[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-6109?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14012248#comment-14012248
]
Hadoop QA commented on HDFS-6109:
---------------------------------
{color:green}+1 overall{color}. Here are the results of testing the latest
attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12647310/HDFS-6109-v3.txt
against trunk revision .
{color:green}+1 @author{color}. The patch does not contain any @author
tags.
{color:green}+1 tests included{color}. The patch appears to include 1 new
or modified test files.
{color:green}+1 javac{color}. The applied patch does not increase the
total number of javac compiler warnings.
{color:green}+1 javadoc{color}. There were no new javadoc warning messages.
{color:green}+1 eclipse:eclipse{color}. The patch built with
eclipse:eclipse.
{color:green}+1 findbugs{color}. The patch does not introduce any new
Findbugs (version 1.3.9) warnings.
{color:green}+1 release audit{color}. The applied patch does not increase
the total number of release audit warnings.
{color:green}+1 core tests{color}. The patch passed unit tests in
hadoop-hdfs-project/hadoop-hdfs.
{color:green}+1 contrib tests{color}. The patch passed contrib unit tests.
Test results:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/7003//testReport/
Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/7003//console
This message is automatically generated.
> let sync_file_range() system call run in background
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-6109
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-6109
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: datanode
> Affects Versions: 3.0.0, 2.3.0
> Reporter: Liang Xie
> Assignee: Liang Xie
> Attachments: HDFS-6109-v2.txt, HDFS-6109-v3.txt, HDFS-6109.txt
>
>
> Through we passed SYNC_FILE_RANGE_WRITE to sync_file_range, to make it as
> asynchronous as possible, it still could be blocked, e.g. the os io request
> queue is full.
> Since we use sync_file_range just as a page cache advisor role:) it doesn't
> decide or guarantee the real durability, it would be nice if we could run it
> in backgroud. At least my test log showed, a few sync_file_range calls still
> cost tens of ms or more, due to the happened location is in the critical
> write path(BlockReceiver class), from a upper view, like HBase application,
> will "hung" tens of ms as well during Hlog syncing.
> Generally speaking, the patch could not improve too much, but, better than
> before, right ? :)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
