[jira] [Commented] (HDFS-10453) ReplicationMonitor thread could stuck for long time due to the race between replication and delete of same file in a large cluster.

2019-09-07 Thread niu (Jira)


[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10453?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16924846#comment-16924846
 ] 

niu commented on HDFS-10453:


Hi [~hexiaoqiao]. 

In this case, shouldn't be zero in the log `still in need of 0 to reach 3`. The 
demand should be at least 1,right?
 I didn't see any abnormal log in namenode.  Don't hung, it still works 
normally. 

Is it possible that some datanode connections are not stable but still alive 
causes this issue?

> ReplicationMonitor thread could stuck for long time due to the race between 
> replication and delete of same file in a large cluster.
> ---
>
> Key: HDFS-10453
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10453
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: namenode
>Affects Versions: 2.4.1, 2.5.2, 2.7.1, 2.6.4
>Reporter: He Xiaoqiao
>Assignee: He Xiaoqiao
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.1.0, 2.10.0, 2.9.1, 2.8.4, 2.7.6, 3.0.3
>
> Attachments: HDFS-10453-branch-2.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.003.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.004.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.005.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.006.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.007.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.008.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.009.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.8.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.8.002.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.9.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.9.002.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-3.0.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-3.0.002.patch, HDFS-10453-trunk.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-trunk.002.patch, HDFS-10453.001.patch
>
>
> ReplicationMonitor thread could stuck for long time and loss data with little 
> probability. Consider the typical scenario:
> (1) create and close a file with the default replicas(3);
> (2) increase replication (to 10) of the file.
> (3) delete the file while ReplicationMonitor is scheduling blocks belong to 
> that file for replications.
> if ReplicationMonitor stuck reappeared, NameNode will print log as:
> {code:xml}
> 2016-04-19 10:20:48,083 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy: Failed to 
> place enough replicas, still in need of 7 to reach 10 
> (unavailableStorages=[], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, 
> newBlock=false) For more information, please enable DEBUG log level on 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy
> ..
> 2016-04-19 10:21:17,184 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy: Failed to 
> place enough replicas, still in need of 7 to reach 10 
> (unavailableStorages=[DISK], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, 
> newBlock=false) For more information, please enable DEBUG log level on 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy
> 2016-04-19 10:21:17,184 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.protocol.BlockStoragePolicy: Failed to place enough 
> replicas: expected size is 7 but only 0 storage types can be selected 
> (replication=10, selected=[], unavailable=[DISK, ARCHIVE], removed=[DISK, 
> DISK, DISK, DISK, DISK, DISK, DISK], policy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]})
> 2016-04-19 10:21:17,184 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy: Failed to 
> place enough replicas, still in need of 7 to reach 10 
> (unavailableStorages=[DISK, ARCHIVE], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, 
> newBlock=false) All required storage types are unavailable:  
> unavailableStorages=[DISK, ARCHIVE], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}
> {code}
> This is because 2 threads (#NameNodeRpcServer and #ReplicationMonitor) 
> process same block at the same moment.
> (1) ReplicationMonitor#computeReplicationWorkForBlocks get blocks to 
> replicate and leave the global lock.
> (2) FSNamesystem#delete invoked to delete blocks then clear the reference in 
> blocksmap, needReplications, etc. the block's NumBytes will set 
> NO_ACK(Long.MAX_VALUE) which is used to indicate that the block deletion does 
> not need explicit ACK from the node. 
> (3) ReplicationMonitor#computeReplicationWorkForBlocks continue to 
> chooseTargets for the same blocks and no node will be selected after traverse 
> whole cluster because  no node choice satisfy the goodness criteria 
> (remaining spaces achieve required size Long.MAX_VALUE). 
> During of stage#3 ReplicationMonitor stuck for long time, esp

[jira] [Comment Edited] (HDFS-10453) ReplicationMonitor thread could stuck for long time due to the race between replication and delete of same file in a large cluster.

2019-09-05 Thread niu (Jira)


[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10453?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16923915#comment-16923915
 ] 

niu edited comment on HDFS-10453 at 9/6/19 4:04 AM:


[~hexiaoqiao] Thanks for your quick reply.

Yes, it is very strange. Currently, I am not sure the correct way to reprod it 
and it occurs after some datanodes are down.

I missed another log which is before this one. They occur in pair.


{code:java}
blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy 
(BlockPlacementPolicyDefault.java:chooseRandom(827)) - Not enough replicas was 
chosen. Reason:{TOO_MANY_NODES_ON_RACK=xxx, NODE_TOO_BUSY=xx}
{code}


It shouldn't happen, right?  


was (Author: hustnn):
[~hexiaoqiao] Thanks for your quick reply.

