[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-1470?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502511
 ] 

Raghu Angadi commented on HADOOP-1470:
--------------------------------------

> could you use the above? 
_can_ I? Yeah sure, my argument has never been it _can not_  be done. We can 
even rechecksum to hide mismatch between {{bpc}} and {{blockSize}}.

Though I don't agree with 'it is good enough until it is extremely difficult to 
use', whether it is implied here or not. I surely don't think it is an 
improvement over FSInputChecker which, I think, was not explicitly designed to 
be general purpose checker. 
 
I sure hope this is not a blocker for HADOOP-1134.

> 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