Ariel Weisberg created CASSANDRA-14384:
------------------------------------------
Summary: If fsync fails it's always an issue and continuing
execution is suspect
Key: CASSANDRA-14384
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14384
Project: Cassandra
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Core
Reporter: Ariel Weisberg
Assignee: Ariel Weisberg
Fix For: 2.1.x, 3.0.x, 3.11.x, 4.x
We can't catch fsync errors and continue so we shouldn't have code that does
that in C*. There was a Postgres bug where fsync returned an error and the FS
lost data, but subsequent fsyncs succeeded.
The [LastErrorException code in
NativeLibrary.trySync|https://github.com/apache/cassandra/commit/be313935e54be450d9aaabda7965a2f266e922c9#diff-4258621cdf765f0fea6770db5d40038fR307]
looks a little janky. What's up with that? When would trySync be something we
would merely try? If try is good enough why do it at all considering try is the
default behavior of a series of unsynced filesystem operations.
Also when we fsync in FD it's not just fsyncing that file the FS is potentially
fsyncing other data and the error code we get could be related to that other
data so we can't safely ignore it. The filesystem could be internally
inconsistent as well. This happens because the FS journaling may force the FS
to flush other data as well to preserve the ordering requirements of journaled
metadata.
If we ignore fsync errors it needs to be for whitelisted reasons such as a bad
FD.
I know we have FSErrorHandler and it makes sense for reads, but I'm not sold on
it being the right answer for writes. We don't retry flushing a memtable or
writing to the commit log to my knowledge. We could go read only and I need to
check if that is w
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
