[jira] [Comment Edited] (HBASE-20471) Recheck the design and implementation of FSYNC_WAL durability for WAL

["Anoop Sam John (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20471?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16446714#comment-16446714 ] 

Anoop Sam John edited comment on HBASE-20471 at 4/21/18 9:31 AM:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Yes I mean along with ur point #3
As a 1st step, at least we should write all these known limitation in to book.  


was (Author: anoop.hbase):
As a 1st step, at least we should write all these known limitation in to book.  

> Recheck the design and implementation of FSYNC_WAL durability for WAL
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-20471
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20471
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Task
>            Reporter: Yu Li
>            Priority: Major
>
> This is something derived from discussion in HBASE-19024 around [this comment|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-19024?focusedCommentId=16445592&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-16445592]
> We have been supplying user the API to set durability per mutation for a long time, by design the SYNC_WAL durability to call {{FSDataOutputStream#hflush}} and FSYNC_WAL {{FSDataOutputStream#hsync}}, while in implementation we have been calling hflush for FSYNC_WAL also until HBASE-19024. Although HBASE-19024 tried to fix the syntax with good willing, the implementation there cannot assure the FSYNC_WAL edits are truly hsync'ed due to the disruptor mechanism used in WAL implementation. Here in this JIRA we aim to have more discussion and give it a complete solution.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)