[jira] [Commented] (ACCUMULO-3839) Nonsense error when configuring instance.volumes.replacements

["Keith Turner (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-3839?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14554696#comment-14554696 ] 

Keith Turner commented on ACCUMULO-3839:
----------------------------------------

Not sure exactly what the intent of that check is.   The error message say something about instance.volumes, but not sure if instance.volumes is involved.  The change looks good.

> Nonsense error when configuring instance.volumes.replacements
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ACCUMULO-3839
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-3839
>             Project: Accumulo
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 1.7.0
>            Reporter: Josh Elser
>            Assignee: Josh Elser
>            Priority: Critical
>             Fix For: 1.6.3, 1.8.0, 1.7.1
>
>         Attachments: 0001-ACCUMULO-3839-Perform-sanity-check-on-the-proper-rep.patch
>
>          Time Spent: 0.5h
>  Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> [~billie.rinaldi] was working with me, trying to configure an existing 1.7.0 instance to start working with HDFS HA.
> Take the following:
> {noformat}
> instance.volumes=hdfs://nn1:port/accumulo
> {noformat}
> and then move to
> {noformat}
> instance.volumes=hdfs://nameservice/accumulo
> instance.volumes.replacements=hdfs://nn1:port/accumulo hdfs://nameservice/accumulo
> {noformat}
> While this is the correct configuration, {{accumulo init --add-volumes}} spews this error
> {noformat}
> hdfs://nameservice/accumulo is set to be replaced in instance.volumes.replacements and should not appear in instance.volumes. It is highly recommended that this property be removed as data could still be written to this volume.
> {noformat}
> It looks like this check that was added in ACCUMULO-2793 incorrectly compares the wrong element in the replacement pairs. It's reasonable to assume that the check was _meant_ to verify that we don't try to write more data to a volume that is intended to be replaced.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)