[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20471?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16446699#comment-16446699
]
Anoop Sam John commented on HBASE-20471:
----------------------------------------
bq.Instead, we allow user to set the cluster-level way of sync through
hbase-site.xml, hflush or hsync.
This is what I too think. Use hflush or hsync is at cluster level. In fact at
CF level. The global configs can be configured at Table or CF level also by
using setConfiguration(String key, String value) any way.
> Recheck the design and implementation of FSYNC_WAL durability for WAL
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-20471
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20471
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Yu Li
> Priority: Major
>
> This is something derived from discussion in HBASE-19024 around [this
> comment|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-19024?focusedCommentId=16445592&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-16445592]
> We have been supplying user the API to set durability per mutation for a long
> time, by design the SYNC_WAL durability to call {{FSDataOutputStream#hflush}}
> and FSYNC_WAL {{FSDataOutputStream#hsync}}, while in implementation we have
> been calling hflush for FSYNC_WAL also until HBASE-19024. Although
> HBASE-19024 tried to fix the syntax with good willing, the implementation
> there cannot assure the FSYNC_WAL edits are truly hsync'ed due to the
> disruptor mechanism used in WAL implementation. Here in this JIRA we aim to
> have more discussion and give it a complete solution.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
