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 7E239200AC8 for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2016 09:36:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 7AE49160A36; Tue, 7 Jun 2016 07:36:23 +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 C3130160A35 for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2016 09:36:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 28615 invoked by uid 500); 7 Jun 2016 07:36:22 -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 28587 invoked by uid 99); 7 Jun 2016 07:36:21 -0000 Received: from arcas.apache.org (HELO arcas) (140.211.11.28) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 07 Jun 2016 07:36:21 +0000 Received: from arcas.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arcas (Postfix) with ESMTP id D52D52C1F5C for ; Tue, 7 Jun 2016 07:36:21 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2016 07:36:21 +0000 (UTC) From: "Tsz Wo Nicholas Sze (JIRA)" To: hdfs-issues@hadoop.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Commented] (HDFS-9924) [umbrella] Asynchronous HDFS Access MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 archived-at: Tue, 07 Jun 2016 07:36:23 -0000 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-9924?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15318054#comment-15318054 ] Tsz Wo Nicholas Sze commented on HDFS-9924: ------------------------------------------- > I think AsyncDistributedFileSystem should be annotated as Private, ... Yes, we should, @Private or @LimitedPrivate. It seems that there are some serious confusions here. FileSystem is a user facing public API, however, DistributedFileSystem is not. DistributedFileSystem is always an internal API and never a public API. Note that FileSystem was annotated as @Public @Stable (in 2010) but DistributedFileSystem was annotated as @LimitedPrivate @Unstable (in 2012). Therefore, adding or changing APIs to DistributedFileSystem do not affect any user facing public API at all. What have we done so far? We have added some methods to DistributedFileSystem and a new internal @Unstable class AsyncDistributedFileSystem. The FileSystem API remains unchanged. So there is no change in any user facing public API at all. Please let me know if you disagree. Thanks. > [umbrella] Asynchronous 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 Asynchronous 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 asynchronous 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