Repository navigation
Conversation
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
CI is green on the current head, and this one still has not had a human review. @Hexiaoqiao @ZanderXu, when you have a moment, could you please take a look? Happy to make any follow-up changes. |
|
CI is still green on the current head, and this one is still waiting on human review. @hfutatzhanghb @Hexiaoqiao, when you have a moment, could you please take a look? Happy to make any follow-up changes. |
|
@deepujain Thanks for your work! Could you rebase this PR onto the latest trunk branch ? Will review later. Thanks. |
b40483d to
261c748
Compare
|
Rebased this onto the latest apache/trunk and force-pushed the refreshed single commit. Local validation passed with |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
The rebase request is addressed and CI is green on the current head. @hfutatzhanghb, when you have a moment, could you please take another look? Happy to make any follow-up changes. |
|
The requested rebase is already addressed and CI is still green on the current head. @hfutatzhanghb, when you have a moment, could you please take another look? Happy to make any follow-up changes. |
261c748 to
2f536d1
Compare
|
Rebased this on current trunk and force-pushed the refreshed head. Ran |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
Reran the existing |
|
Reran the existing workflow on the current head again. The latest fork-side rerun hit the shared lane, while and on this head are green. No code changes in this update. |
|
Reran the existing |
|
No code changes here. I reran the existing fork-side |
2f536d1 to
39d8560
Compare
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
No code changes here. I reran the current head again on July 12, 2026 to refresh the fork-side red GitHub Actions lane. On that rerun, the only failing shard was If the patch looks reasonable, @hfutatzhanghb @Hexiaoqiao, could you please take a look when you have a moment? Happy to make any follow-up changes. |
|
No code changes here. |
|
No code changes here. I reran the existing fork-side |
|
No code changes here. I reran the fork-side |
|
No code changes here. |
39d8560 to
8886e2d
Compare
|
Rebased this branch onto current apache/trunk on August 4, 2026 and force-pushed the refreshed single commit. I also retried |
|
Pushed a no-code |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
No code changes here. Yetus on the August 5, 2026 head failed only in |
|
Quick status refresh as of August 9, 2026: I reran the fork-side GitHub Build for the current head. The rerun completed with a failure in only the |
|
No code changes in this update. I pushed a no-code |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
No code changes in this update. On the August 10, 2026 head, Apache Yetus and |
|
No code changes here. The August 11, 2026 fork-side |
|
All checks are green on the current head now, including the refreshed fork-side |
|
All checks are green on the current head. @hfutatzhanghb @Hexiaoqiao, could you please take another look when convenient? I am happy to address any follow-up. |
1e3a042 to
9f7b2fc
Compare
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
Hi @ZanderXu @slfan1989 @Hexiaoqiao, HDFS-17850 has been open since March and is rebased on trunk. Same Jenkins flake on the last run. Happy to retrigger CI. A review would really help move this along. |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
ef049ad to
930dd1c
Compare
|
Jenkins build 12 timed out after nearly three hours and exited 143 while running the HDFS module tests, with no patch-specific failure in the console. I pushed a no-code CI refresh on e15a4e2. Ready for the new CI run. |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
e15a4e2 to
2410070
Compare
|
Rebased cleanly onto current trunk at |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
… than replica. Signed-off-by: Deepak Jain <deepujain@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Deepak Jain <deepujain@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Deepak Jain <deepujain@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Deepak Jain <deepujain@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Deepak Jain <deepujain@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Deepak Jain <deepujain@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Deepak Jain <deepujain@gmail.com>
2410070 to
bc2fe17
Compare
|
Rebased onto trunk |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
bc2fe17 to
6ed1ada
Compare
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
Checks are green on the latest commit. Could a maintainer review this when you have a chance? |
Summary
When using a third-party HDFS client, if the client does not update the generation stamp (GS) correctly on append, the DataNode previously accepted
newGS == currentGS, which can lead to corrupted replica state. This change requires the new generation stamp to be strictly greater than the replica's current generation stamp: append now rejects bothnewGS < currentGS(existing) andnewGS == currentGS(new), so misbehaving clients cannot silently corrupt replica state.Change
append(ExtendedBlock b, long newGS, long expectedBlockLen), change the validity check fromnewGS < b.getGenerationStamp()tonewGS <= b.getGenerationStamp(), so that equal generation stamps are also rejected with the same IOException message.testAppendRejectsSameOrLowerGenerationStamp(): create a file, get the finalized block, then assert thatappend(block, block.getGenerationStamp(), blockLen)andappend(block, block.getGenerationStamp() - 1, blockLen)throw IOException with "should be greater than the replica", and thatappend(block, block.getGenerationStamp() + 1, blockLen)succeeds (HDFS-17850).JIRA
Fixes HDFS-17850
For code changes:
AI Tooling
Contains content generated by Codex.
How was this patch tested?
Earlier commands above are historical evidence, where present. Current rebase validation passed
git diff --check; fresh hosted CI is running. Focused Java validation is reported separately when complete.Validated repair head
bc2fe171(2026-09-19)TestFsDatasetImpl#testAppendRejectsSameOrLowerGenerationStamppassed: 1 test, 0 failures, 0 errors, 0 skipped. The selected reactor finished successfully in a Java 17/Maven 3.9.15 container with GNU stat and bounded memory (MAVEN_OPTS=-Xmx1024m, test heap 1536 MB).mvn -B -ntp -pl hadoop-hdfs-project/hadoop-hdfs -am -Dtest=TestFsDatasetImpl#testAppendRejectsSameOrLowerGenerationStamp -Dsurefire.failIfNoSpecifiedTests=false -Dmaven.test.failure.ignore=false "-Dmaven-surefire-plugin.argLine=-Xmx1536m -Xss4m" testFull TestFsDatasetImpl class first attempt was killed by Docker OOM (exit137), narrowed to direct regression under bounded heap. Full-class success is not claimed.