Yes, it is very strange. Currently, I am not sure the correct way to reprod it 
and it occurs after some datanodes are down.

I missed another log which is before this one 

```blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy 
(BlockPlacementPolicyDefault.java:chooseRandom(827)) - Not enough replicas was 
chosen. Reason:{TOO_MANY_NODES_ON_RACK=xxx, NODE_TOO_BUSY=xx}```

It shouldn't happen, right?  

> ReplicationMonitor thread could stuck for long time due to the race between 
> replication and delete of same file in a large cluster.
> ---
>
> Key: HDFS-10453
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10453
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: namenode
>Affects Versions: 2.4.1, 2.5.2, 2.7.1, 2.6.4
>Reporter: He Xiaoqiao
>Assignee: He Xiaoqiao
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.1.0, 2.10.0, 2.9.1, 2.8.4, 2.7.6, 3.0.3
>
> Attachments: HDFS-10453-branch-2.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.003.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.004.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.005.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.006.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.007.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.008.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.009.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.8.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.8.002.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.9.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.9.002.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-3.0.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-3.0.002.patch, HDFS-10453-trunk.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-trunk.002.patch, HDFS-10453.001.patch
>
>
> ReplicationMonitor thread could stuck for long time and loss data with little 
> probability. Consider the typical scenario:
> (1) create and close a file with the default replicas(3);
> (2) increase replication (to 10) of the file.
> (3) delete the file while ReplicationMonitor is scheduling blocks belong to 
> that file for replications.
> if ReplicationMonitor stuck reappeared, NameNode will print log as:
> {code:xml}
> 2016-04-19 10:20:48,083 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy: Failed to 
> place enough replicas, still in need of 7 to reach 10 
> (unavailableStorages=[], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, 
> newBlock=false) For more information, please enable DEBUG log level on 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy
> ..
> 2016-04-19 10:21:17,184 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy: Failed to 
> place enough replicas, still in need of 7 to reach 10 
> (unavailableStorages=[DISK], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, 
> newBlock=false) For more information, please enable DEBUG log level on 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy
> 2016-04-19 10:21:17,184 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.protocol.BlockStoragePolicy: Failed to place enough 
> replicas: expected size is 7 but only 0 storage types can be selected 
> (replication=10, selected=[], unavailable=[DISK, ARCHIVE], removed=[DISK, 
> DISK, DISK, DISK, DISK, DISK, DISK], policy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]})
> 2016-04-19 10:21:17,184 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy: Failed to 
> place enough replicas, still in need of 7 to reach 10 
> (unavailableStorages=[DISK, ARCHIVE], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, 
> newBlock=false) All required storage types are unavailable:  
> unavailableStorages=[DISK, ARCHIVE], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}
> {code}
> This is because 2 threads (#NameNodeRpcServer and #ReplicationMonitor) 
> process same block at the same moment.
> (1) ReplicationMonitor#computeReplicationWorkForBlocks get block

[jira] [Commented] (HDFS-10453) ReplicationMonitor thread could stuck for long time due to the race between replication and delete of same file in a large cluster.

2019-09-05 Thread niu (Jira)


[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10453?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16923915#comment-16923915
 ] 

niu commented on HDFS-10453:


[~hexiaoqiao] Thanks for your quick reply.

Yes, it is very strange. Currently, I am not sure the correct way to reprod it 
and it occurs after some datanodes are down.

I missed another log which is before this one 

```blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy 
(BlockPlacementPolicyDefault.java:chooseRandom(827)) - Not enough replicas was 
chosen. Reason:{TOO_MANY_NODES_ON_RACK=xxx, NODE_TOO_BUSY=xx}```

It shouldn't happen, right?  

