[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-15536?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15263410#comment-15263410
]
Duo Zhang commented on HBASE-15536:
-----------------------------------
{quote}
Maybe add a note on commit to the DefaultWALProvider about this 'odd' fact.
{quote}
I think we could change the name of DefaultWALProvider to a more reasonable
name, but still map 'o.a.h.h.regionserver.wal.DefaultWALProvider' to the
renamed class. This does not break the config compatibility.
{quote}
Any place you know where we are missing coverage? Any secure deploy type? Or a
deploy type that needs more testing? Could file an issue for such 'weak' areas.
{quote}
Two things I can tell right now.
First is what if the whole HDFS crashes. Of course we can say that if HDFS
crashes then we can not guarantee much since we heavily rely on HDFS. But if
the behavior is changed then the end users may need to change their maintain
guide of how to deal with HDFS crash.
Second is the performance of secure output.
Thanks.
> Make AsyncFSWAL as our default WAL
> ----------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-15536
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-15536
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Affects Versions: 2.0.0
> Reporter: Duo Zhang
> Assignee: Duo Zhang
> Fix For: 2.0.0
>
> Attachments: HBASE-15536-v1.patch, HBASE-15536-v2.patch,
> HBASE-15536.patch
>
>
> As it should be predicated on passing basic cluster ITBLL
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
