> hbase-5270v10.patch, hbase-5270v2.patch, hbase-5270v4.patch,
> hbase-5270v5.patch, hbase-5270v6.patch, hbase-5270v7.patch,
> hbase-5270v8.patch, hbase-5270v9.patch, sampletest.txt
>
>
> This JIRA continues the effort from HBASE-5179. Starting with Stack's
> comments about patches for 0.92 and TRUNK:
> Reviewing 0.92v17
> isDeadServerInProgress is a new public method in ServerManager but it does
> not seem to be used anywhere.
> Does isDeadRootServerInProgress need to be public? Ditto for meta version.
> This method param names are not right 'definitiveRootServer'; what is meant
> by definitive? Do they need this qualifier?
> Is there anything in place to stop us expiring a server twice if its carrying
> root and meta?
> What is difference between asking assignment manager isCarryingRoot and this
> variable that is passed in? Should be doc'd at least. Ditto for meta.
> I think I've asked for this a few times - onlineServers needs to be
> explained... either in javadoc or in comment. This is the param passed into
> joinCluster. How does it arise? I think I know but am unsure. God love the
> poor noob that comes awandering this code trying to make sense of it all.
> It looks like we get the list by trawling zk for regionserver znodes that
> have not checked in. Don't we do this operation earlier in master setup? Are
> we doing it again here?
> Though distributed split log is configured, we will do in master single
> process splitting under some conditions with this patch. Its not explained in
> code why we would do this. Why do we think master log splitting 'high
> priority' when it could very well be slower. Should we only go this route if
> distributed splitting is not going on. Do we know if concurrent distributed
> log splitting and master splitting works?
> Why would we have dead servers in progress here in master startup? Because a
> servershutdownhandler fired?
> This patch is different to the patch for 0.90. Should go into trunk first
> with tests, then 0.92. Should it be in this issue? This issue is really hard
> to follow now. Maybe this issue is for 0.90.x and new issue for more work on
> this trunk patch?
> This patch needs to have the v18 differences applied.
--
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
