FAQ
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-928?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12476239 ]

Doug Cutting commented on HADOOP-928:
-------------------------------------

One more thing: the sum file buffer should also be kept small, probably to the default (io.file.buffer.size). Currently the patch passes the bufferSize parameter there, rather than letting it default.
make checksums optional per FileSystem
--------------------------------------

Key: HADOOP-928
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-928
Project: Hadoop
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: fs
Reporter: Doug Cutting
Assigned To: Hairong Kuang
Attachments: checksum.patch, checksum1.patch, checksum2.patch


Checksumming is currently built into the base FileSystem class. It should instead be optional, with each FileSystem implementation electing whether to use the Hadoop-provided checksum system, or to disable it, or to implement its own custom checksum system.
To implement this, a ChecksumFileSystem implementation can be provided that wraps another FileSystem implementation, implementing checksums as in Hadoop's current mandatory implementation (i.e., as a separate crc file per file that's elided from directory listings). The 'raw' FileSystem methods would be removed. FSDataInputStream and FSDataOutputStream would be made interfaces.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts

Previous

Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 22 of 29 | next ›
Discussion Overview
groupcommon-dev @
categorieshadoop
postedJan 25, '07 at 4:19a
activeMay 17, '07 at 11:28a
posts29
users1
websitehadoop.apache.org...
irc#hadoop

1 user in discussion

Hadoop QA (JIRA): 29 posts

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase