[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-15107?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16286673#comment-16286673
]
Ryan Blue commented on HADOOP-15107:
------------------------------------
For the definition of correctness, I think we will need two based on the
possible failures that are handled. Task-level failure tolerance: the committer
can handle any task failure, including during task commit. Job-level failure
tolerance: the committer can handle failure during job commit. The contribution
of the multi-part committer is that it handles task-level failure without a
copy and minimizes the impact of job-level failure. But, it doesn't guarantee
job-level failure if the job commit fails.
> Prove the correctness of the new committers, or fix where they are not correct
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HADOOP-15107
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-15107
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: fs/s3
> Affects Versions: 3.1.0
> Reporter: Steve Loughran
> Assignee: Steve Loughran
>
> I'm writing about the paper on the committers, one which, being a proper
> paper, requires me to show the committers work.
> # define the requirements of a "Correct" committed job (this applies to the
> FileOutputCommitter too)
> # show that the Staging committer meets these requirements (most of this is
> implicit in that it uses the V1 FileOutputCommitter to marshall .pendingset
> lists from committed tasks to the final destination, where they are read and
> committed.
> # Show the magic committer also works.
> I'm now not sure that the magic committer works.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
