[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-13767?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16568851#comment-16568851
]
Plamen Jeliazkov commented on HDFS-13767:
-----------------------------------------
Thanks for the responses, [~vagarychen]!
Thank you I think I understand (2) and (3) now.
Regarding (4) -- Thanks for pointing out it could be worse. I understand where
you are coming from. Do you think we could end up hitting that scenario anyway
in the case of a slow / dying / dead ObserverNode? The client would just end up
calling _msync()_ on another node, no? I agree that we would just end up going
to a heuristic (configuration of some timeout interval). I also suppose if we
had enough healthy ObserverNodes then its may not really be a concern to have a
bunch of calls queue'd if we could actually support holding them all across
hosts vs spontaneous client network traffic trying to find a "good" host.
> Add msync server implementation.
> --------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-13767
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-13767
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: namenode
> Reporter: Chen Liang
> Assignee: Chen Liang
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: HDFS-13767-HDFS-12943.001.patch,
> HDFS-13767-HDFS-12943.002.patch, HDFS-13767.WIP.001.patch,
> HDFS-13767.WIP.002.patch, HDFS-13767.WIP.003.patch, HDFS-13767.WIP.004.patch
>
>
> This is a followup on HDFS-13688, where msync API is introduced to
> {{ClientProtocol}} but the server side implementation is missing. This is
> Jira is to implement the server side logic.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
