[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-19024?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16403681#comment-16403681
]
Andrew Purtell commented on HBASE-19024:
----------------------------------------
{quote}So we can enable hsync over hflush at server level by hbase.wal.hsync
new config. And individually a Mutation can mark any lower Durability also.
Same way even if this config is NOT ON at RS level, still Mutation can mark so.
Correct?
{quote}
Yes
{quote}isForceSync - Not used. Do we need this? I can not see even in tests
been used.
{quote}
It seems to be a bean thing. I just rebased the patch. Can remove it. Not a big
deal either way.
{quote}In case of AsyncFSWAL, we do not use this new config and seems we use
only hflush way there.(Offline confirmed with [~Apache9]). Another issue to fix
that or in this issue only?
{quote}
We don't have asyncfswal in branch-1 so had a blind spot here. Could do it.
Could wait for another JIRA. Might be less confusing to add support there too.
> provide a configurable option to hsync WAL edits to the disk for better
> durability
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-19024
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-19024
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: wal
> Environment:
> Reporter: Vikas Vishwakarma
> Assignee: Harshal Jain
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.1.0, 1.5.0
>
> Attachments: HBASE-19024-master.v10.patch,
> HBASE-19024.branch-1.2.001.patch, HBASE-19024.branch-1.2.002.patch,
> HBASE-19024.branch-1.2.003.patch, HBASE-19024.branch-1.2.004.patch,
> HBASE-19024.branch-1.2.005.patch, branch-1.branch-1.patch,
> branch-1.v1.branch-1.patch, master.patch, master.v2.patch, master.v3.patch,
> master.v5.patch, master.v5.patch, master.v6.patch, master.v9.patch
>
>
> At present we do not have an option to hsync WAL edits to the disk for better
> durability. In our local tests we see 10-15% latency impact of using hsync
> instead of hflush which is not very high.
> We should have a configurable option to hysnc WAL edits instead of just
> sync/hflush which will call the corresponding API on the hadoop side.
> Currently HBase handles both SYNC_WAL and FSYNC_WAL as the same calling
> FSDataOutputStream sync/hflush on the hadoop side. This can be modified to
> let FSYNC_WAL call hsync on the hadoop side instead of sync/hflush. We can
> keep the default value to sync as the current behavior and hsync can be
> enabled based on explicit configuration.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
