Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id F395B200B2D for ; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 21:22:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id F24A01602C5; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 19:22:07 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 4652D160A51 for ; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 21:22:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 32748 invoked by uid 500); 16 Jun 2016 19:22:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact hdfs-issues-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list hdfs-issues@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 32288 invoked by uid 99); 16 Jun 2016 19:22:05 -0000 Received: from arcas.apache.org (HELO arcas) (140.211.11.28) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 19:22:05 +0000 Received: from arcas.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arcas (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D09C2C1F61 for ; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 19:22:05 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 19:22:05 +0000 (UTC) From: "Jitendra Nath Pandey (JIRA)" To: hdfs-issues@hadoop.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Commented] (HDFS-9924) [umbrella] Nonblocking HDFS Access MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 archived-at: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 19:22:08 -0000 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-9924?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15334494#comment-15334494 ] Jitendra Nath Pandey commented on HDFS-9924: -------------------------------------------- The lack of consensus is only for the API. The underlying implementation is useful for any API we choose. I will suggest to create a patch to remove only the AsyncDistributedFileSystem API. I can do that if thats an agreeable approach. [~andrew.wang], I think you earlier mentioned that you are ok to move out only the API. I would rather revert only the API, or move it to a test and that will avoid the overhead of a branch. The other proposal in HDFS-10535, for non blocking hdfs access, should not implement the file system interface, therefore it is not just a rename. If that is acceptable, we can have the Async API only in the trunk. At this point, I think it will be lot easier to build a consensus first in trunk. > [umbrella] Nonblocking HDFS Access > ---------------------------------- > > Key: HDFS-9924 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-9924 > Project: Hadoop HDFS > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: fs > Reporter: Tsz Wo Nicholas Sze > Assignee: Xiaobing Zhou > Attachments: AsyncHdfs20160510.pdf > > > This is an umbrella JIRA for supporting Nonblocking HDFS Access. > Currently, all the API methods are blocking calls -- the caller is blocked until the method returns. It is very slow if a client makes a large number of independent calls in a single thread since each call has to wait until the previous call is finished. It is inefficient if a client needs to create a large number of threads to invoke the calls. > We propose adding a new API to support nonblocking calls, i.e. the caller is not blocked. The methods in the new API immediately return a Java Future object. The return value can be obtained by the usual Future.get() method. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-issues-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-issues-help@hadoop.apache.org