[jira] [Comment Edited] (HDFS-15589) Huge PostponedMisreplicatedBlocks can't decrease immediately when start namenode after datanode
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-15589?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17199847#comment-17199847
]
zhengchenyu edited comment on HDFS-15589 at 9/22/20, 6:24 AM:
--
Yeps, I can solve this problem by trigger block report manually. My means is
there any need to solve this problem by optimized some logical?
For example make sure new block report which trigger by namenode's heartbeat
happened after enter active state.
Because you know when I trigger datanode's block report, means block report
will occure twice. I thinks there is no need to increase the load to namenode.
In addition, as I kown, trigger block report manually will block report to all
namenode, then increase load to all namenode.
was (Author: zhengchenyu):
Yeps, I can solve this problem by trigger block report manually. My means is
there any need to solve this problem by optimized some logical?
For example make sure new block report which trigger by namenode's heartbeat
happened after enter active state.
Because you know when I trigger datanode's block report, means block report
will occure twice. I thinks there is no need to increase the load to namenode.
> Huge PostponedMisreplicatedBlocks can't decrease immediately when start
> namenode after datanode
> ---
>
> Key: HDFS-15589
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-15589
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: hdfs
> Environment: CentOS 7
>Reporter: zhengchenyu
>Priority: Major
>
> In our test cluster, I restart my namenode. Then I found many
> PostponedMisreplicatedBlocks which doesn't decrease immediately.
> I search the log below like this.
> {code:java}
> 2020-09-21 17:02:37,029 DEBUG BlockStateChange: *BLOCK* NameNode.blockReport:
> from DatanodeRegistration(xx.xx.xx.xx:9866,
> datanodeUuid=c6a9934f-afd4-4437-b976-fed55173ce57, infoPort=9864,
> infoSecurePort=0, ipcPort=9867,
> storageInfo=lv=-57;cid=CID-9f6d0a32-e51c-459a-9f65-6e7b5791ee25;nsid=1016509846;c=1592578350834),
> reports.length=12
> 2020-09-21 17:02:37,029 DEBUG BlockStateChange: *BLOCK* NameNode.blockReport:
> from DatanodeRegistration(xx.xx.xx.xx:9866,
> datanodeUuid=aee144f1-2082-4bca-a92b-f3c154a71c65, infoPort=9864,
> infoSecurePort=0, ipcPort=9867,
> storageInfo=lv=-57;cid=CID-9f6d0a32-e51c-459a-9f65-6e7b5791ee25;nsid=1016509846;c=1592578350834),
> reports.length=12
> 2020-09-21 17:02:37,029 DEBUG BlockStateChange: *BLOCK* NameNode.blockReport:
> from DatanodeRegistration(xx.xx.xx.xx:9866,
> datanodeUuid=d152fa5b-1089-4bfc-b9c4-e3a7d98c7a7b, infoPort=9864,
> infoSecurePort=0, ipcPort=9867,
> storageInfo=lv=-57;cid=CID-9f6d0a32-e51c-459a-9f65-6e7b5791ee25;nsid=1016509846;c=1592578350834),
> reports.length=12
> 2020-09-21 17:02:37,156 DEBUG BlockStateChange: *BLOCK* NameNode.blockReport:
> from DatanodeRegistration(xx.xx.xx.xx:9866,
> datanodeUuid=5cffc1fe-ace9-4af8-adfc-6002a7f5565d, infoPort=9864,
> infoSecurePort=0, ipcPort=9867,
> storageInfo=lv=-57;cid=CID-9f6d0a32-e51c-459a-9f65-6e7b5791ee25;nsid=1016509846;c=1592578350834),
> reports.length=12
> 2020-09-21 17:02:37,161 DEBUG BlockStateChange: *BLOCK* NameNode.blockReport:
> from DatanodeRegistration(xx.xx.xx.xx:9866,
> datanodeUuid=9980d8e1-b0d9-4657-b97d-c803f82c1459, infoPort=9864,
> infoSecurePort=0, ipcPort=9867,
> storageInfo=lv=-57;cid=CID-9f6d0a32-e51c-459a-9f65-6e7b5791ee25;nsid=1016509846;c=1592578350834),
> reports.length=12
> 2020-09-21 17:02:37,197 DEBUG BlockStateChange: *BLOCK* NameNode.blockReport:
> from DatanodeRegistration(xx.xx.xx.xx:9866,
> datanodeUuid=77ff3f5e-37f0-405f-a16c-166311546cae, infoPort=9864,
> infoSecurePort=0, ipcPort=9867,
> storageInfo=lv=-57;cid=CID-9f6d0a32-e51c-459a-9f65-6e7b5791ee25;nsid=1016509846;c=1592578350834),
> reports.length=12
> {code}
> Node: test cluster only have 6 datanode.