> ReplicationMonitor thread could stuck for long time due to the race between 
> replication and delete of same file in a large cluster.
> ---
>
> Key: HDFS-10453
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10453
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: namenode
>Affects Versions: 2.4.1, 2.5.2, 2.7.1, 2.6.4
>Reporter: He Xiaoqiao
>Assignee: He Xiaoqiao
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.1.0, 2.10.0, 2.9.1, 2.8.4, 2.7.6, 3.0.3
>
> Attachments: HDFS-10453-branch-2.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.003.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.004.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.005.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.006.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.007.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.008.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.009.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.8.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.8.002.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.9.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.9.002.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-3.0.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-3.0.002.patch, HDFS-10453-trunk.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-trunk.002.patch, HDFS-10453.001.patch
>
>
> ReplicationMonitor thread could stuck for long time and loss data with little 
> probability. Consider the typical scenario:
> (1) create and close a file with the default replicas(3);
> (2) increase replication (to 10) of the file.
> (3) delete the file while ReplicationMonitor is scheduling blocks belong to 
> that file for replications.
> if ReplicationMonitor stuck reappeared, NameNode will print log as:
> {code:xml}
> 2016-04-19 10:20:48,083 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy: Failed to 
> place enough replicas, still in need of 7 to reach 10 
> (unavailableStorages=[], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, 
> newBlock=false) For more information, please enable DEBUG log level on 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy
> ..
> 2016-04-19 10:21:17,184 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy: Failed to 
> place enough replicas, still in need of 7 to reach 10 
> (unavailableStorages=[DISK], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, 
> newBlock=false) For more information, please enable DEBUG log level on 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy
> 2016-04-19 10:21:17,184 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.protocol.BlockStoragePolicy: Failed to place enough 
> replicas: expected size is 7 but only 0 storage types can be selected 
> (replication=10, selected=[], unavailable=[DISK, ARCHIVE], removed=[DISK, 
> DISK, DISK, DISK, DISK, DISK, DISK], policy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]})
> 2016-04-19 10:21:17,184 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy: Failed to 
> place enough replicas, still in need of 7 to reach 10 
> (unavailableStorages=[DISK, ARCHIVE], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, 
> newBlock=false) All required storage types are unavailable:  
> unavailableStorages=[DISK, ARCHIVE], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}
> {code}
> This is because 2 threads (#NameNodeRpcServer and #ReplicationMonitor) 
> process same block at the same moment.
> (1) ReplicationMonitor#computeReplicationWorkForBlocks get blocks to 
> replicate and leave the global lock.
> (2) FSNamesystem#delete invoked to delete blocks then clear the reference in 
> blocksmap, needReplications, etc. the block's NumBytes will set 
> NO_ACK(Long.MAX_VALUE) which is used to indicate that the block deletion does 
> not need explicit ACK from the node. 
> (3) ReplicationMonitor#computeReplicationWorkForBlocks continue to 
> chooseTargets for the same blocks and no node will be selected after traverse 
> whole cluster because  no node choice satisfy the goodness criteria 
> (rem

[jira] [Comment Edited] (HDFS-10453) ReplicationMonitor thread could stuck for long time due to the race between replication and delete of same file in a large cluster.

2019-09-05 Thread niu (Jira)


[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10453?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16923885#comment-16923885
 ] 

niu edited comment on HDFS-10453 at 9/6/19 2:54 AM:


Hi [~hexiaoqiao]

We are using 2.9.2 and has this WARN again. In which case, will the `in need of 
0 to reach 3` happen? From my understanding, if the `results` already equals to 
the number of replicas, shouldn't request node anymore.


{code:java}
2019-09-05 16:10:47,821 WARN  blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy 
(BlockPlacementPolicyDefault.java:chooseTarget(431)) - Failed to place enough 
replicas, still in need of 0 to reach 3 (unavailableStorages=[], 
storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, storageTypes=[DISK], 
creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, newBlock=false) For more 
information, please enable DEBUG log level on 
org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy and 
org.apache.hadoop.net.NetworkTopology
{code}



was (Author: hustnn):
Hi [~hexiaoqiao]

We are using 2.9.2 and has this WARN again. In which case, will the `in need of 
0 to reach 3` happen?


{code:java}
2019-09-05 16:10:47,821 WARN  blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy 
(BlockPlacementPolicyDefault.java:chooseTarget(431)) - Failed to place enough 
replicas, still in need of 0 to reach 3 (unavailableStorages=[], 
storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, storageTypes=[DISK], 
creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, newBlock=false) For more 
information, please enable DEBUG log level on 
org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy and 
org.apache.hadoop.net.NetworkTopology
{code}


