[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10458?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15311759#comment-15311759
]
Zhe Zhang commented on HDFS-10458:
----------------------------------
Thanks for the comment [~shv]. I started updating the patch using
{{encryptionZones == null}} as condition check, but found that we would have to
update all references to {{encryptionZones}} with null-handling logic. E.g., in
{{listEncryptionZones}} and {{createEncryptionZone}}, would need to handle null
value. It's probably not worth that much code change to avoid adding a field.
But LMK your thoughts.
> getFileEncryptionInfo should return quickly for non-encrypted cluster
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-10458
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10458
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: encryption, namenode
> Affects Versions: 2.6.0
> Reporter: Zhe Zhang
> Assignee: Zhe Zhang
> Attachments: HDFS-10458.00.patch, HDFSA-10458.01.patch,
> HDFSA-10458.02.patch
>
>
> {{FSDirectory#getFileEncryptionInfo}} always acquires {{readLock}} and checks
> if the path belongs to an EZ. For a busy system with potentially many listing
> operations, this could cause locking contention.
> I think we should add a call {{EncryptionZoneManager#hasEncryptionZone()}} to
> return whether the system has any EZ. If no EZ at all,
> {{getFileEncryptionInfo}} should return null without {{readLock}}.
> If {{hasEncryptionZone}} is only used in the above scenario, maybe itself
> doesn't need a {{readLock}} -- if the system doesn't have any EZ when
> {{getFileEncryptionInfo}} is called on a path, it means the path cannot be
> encrypted.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
