HADOOP-18128. Fix typo issues of outputstream.md (#4025)
This commit is contained in:
parent
9e475aede6
commit
902a7935e9
|
@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ or `FSDataOutputStreamBuilder.build()`.
|
|||
These all return instances of `FSDataOutputStream`, through which data
|
||||
can be written through various `write()` methods.
|
||||
After a stream's `close()` method is called, all data written to the
|
||||
stream MUST BE persisted to the fileysystem and visible to oll other
|
||||
stream MUST BE persisted to the filesystem and visible to oll other
|
||||
clients attempting to read data from that path via `FileSystem.open()`.
|
||||
|
||||
As well as operations to write the data, Hadoop's `OutputStream` implementations
|
||||
|
@ -126,7 +126,7 @@ consistent with the data at the filesystem.
|
|||
|
||||
The output stream returned from a call of
|
||||
`FileSystem.append(path, buffersize, progress)` within a filesystem `FS`,
|
||||
can be modelled as a stream whose `buffer` is intialized to that of
|
||||
can be modelled as a stream whose `buffer` is initialized to that of
|
||||
the original file:
|
||||
|
||||
```python
|
||||
|
@ -184,7 +184,7 @@ This document covers the requirements of such implementations.
|
|||
|
||||
HDFS's `FileSystem` implementation, `DistributedFileSystem`, returns an instance
|
||||
of `HdfsDataOutputStream`. This implementation has at least two behaviors
|
||||
which are not explicitly declared by the base Java implmentation
|
||||
which are not explicitly declared by the base Java implementation
|
||||
|
||||
1. Writes are synchronized: more than one thread can write to the same
|
||||
output stream. This is a use pattern which HBase relies on.
|
||||
|
@ -648,7 +648,7 @@ in production.
|
|||
1. `OutputStream.write()` MAY persist the data, synchronously or asynchronously
|
||||
1. `OutputStream.flush()` flushes data to the destination. There
|
||||
are no strict persistence requirements.
|
||||
1. `Syncable.hflush()` synchronously sends all outstaning data to the destination
|
||||
1. `Syncable.hflush()` synchronously sends all outstanding data to the destination
|
||||
filesystem. After returning to the caller, the data MUST be visible to other readers,
|
||||
it MAY be durable. That is: it does not have to be persisted, merely guaranteed
|
||||
to be consistently visible to all clients attempting to open a new stream reading
|
||||
|
@ -678,7 +678,7 @@ public void hflush() throws IOException {
|
|||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This is perfectly acceptable as an implementation: the semantics of `hflush()`
|
||||
are satisifed.
|
||||
are satisfied.
|
||||
What is not acceptable is downgrading `hsync()` to `hflush()`, as the durability guarantee is no longer met.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -863,7 +863,7 @@ local data as can be written to full checksummed blocks of data.
|
|||
That is, the hsync/hflush operations are not guaranteed to write all the pending
|
||||
data until the file is finally closed.
|
||||
|
||||
For this reason, the local fileystem accessed via `file://` URLs
|
||||
For this reason, the local filesystem accessed via `file://` URLs
|
||||
does not support `Syncable` unless `setWriteChecksum(false)` was
|
||||
called on that FileSystem instance so as to disable checksum creation.
|
||||
After which, obviously, checksums are not generated for any file.
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue