sodonnel commented on PR #11199: URL: https://github.com/apache/ozone/pull/11199#issuecomment-5665657833
There are a few things we need to think about in this PR. Firstly, I think its too big a PR. We should deal with just the RM change and the report initially and leave the ContainerInfo command change as a second task. Also, we are adding a new health state, but we are treating it different to other health states (under replicated, over replicated, unhealthy). For all the other states, the state is stored into the container object in memory after it is processed. Why should this one be different? Does it make sense to have this like any other? Quasi_Closed_Stuck, for example, is an "unfixable state" right now. Containers in this state cannot get out of it, and this BCSID+checksum mismatch is nearly the same - its informational, but nothing for an operator to do. In the future perhaps they do take action or run a manual reconcile command, so it feels as valid a health state as QC_Stuck. If we treat it as a normal health state, then we do need to be aware that a container can only have a single health state. That means all replication and health related checks have passed and their problems fixed via replication, as they are more important than the mis-match. Is it possible for a container to be QC_Stuck and have this checksum mis-match? If so, which would win - BCSID+checksum mis-match or QC_Stuck? -- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
