You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to common-dev@hadoop.apache.org by "Runping Qi (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2008/04/01 04:44:24 UTC

[jira] Created: (HADOOP-3146) SequenceFile should not call flush excessively

SequenceFile should not call flush excessively
----------------------------------------------

                 Key: HADOOP-3146
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
             Project: Hadoop Core
          Issue Type: Bug
          Components: mapred
            Reporter: Runping Qi



Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
It does not make much sense to call flush inside append.


-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Commented: (HADOOP-3146) DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync

Posted by "Hadoop QA (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12585284#action_12585284 ] 

Hadoop QA commented on HADOOP-3146:
-----------------------------------

-1 overall.  Here are the results of testing the latest attachment 
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12379196/flushToFsync.patch
against trunk revision 643282.

    @author +1.  The patch does not contain any @author tags.

    tests included +1.  The patch appears to include 6 new or modified tests.

    javadoc +1.  The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages.

    javac +1.  The applied patch does not generate any new javac compiler warnings.

    release audit +1.  The applied patch does not generate any new release audit warnings.

    findbugs +1.  The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs warnings.

    core tests -1.  The patch failed core unit tests.

    contrib tests +1.  The patch passed contrib unit tests.

Test results: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/2143/testReport/
Findbugs warnings: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/2143/artifact/trunk/build/test/findbugs/newPatchFindbugsWarnings.html
Checkstyle results: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/2143/artifact/trunk/build/test/checkstyle-errors.html
Console output: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/2143/console

This message is automatically generated.

> DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3146
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>            Reporter: Runping Qi
>            Assignee: dhruba borthakur
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 0.17.0
>
>         Attachments: flushToFsync.patch
>
>
> Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
> The current implementation of flush should be renamed as sync.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Commented: (HADOOP-3146) SequenceFile should not call flush excessively

Posted by "Runping Qi (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12583995#action_12583995 ] 

Runping Qi commented on HADOOP-3146:
------------------------------------


Then the dfs (and maybe sequence file too) need to provide an api similar to sync.



> SequenceFile should not call flush excessively
> ----------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3146
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>            Reporter: Runping Qi
>             Fix For: 0.17.0
>
>
> Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
> It does not make much sense to call flush inside append.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Commented: (HADOOP-3146) SequenceFile should not call flush excessively

Posted by "dhruba borthakur (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12583996#action_12583996 ] 

dhruba borthakur commented on HADOOP-3146:
------------------------------------------

I agree. I think we should revert back the semantics of DFSOutputStream.flush() to what it was in 0.16. Also, introduce a new call DFSOutputStream.sync() that actually waits for packets to get acknowledged from datanodes. Patch coming soon....

> SequenceFile should not call flush excessively
> ----------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3146
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>            Reporter: Runping Qi
>             Fix For: 0.17.0
>
>
> Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
> It does not make much sense to call flush inside append.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Updated: (HADOOP-3146) DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync

Posted by "dhruba borthakur (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

dhruba borthakur updated HADOOP-3146:
-------------------------------------

    Status: Open  (was: Patch Available)

> DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3146
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>            Reporter: Runping Qi
>            Assignee: dhruba borthakur
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 0.17.0
>
>         Attachments: flushToFsync.patch
>
>
> Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
> The current implementation of flush should be renamed as sync.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Commented: (HADOOP-3146) DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync

Posted by "Hudson (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12585960#action_12585960 ] 

Hudson commented on HADOOP-3146:
--------------------------------

Integrated in Hadoop-trunk #451 (See [http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-trunk/451/])

> DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3146
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>            Reporter: Runping Qi
>            Assignee: dhruba borthakur
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 0.17.0
>
>         Attachments: flushToFsync.patch, flushToFsync2.patch
>
>
> Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
> The current implementation of flush should be renamed as sync.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Commented: (HADOOP-3146) DFS flush should be light weighted

Posted by "dhruba borthakur (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12584022#action_12584022 ] 

dhruba borthakur commented on HADOOP-3146:
------------------------------------------

I agree that even if the flush call in 0.17 is much more heavyweight that earlier, I still do not understand why it is causing the task to hang. I wonder if there is a bug in the implementation of DFSOutputStream.flush() that is causing the observed problems!

