[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-7973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13185825#comment-13185825
]
Daryn Sharp commented on HADOOP-7973:
-------------------------------------
The problem appears to be a case of two wrongs make a right. Fixing a bug in
HDFS-2450 exposed another bug. Unlike other filesystems, DFS used to strip the
default port from its uris. Ie.
{{FileSystem.get("hdfs://host:port").getUri()}} did not return
"hdfs://host:port". It returned "hdfs://host".
The result is that MR must be getting another filesystem based on {{getUri()}}
of one filesystem. When the port is stripped, two distinct filesystems are
created. It's a complete fluke that MR worked because of the former bug.
So is the finalizer approach a no-go, or do you have another solution in mind?
As you mentioned it's a public api, so is it better to "fix" the public api, or
tell users don't use the public api?
> DistributedFileSystem close has severe consequences
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HADOOP-7973
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-7973
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: fs
> Affects Versions: 1.0.0
> Reporter: Daryn Sharp
> Assignee: Daryn Sharp
> Priority: Blocker
> Attachments: HADOOP-7973.patch
>
>
> The way {{FileSystem#close}} works is very problematic. Since the
> {{FileSystems}} are cached, any {{close}} by any caller will cause problems
> for every other reference to it. Will add more detail in the comments.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
