[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-2094?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14075752#comment-14075752
 ] 

Hadoop QA commented on MAPREDUCE-2094:
--------------------------------------

{color:green}+1 overall{color}.  Here are the results of testing the latest 
attachment 
  
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12658039/MAPREDUCE-2094-20140727-svn.patch
  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 3 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 2.0.3) 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-mapreduce-project/hadoop-mapreduce-client/hadoop-mapreduce-client-core.

    {color:green}+1 contrib tests{color}.  The patch passed contrib unit tests.

Test results: 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-MAPREDUCE-Build/4772//testReport/
Console output: 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-MAPREDUCE-Build/4772//console

This message is automatically generated.

> org.apache.hadoop.mapreduce.lib.input.FileInputFormat: isSplitable implements 
> unsafe default behaviour that is different from the documented behaviour.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: MAPREDUCE-2094
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-2094
>             Project: Hadoop Map/Reduce
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: task
>            Reporter: Niels Basjes
>            Assignee: Niels Basjes
>         Attachments: MAPREDUCE-2094-2011-05-19.patch, 
> MAPREDUCE-2094-20140727-svn.patch, MAPREDUCE-2094-20140727.patch, 
> MAPREDUCE-2094-FileInputFormat-docs-v2.patch
>
>
> When implementing a custom derivative of FileInputFormat we ran into the 
> effect that a large Gzipped input file would be processed several times. 
> A near 1GiB file would be processed around 36 times in its entirety. Thus 
> producing garbage results and taking up a lot more CPU time than needed.
> It took a while to figure out and what we found is that the default 
> implementation of the isSplittable method in 
> [org.apache.hadoop.mapreduce.lib.input.FileInputFormat | 
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/hadoop/mapreduce/trunk/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/mapreduce/lib/input/FileInputFormat.java?view=markup
>  ] is simply "return true;". 
> This is a very unsafe default and is in contradiction with the JavaDoc of the 
> method which states: "Is the given filename splitable? Usually, true, but if 
> the file is stream compressed, it will not be. " . The actual implementation 
> effectively does "Is the given filename splitable? Always true, even if the 
> file is stream compressed using an unsplittable compression codec. "
> For our situation (where we always have Gzipped input) we took the easy way 
> out and simply implemented an isSplittable in our class that does "return 
> false; "
> Now there are essentially 3 ways I can think of for fixing this (in order of 
> what I would find preferable):
> # Implement something that looks at the used compression of the file (i.e. do 
> migrate the implementation from TextInputFormat to FileInputFormat). This 
> would make the method do what the JavaDoc describes.
> # "Force" developers to think about it and make this method abstract.
> # Use a "safe" default (i.e. return false)



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

Reply via email to