You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@ozone.apache.org by "Devesh Kumar Singh (Jira)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2025/11/24 05:59:00 UTC
[jira] [Resolved] (HDDS-9633) Recon Container Report mis-match with RM Admin CLI container report
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-9633?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Devesh Kumar Singh resolved HDDS-9633.
--------------------------------------
Resolution: Duplicate
> Recon Container Report mis-match with RM Admin CLI container report
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDDS-9633
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-9633
> Project: Apache Ozone
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Ozone Recon
> Reporter: Devesh Kumar Singh
> Assignee: Devesh Kumar Singh
> Priority: Major
>
> * Difference between statistics (MISSING, MIS-REPLICATED, OVER-REPLICATED, UNDER-REPLICATED) of unhealthy containers provided by Recon and statistics provided by
> {code:java}
> ozone admin container report
> {code}
> command.
> _*All below degraded states of containers are marked as *UNHEALTHY* in Recon.*_
> {noformat}
> *MISSING* - Recon identifies any container as missing where it just checks if no replica of a container is
> reported in any of the DNs container report.
> *UNDER-REPLICATED *- Recon supports only Ratis containers marks the container as UNDER-REPLICATED,
> if replication factor doesn't match based on reports from all DNs and replica
> count is lesser than replication factor, where as RM container report includes both EC and Ratis containers and RM marks any container as UNDER-REPLICATED
> if it has all replicas present but not having sufficient number of HEALTHY replicas or if a container has some replicas missing.
> *OVER-REPLICATED* - Recon marks a container as OVER-REPLICATED if multiple DN reports more than the required number
> of replicas for a container. However RM container report marks a container
> as OVER-REPLICATED on 2 conditions - one, if there are all healthy
> replicas in excess (more than required nodes), another ,
> if there are in unhealthy replicas in excess along with required number of healthy replicas.
> MIS-REPLICATED - Depending on placement policy, both Recon and
> RM container report marks a container as MIS-REPLICATED i
> f container is not placed as per placement policy.
> {noformat}
> So all in all, there are differences in a way how Recon identifies the degraded state (UNHEALTHY) of containers and how RM container report identifies various degraded states.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscribe@ozone.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-help@ozone.apache.org