+1 (btw is there anything we can do about the maniacal spam classifier on this list? it marked my first three attempts to +1 this patch as spam...)
-Todd On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Eli Collins <e...@cloudera.com> wrote: > > +1 > > Thanks, > Eli > > On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 10:22 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > > I'd like to open a vote on committing HDFS-927 to both hadoop branch > > 0.20 and to 0.21. > > > > HDFS-927 "DFSInputStream retries too many times for new block > > location" has an odd summary but in short, its a better HDFS-127 > > "DFSClient block read failures cause open DFSInputStream to become > > unusable". HDFS-127 is an old, popular issue that refuses to die. We > > voted on having it committed to the 0.20 branch not too long ago, see > > http://www.mail-archive.com/hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org/msg00401.html, > > only it broke TestFsck (See http://su.pr/1nylUn) so it was reverted. > > > > High-level, HDFS-127/HDFS-927 is about fixing DFSClient so it a good > > read cleans out the failures count (Previous failures 'stuck' though > > there may have been hours of successful reads in betwixt). When > > rolling hadoop 0.20.2 was proposed, a few fellas including myself > > raised a lack of HDFS-127 as an obstacle. > > > > HDFS-927 has been committed to TRUNK. > > > > I'm +1 on committing to 0.20 and to 0.21 branches. > > > > Thanks for taking the time to take a look into this issue. > > St.Ack > >
