GitHub user pnowojski opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/4876
[FLINK-7737][filesystem] Add syncOnFlush flag to StreamWriterBase
## What is the purpose of the change
It depends whether to call hsync or hflush on the underlying file system
and user preferences. Normally hflush is enough to protect against single
machine HDFS failures and against TaskManagers failures. However if user is
using S3 like file system, or wants to protect against whole HDFS rack power
loss hsync must be used instead.
This is a stop gap solution until proper fix waiting for
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5789
## Verifying this change
This change is hard to test :( One could think about writing a unit test
using mocks, but that would only copy the implementation.
## Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:
- Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): (yes / **no**)
- The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with
`@Public(Evolving)`: (yes / **no**)
- The serializers: (yes / **no** / don't know)
- The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): (yes /
**no** / don't know)
- Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its
components), Checkpointing, Yarn/Mesos, ZooKeeper: (yes / **no** / don't know)
## Documentation
- Does this pull request introduce a new feature? (**yes** / no)
- If yes, how is the feature documented? (not applicable / docs /
**JavaDocs** / not documented)
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/pnowojski/flink f7737
Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/4876.patch
To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:
This closes #4876
----
commit 8d1c34197d1098cbd5a56ec882da17f42410c1f4
Author: Piotr Nowojski <[email protected]>
Date: 2017-10-20T14:47:52Z
[FLINK-7737][filesystem] Add syncOnFlush flag to StreamWriterBase
It depends whether to call hsync or hflush on the underlying file system
and user preferences. Normally hflush is enough to protect against single
machine HDFS failures and against TaskManagers failures. However if user is
using S3 like file system, or wants to protect againt whole HDFS rack power
loss hsync must be used instead.
----
---
