elow, how does the upgrade fail? Can you provide specific steps
to reproduce?
Smells like a bug to me, if I understand the scenario correctly.
-Todd
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Sreehari G wrote:
Hi all ,
What is the expectation in the following scenario :
Namenode has 3 name dirs
Hi all ,
What is the expectation in the following scenario :
Namenode has 3 name dirs configured ..
1) Namenode upgrade starts - Upgrade fails after 1st directory is upgraded
(2nd and 3rd dir is left unchanged ..)
2) Namenode starts
3) Namenode shutdown and rollbacked
Are the new changes done
ng the course of this project, so it's a good
opportunity to fix it up, add test coverage, etc.
-Todd
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 1:08 AM, Sreehari G wrote:
> Hi all ,
>
> In HDFS-903 - ( md5 verification of fsimage ) , with this change ,
> Backupnode is downloading the image &a
Hi all ,
In HDFS-903 - ( md5 verification of fsimage ) , with this change ,
Backupnode is downloading the image & edit files from namenode everytime
since the difference in checkpoint time is always maintined b/w Namenode and
Backupnode . This happens since Namenode is resetting its checkpoint t
In issue HDFS-1839 , is it safe to remove the endcheckpoint() call made at
doCheckpoint after namenode.rollfsimage() ?? As Konstantin Shvachko pointed
out , this call seems to be redundant .. Or is there any other impact if we
remove this ?
HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO.,LTD. huawei_logo
Solitaire