> You will see the blockreport called before "Marking all datanodes as stale"
> which is logged by startActiveServices. But
> DatanodeStorageInfo.blockContentsStale only set to false in blockreport, then
> startActiveServices set all datnaode to stale node. So the datanodes will
> keep stale util next blockreport, then PostponedMisreplicatedBlocks keep a
> huge number.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
[jira] [Comment Edited] (HDFS-15589) Huge PostponedMisreplicatedBlocks can't decrease immediately when start namenode after datanode
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-15589?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17199847#comment-17199847
]
zhengchenyu edited comment on HDFS-15589 at 9/22/20, 6:20 AM:
--
Yeps, I can solve this problem by trigger block report manually. My means is
there any need to solve this problem by optimized some logical?
For example make sure new block report which trigger by namenode's heartbeat
happened after enter active state.
Because you know when I trigger datanode's block report, means block report
will occure twice. I thinks there is no need to increase the load to namenode.
was (Author: zhengchenyu):
Yeps, I can solve this problem by trigger block report manually. My means is
there any need to solve this problem by optimized some logical? For example
make sure new block report which trigger by namenode's heartbeat happened after
enter active state.
> Huge PostponedMisreplicatedBlocks can't decrease immediately when start
> namenode after datanode
> ---
>
> Key: HDFS-15589
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-15589
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: hdfs
> Environment: CentOS 7
>Reporter: zhengchenyu
>Priority: Major
>
> In our test cluster, I restart my namenode. Then I found many
> PostponedMisreplicatedBlocks which doesn't decrease immediately.
> I search the log below like this.
> {code:java}
> 2020-09-21 17:02:37,029 DEBUG BlockStateChange: *BLOCK* NameNode.blockReport:
> from DatanodeRegistration(xx.xx.xx.xx:9866,
> datanodeUuid=c6a9934f-afd4-4437-b976-fed55173ce57, infoPort=9864,
> infoSecurePort=0, ipcPort=9867,
> storageInfo=lv=-57;cid=CID-9f6d0a32-e51c-459a-9f65-6e7b5791ee25;nsid=1016509846;c=1592578350834),
> reports.length=12
> 2020-09-21 17:02:37,029 DEBUG BlockStateChange: *BLOCK* NameNode.blockReport:
> from DatanodeRegistration(xx.xx.xx.xx:9866,
> datanodeUuid=aee144f1-2082-4bca-a92b-f3c154a71c65, infoPort=9864,
> infoSecurePort=0, ipcPort=9867,
> storageInfo=lv=-57;cid=CID-9f6d0a32-e51c-459a-9f65-6e7b5791ee25;nsid=1016509846;c=1592578350834),
> reports.length=12
> 2020-09-21 17:02:37,029 DEBUG BlockStateChange: *BLOCK* NameNode.blockReport:
> from DatanodeRegistration(xx.xx.xx.xx:9866,
> datanodeUuid=d152fa5b-1089-4bfc-b9c4-e3a7d98c7a7b, infoPort=9864,
> infoSecurePort=0, ipcPort=9867,
> storageInfo=lv=-57;cid=CID-9f6d0a32-e51c-459a-9f65-6e7b5791ee25;nsid=1016509846;c=1592578350834),
> reports.length=12
> 2020-09-21 17:02:37,156 DEBUG BlockStateChange: *BLOCK* NameNode.blockReport:
> from DatanodeRegistration(xx.xx.xx.xx:9866,
> datanodeUuid=5cffc1fe-ace9-4af8-adfc-6002a7f5565d, infoPort=9864,
> infoSecurePort=0, ipcPort=9867,
> storageInfo=lv=-57;cid=CID-9f6d0a32-e51c-459a-9f65-6e7b5791ee25;nsid=1016509846;c=1592578350834),
> reports.length=12
> 2020-09-21 17:02:37,161 DEBUG BlockStateChange: *BLOCK* NameNode.blockReport:
> from DatanodeRegistration(xx.xx.xx.xx:9866,
> datanodeUuid=9980d8e1-b0d9-4657-b97d-c803f82c1459, infoPort=9864,
> infoSecurePort=0, ipcPort=9867,
> storageInfo=lv=-57;cid=CID-9f6d0a32-e51c-459a-9f65-6e7b5791ee25;nsid=1016509846;c=1592578350834),
> reports.length=12
> 2020-09-21 17:02:37,197 DEBUG BlockStateChange: *BLOCK* NameNode.blockReport:
> from DatanodeRegistration(xx.xx.xx.xx:9866,
> datanodeUuid=77ff3f5e-37f0-405f-a16c-166311546cae, infoPort=9864,
> infoSecurePort=0, ipcPort=9867,
> storageInfo=lv=-57;cid=CID-9f6d0a32-e51c-459a-9f65-6e7b5791ee25;nsid=1016509846;c=1592578350834),
> reports.length=12
> {code}
> Node: test cluster only have 6 datanode.
> You will see the blockreport called before "Marking all datanodes as stale"
> which is logged by startActiveServices. But
> DatanodeStorageInfo.blockContentsStale only set to false in blockreport, then
> startActiveServices set all datnaode to stale node. So the datanodes will
> keep stale util next blockreport, then PostponedMisreplicatedBlocks keep a
> huge number.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
