[ 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)