[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-9342?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15049649#comment-15049649
]
Zhe Zhang commented on HDFS-9342:
---------------------------------
Thanks Walter (and sorry about the late review). The algorithm LGTM. A minor
below:
{code}
if (expected != acked) {
return ackedBGLength;
}
{code}
This isn't completely accurate: {{acked}} could be smaller than {{expected}} if
some packets are not acknowledged yet (not a DN failure). In that case I think
we should count {{acked}}. That said, the entire {{considerLastPartialStripe}}
logic is complex and not really necessary -- only used by an {{assert}}. Maybe
we should get rid of it?
> Erasure coding: client should update and commit block based on acknowledged
> size
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-9342
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-9342
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: erasure-coding
> Affects Versions: 3.0.0
> Reporter: Zhe Zhang
> Assignee: Walter Su
> Attachments: HDFS-9342.01.patch, HDFS-9342.02.patch
>
>
> For non-EC files, we have:
> {code}
> protected ExtendedBlock block; // its length is number of bytes acked
> {code}
> For EC files, the size of {{DFSStripedOutputStream#currentBlockGroup}} is
> incremented in {{writeChunk}} without waiting for ack. And both
> {{updatePipeline}} and {{commitBlock}} are based on size of
> {{currentBlockGroup}}.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
