[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-8833?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14659173#comment-14659173
]
Andrew Wang commented on HDFS-8833:
-----------------------------------
bq. My point is we should only use xattr for representing ec policy for
file/dir, instead of occupying several bits in INodeFile first then coming to
xattr later.
I guess this is the core of the issue, since I don't understand your objection
to using file header bits. Are you worried that we will want to use these bits
for another purpose? Or that the code to later use an xattr will be complex?
Would like to discuss this since it seems like the focal point and influences
our implementation choices.
> Erasure coding: store EC schema and cell size in INodeFile and eliminate
> notion of EC zones
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-8833
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-8833
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: namenode
> Affects Versions: HDFS-7285
> Reporter: Zhe Zhang
> Assignee: Zhe Zhang
>
> We have [discussed |
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7285?focusedCommentId=14357754&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14357754]
> storing EC schema with files instead of EC zones and recently revisited the
> discussion under HDFS-8059.
> As a recap, the _zone_ concept has severe limitations including renaming and
> nested configuration. Those limitations are valid in encryption for security
> reasons and it doesn't make sense to carry them over in EC.
> This JIRA aims to store EC schema and cell size on {{INodeFile}} level. For
> simplicity, we should first implement it as an xattr and consider memory
> optimizations (such as moving it to file header) as a follow-on. We should
> also disable changing EC policy on a non-empty file / dir in the first phase.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