> ReplicationMonitor thread could stuck for long time due to the race between 
> replication and delete of same file in a large cluster.
> ---
>
> Key: HDFS-10453
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10453
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: namenode
>Affects Versions: 2.4.1, 2.5.2, 2.7.1, 2.6.4
>Reporter: He Xiaoqiao
>Assignee: He Xiaoqiao
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.1.0, 2.10.0, 2.9.1, 2.8.4, 2.7.6, 3.0.3
>
> Attachments: HDFS-10453-branch-2.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.003.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.004.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.005.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.006.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.007.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.008.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.009.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.8.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.8.002.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.9.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.9.002.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-3.0.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-3.0.002.patch, HDFS-10453-trunk.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-trunk.002.patch, HDFS-10453.001.patch
>
>
> ReplicationMonitor thread could stuck for long time and loss data with little 
> probability. Consider the typical scenario:
> (1) create and close a file with the default replicas(3);
> (2) increase replication (to 10) of the file.
> (3) delete the file while ReplicationMonitor is scheduling blocks belong to 
> that file for replications.
> if ReplicationMonitor stuck reappeared, NameNode will print log as:
> {code:xml}
> 2016-04-19 10:20:48,083 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy: Failed to 
> place enough replicas, still in need of 7 to reach 10 
> (unavailableStorages=[], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, 
> newBlock=false) For more information, please enable DEBUG log level on 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy
> ..
> 2016-04-19 10:21:17,184 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy: Failed to 
> place enough replicas, still in need of 7 to reach 10 
> (unavailableStorages=[DISK], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, 
> newBlock=false) For more information, please enable DEBUG log level on 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy
> 2016-04-19 10:21:17,184 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.protocol.BlockStoragePolicy: Failed to place enough 
> replicas: expected size is 7 but only 0 storage types can be selected 
> (replication=10, selected=[], unavailable=[DISK, ARCHIVE], removed=[DISK, 
> DISK, DISK, DISK, DISK, DISK, DISK], policy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]})
> 2016-04-19 10:21:17,184 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy: Failed to 
> place enough replicas, still in need of 7 to reach 10 
> (unavailableStorages=[DISK, ARCHIVE], storagePo

[jira] [Comment Edited] (HDFS-10453) ReplicationMonitor thread could stuck for long time due to the race between replication and delete of same file in a large cluster.

2019-09-05 Thread niu (Jira)


[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10453?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16923885#comment-16923885
 ] 

niu edited comment on HDFS-10453 at 9/6/19 2:53 AM:


Hi [~hexiaoqiao]

We are using 2.9.2 and has this WARN again. In which case, will the `in need of 
0 to reach 3` happen?


{code:java}
2019-09-05 16:10:47,821 WARN  blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy 
(BlockPlacementPolicyDefault.java:chooseTarget(431)) - Failed to place enough 
replicas, still in need of 0 to reach 3 (unavailableStorages=[], 
storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, storageTypes=[DISK], 
creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, newBlock=false) For more 
information, please enable DEBUG log level on 
org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy and 
org.apache.hadoop.net.NetworkTopology
{code}



was (Author: hustnn):
Hi [~hexiaoqiao]

We are using 2.9.2 and has this WARN again. In which case, will the `in need of 
0 to reach 3` happen?

```2019-09-05 16:10:47,821 WARN  blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy 
(BlockPlacementPolicyDefault.java:chooseTarget(431)) - Failed to place enough 
replicas, still in need of 0 to reach 3 (unavailableStorages=[], 
storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, storageTypes=[DISK], 
creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, newBlock=false) For more 
information, please enable DEBUG log level on 
org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy and 
org.apache.hadoop.net.NetworkTopology```

> ReplicationMonitor thread could stuck for long time due to the race between 
> replication and delete of same file in a large cluster.
> ---
>
> Key: HDFS-10453
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10453
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: namenode
>Affects Versions: 2.4.1, 2.5.2, 2.7.1, 2.6.4
>Reporter: He Xiaoqiao
>Assignee: He Xiaoqiao
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.1.0, 2.10.0, 2.9.1, 2.8.4, 2.7.6, 3.0.3
>
> Attachments: HDFS-10453-branch-2.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.003.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.004.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.005.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.006.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.007.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.008.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.009.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.8.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.8.002.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.9.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.9.002.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-3.0.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-3.0.002.patch, HDFS-10453-trunk.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-trunk.002.patch, HDFS-10453.001.patch
>
>
> ReplicationMonitor thread could stuck for long time and loss data with little 
> probability. Consider the typical scenario:
> (1) create and close a file with the default replicas(3);
> (2) increase replication (to 10) of the file.
> (3) delete the file while ReplicationMonitor is scheduling blocks belong to 
> that file for replications.
> if ReplicationMonitor stuck reappeared, NameNode will print log as:
> {code:xml}
> 2016-04-19 10:20:48,083 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy: Failed to 
> place enough replicas, still in need of 7 to reach 10 
> (unavailableStorages=[], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, 
> newBlock=false) For more information, please enable DEBUG log level on 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy
> ..
> 2016-04-19 10:21:17,184 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy: Failed to 
> place enough replicas, still in need of 7 to reach 10 
> (unavailableStorages=[DISK], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, 
> newBlock=false) For more information, please enable DEBUG log level on 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy
> 2016-04-19 10:21:17,184 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.protocol.BlockStoragePolicy: Failed to place enough 
> replicas: expected size is 7 but only 0 storage types can be selected 
> (replication=10, selected=[], unavailable=[DISK, ARCHIVE], removed=[DISK, 
> DISK, DISK, DISK, DISK, DISK, DISK], policy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]})
> 2016-04-19 10:21:17,184 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy: Failed to 
> place enough replicas, still in need of 7 to reach 10 
> (unavailableStorages=[DISK, ARCHIVE], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, 
> newBlock=false) A

[jira] [Commented] (HDFS-10453) ReplicationMonitor thread could stuck for long time due to the race between replication and delete of same file in a large cluster.

2019-09-05 Thread niu (Jira)


[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10453?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16923885#comment-16923885
 ] 

niu commented on HDFS-10453:


Hi [~hexiaoqiao]

We are using 2.9.2 and has this WARN again. In which case, will the `in need of 
0 to reach 3` happen?

