[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-1470?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502508
 ] 

Doug Cutting commented on HADOOP-1470:
--------------------------------------

> Do you think attached patch is generic?

Nothing is generic until it's used in more than one place.  The above isn't 
complete (it needs, e.g., 'read()' and 'seek()' implementations) but it looks 
like a good start.  But the real question is to you: could you use the above?  
Can you present the data and checksums as input streams that support 
read(byte[], int, int) and seek(long)?

It also assumes a particular checksum implementation, CRC32.  If we wish to 
allow for others, that aspect could be generalized by adding a codec-like 
interface for checksummers.  But I think we should probably skip that this 
iteration.


> Rework FSInputChecker and FSOutputSummer to support checksum code sharing 
> between ChecksumFileSystem and block level crc dfs
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-1470
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-1470
>             Project: Hadoop
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: fs
>    Affects Versions: 0.12.3
>            Reporter: Hairong Kuang
>            Assignee: Hairong Kuang
>             Fix For: 0.14.0
>
>         Attachments: genericChecksum.patch
>
>
> Comment from Doug in HADOOP-1134:
> I'd prefer it if the CRC code could be shared with CheckSumFileSystem. In 
> particular, it seems to me that FSInputChecker and FSOutputSummer could be 
> extended to support pluggable sources and sinks for checksums, respectively, 
> and DFSDataInputStream and DFSDataOutputStream could use these. Advantages of 
> this are: (a) single implementation of checksum logic to debug and maintain; 
> (b) keeps checksumming as close to possible to data generation and use. This 
> patch computes checksums after data has been buffered, and validates them 
> before it is buffered. We sometimes use large buffers and would like to guard 
> against in-memory errors. The current checksum code catches a lot of such 
> errors. So we should compute checksums after minimal buffering (just 
> bytesPerChecksum, ideally) and validate them at the last possible moment 
> (e.g., through the use of a small final buffer with a larger buffer behind 
> it). I do not think this will significantly affect performance, and data 
> integrity is a high priority. 

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply via email to