> DFS flush should be light weighted
> ----------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3146
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>            Reporter: Runping Qi
>            Assignee: dhruba borthakur
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 0.17.0
>
>
> Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
> The current implementation of flush should be renamed as sync.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Updated: (HADOOP-3146) DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync

Posted by "dhruba borthakur (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

dhruba borthakur updated HADOOP-3146:
-------------------------------------

    Attachment: flushToFsync2.patch

The previous patch did not change one unit test that was still invoking the old flush() API. 

> DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3146
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>            Reporter: Runping Qi
>            Assignee: dhruba borthakur
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 0.17.0
>
>         Attachments: flushToFsync.patch, flushToFsync2.patch
>
>
> Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
> The current implementation of flush should be renamed as sync.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Assigned: (HADOOP-3146) SequenceFile should not call flush excessively

Posted by "dhruba borthakur (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

dhruba borthakur reassigned HADOOP-3146:
----------------------------------------

    Assignee: dhruba borthakur

> SequenceFile should not call flush excessively
> ----------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3146
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>            Reporter: Runping Qi
>            Assignee: dhruba borthakur
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 0.17.0
>
>
> Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
> It does not make much sense to call flush inside append.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Updated: (HADOOP-3146) DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync

Posted by "dhruba borthakur (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

dhruba borthakur updated HADOOP-3146:
-------------------------------------

    Status: Patch Available  (was: Open)

> DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3146
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>            Reporter: Runping Qi
>            Assignee: dhruba borthakur
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 0.17.0
>
>         Attachments: flushToFsync.patch, flushToFsync2.patch
>
>
> Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
> The current implementation of flush should be renamed as sync.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Updated: (HADOOP-3146) DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync

Posted by "dhruba borthakur (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

dhruba borthakur updated HADOOP-3146:
-------------------------------------

    Hadoop Flags: [Reviewed]
          Status: Patch Available  (was: Open)

> DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3146
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>            Reporter: Runping Qi
>            Assignee: dhruba borthakur
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 0.17.0
>
>         Attachments: flushToFsync.patch
>
>
> Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
> The current implementation of flush should be renamed as sync.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Updated: (HADOOP-3146) DFS flush should be light weighted

Posted by "Runping Qi (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Runping Qi updated HADOOP-3146:
-------------------------------

    Description: 
Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
The current implementation of flush should be renamed as sync.


  was:
Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
It does not make much sense to call flush inside append.


        Summary: DFS flush should be light weighted  (was: SequenceFile should not call flush excessively)

> DFS flush should be light weighted
> ----------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3146
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>            Reporter: Runping Qi
>            Assignee: dhruba borthakur
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 0.17.0
>
>
> Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
> The current implementation of flush should be renamed as sync.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Updated: (HADOOP-3146) SequenceFile should not call flush excessively

Posted by "Owen O'Malley (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Owen O'Malley updated HADOOP-3146:
----------------------------------

    Component/s:     (was: mapred)
                 dfs
    Description: 
Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
It does not make much sense to call flush inside append.


  was:

Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
It does not make much sense to call flush inside append.



Actually, I would vote for HDFS to make flush cheaper again. Flush should *not* mean that your bytes have reached the disk. It should only mean that they have been sent to the operating system.

> SequenceFile should not call flush excessively
> ----------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3146
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>            Reporter: Runping Qi
>
> Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
> It does not make much sense to call flush inside append.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Updated: (HADOOP-3146) DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync

Posted by "dhruba borthakur (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

dhruba borthakur updated HADOOP-3146:
-------------------------------------

    Summary: DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync  (was: DFS flush should be light weighted)

> DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3146
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>            Reporter: Runping Qi
>            Assignee: dhruba borthakur
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 0.17.0
>
>
> Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
> The current implementation of flush should be renamed as sync.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Commented: (HADOOP-3146) DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync

Posted by "Raghu Angadi (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12584945#action_12584945 ] 

Raghu Angadi commented on HADOOP-3146:
--------------------------------------

+1.

> DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3146
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>            Reporter: Runping Qi
>            Assignee: dhruba borthakur
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 0.17.0
>
>         Attachments: flushToFsync.patch
>
>
> Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
> The current implementation of flush should be renamed as sync.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Updated: (HADOOP-3146) DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync

Posted by "dhruba borthakur (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

dhruba borthakur updated HADOOP-3146:
-------------------------------------

    Resolution: Fixed
        Status: Resolved  (was: Patch Available)

I just committed this.

> DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3146
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>            Reporter: Runping Qi
>            Assignee: dhruba borthakur
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 0.17.0
>
>         Attachments: flushToFsync.patch, flushToFsync2.patch
>
>
> Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
> The current implementation of flush should be renamed as sync.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Commented: (HADOOP-3146) DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync

Posted by "Hadoop QA (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12585454#action_12585454 ] 

Hadoop QA commented on HADOOP-3146:
-----------------------------------

+1 overall.  Here are the results of testing the latest attachment 
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12379324/flushToFsync2.patch
against trunk revision 643282.

    @author +1.  The patch does not contain any @author tags.

    tests included +1.  The patch appears to include 9 new or modified tests.

    javadoc +1.  The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages.

    javac +1.  The applied patch does not generate any new javac compiler warnings.

    release audit +1.  The applied patch does not generate any new release audit warnings.

    findbugs +1.  The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs warnings.

    core tests +1.  The patch passed core unit tests.

    contrib tests +1.  The patch passed contrib unit tests.

Test results: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/2155/testReport/
Findbugs warnings: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/2155/artifact/trunk/build/test/findbugs/newPatchFindbugsWarnings.html
Checkstyle results: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/2155/artifact/trunk/build/test/checkstyle-errors.html
Console output: http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Patch/2155/console

This message is automatically generated.

> DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3146
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>            Reporter: Runping Qi
>            Assignee: dhruba borthakur
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 0.17.0
>
>         Attachments: flushToFsync.patch, flushToFsync2.patch
>
>
> Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
> The current implementation of flush should be renamed as sync.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Updated: (HADOOP-3146) SequenceFile should not call flush excessively

Posted by "dhruba borthakur (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

dhruba borthakur updated HADOOP-3146:
-------------------------------------

    Fix Version/s: 0.17.0
         Priority: Blocker  (was: Major)

> SequenceFile should not call flush excessively
> ----------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3146
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>            Reporter: Runping Qi
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 0.17.0
>
>
> Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
> It does not make much sense to call flush inside append.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Commented: (HADOOP-3146) DFS flush should be light weighted

Posted by "Raghu Angadi (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12584014#action_12584014 ] 

Raghu Angadi commented on HADOOP-3146:
--------------------------------------

How expensive really is current flush()? 

Of course, lighter flush() is better. I think we should do this irrespective of how much it saves.

> DFS flush should be light weighted
> ----------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3146
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>            Reporter: Runping Qi
>            Assignee: dhruba borthakur
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 0.17.0
>
>
> Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
> The current implementation of flush should be renamed as sync.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


[jira] Updated: (HADOOP-3146) DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync

Posted by "dhruba borthakur (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>.
     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

dhruba borthakur updated HADOOP-3146:
-------------------------------------

    Attachment: flushToFsync.patch

Renamed DFSOutputStream.flush() to DFSOutputStream.fsync(). This ensures that programs that were invoking OutputStream.flush() lavishly would continue to work as before.

> DFSOutputStream.flush should be renamed as DFSOutputStream.fsync
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3146
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3146
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dfs
>            Reporter: Runping Qi
>            Assignee: dhruba borthakur
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 0.17.0
>
>         Attachments: flushToFsync.patch
>
>
> Starting fron hadoop-0.17, calling flush of dfs becomes very expensive.
> The current implementation of flush should be renamed as sync.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.