[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-928?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15315131#comment-15315131
]
Rithin Shetty commented on BOOKKEEPER-928:
--
Here is the link to the github re
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-928?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15314453#comment-15314453
]
Rithin Shetty commented on BOOKKEEPER-928:
--
Yes, I can share my workspace. I'
@sijie let me expand what I mean by " this changes something fundamental "
Everything starts that we are not persisting. Also I share lot of the
points raised by @Matteo.
- In theory, we could loose all copies of EntryId X but persist EntryId
X+Y. How does reads,replication, consistency cope up
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-928?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15313967#comment-15313967
]
Enrico Olivelli commented on BOOKKEEPER-928:
Are you going to add a generi
I was interested in trying something in this area, but never actually got
to do it.
A few random notes:
1. My suspicion, with no backing data at this point, is that simply
skipping the fsync
for "non-durable" ledgers might not give a big improvement, just a bit
less latency
for non-fsynce