```2019-09-05 16:10:47,821 WARN  blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy 
(BlockPlacementPolicyDefault.java:chooseTarget(431)) - Failed to place enough 
replicas, still in need of 0 to reach 3 (unavailableStorages=[], 
storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, storageTypes=[DISK], 
creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, newBlock=false) For more 
information, please enable DEBUG log level on 
org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy and 
org.apache.hadoop.net.NetworkTopology```

> ReplicationMonitor thread could stuck for long time due to the race between 
> replication and delete of same file in a large cluster.
> ---
>
> Key: HDFS-10453
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10453
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: namenode
>Affects Versions: 2.4.1, 2.5.2, 2.7.1, 2.6.4
>Reporter: He Xiaoqiao
>Assignee: He Xiaoqiao
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.1.0, 2.10.0, 2.9.1, 2.8.4, 2.7.6, 3.0.3
>
> Attachments: HDFS-10453-branch-2.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.003.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.004.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.005.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.006.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.007.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.008.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.7.009.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.8.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.8.002.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-2.9.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-2.9.002.patch, HDFS-10453-branch-3.0.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-branch-3.0.002.patch, HDFS-10453-trunk.001.patch, 
> HDFS-10453-trunk.002.patch, HDFS-10453.001.patch
>
>
> ReplicationMonitor thread could stuck for long time and loss data with little 
> probability. Consider the typical scenario:
> (1) create and close a file with the default replicas(3);
> (2) increase replication (to 10) of the file.
> (3) delete the file while ReplicationMonitor is scheduling blocks belong to 
> that file for replications.
> if ReplicationMonitor stuck reappeared, NameNode will print log as:
> {code:xml}
> 2016-04-19 10:20:48,083 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy: Failed to 
> place enough replicas, still in need of 7 to reach 10 
> (unavailableStorages=[], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, 
> newBlock=false) For more information, please enable DEBUG log level on 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy
> ..
> 2016-04-19 10:21:17,184 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy: Failed to 
> place enough replicas, still in need of 7 to reach 10 
> (unavailableStorages=[DISK], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, 
> newBlock=false) For more information, please enable DEBUG log level on 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy
> 2016-04-19 10:21:17,184 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.protocol.BlockStoragePolicy: Failed to place enough 
> replicas: expected size is 7 but only 0 storage types can be selected 
> (replication=10, selected=[], unavailable=[DISK, ARCHIVE], removed=[DISK, 
> DISK, DISK, DISK, DISK, DISK, DISK], policy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]})
> 2016-04-19 10:21:17,184 WARN 
> org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.server.blockmanagement.BlockPlacementPolicy: Failed to 
> place enough replicas, still in need of 7 to reach 10 
> (unavailableStorages=[DISK, ARCHIVE], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}, 
> newBlock=false) All required storage types are unavailable:  
> unavailableStorages=[DISK, ARCHIVE], storagePolicy=BlockStoragePolicy{HOT:7, 
> storageTypes=[DISK], creationFallbacks=[], replicationFallbacks=[ARCHIVE]}
> {code}
> This is because 2 threads (#NameNodeRpcServer and #ReplicationMonitor) 
> process same block at the same moment.
> (1) ReplicationMonitor#computeReplicationWorkForBlocks get blocks to 
> replicate and leave the global lock.
> (2) FSNamesystem#delete invoked to delete blocks then clear the reference in 
> blocksmap, needReplications, etc. the block's NumBytes will set 
> NO_ACK(Long.MAX_VALUE) which is used to indicate that the block deletion does 
> not need explicit ACK from the node. 
> (3) ReplicationMonit