apache / apache/rocketmq

Should we always call destory before removing a mapped file ?

Open
#2,019 3 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub
no stale type/question
Dominant language
Java
Stars
22.6k
Forks
12k
Avg merge
2d 20h
Merged PRs (30d)
26

Description

The issue tracker is **ONLY** used for bug report(feature request need to follow [RIP process](https://github.com/apache/rocketmq/wiki/RocketMQ-Improvement-Proposal)). Keep in mind, please check whether there is an existing same report before your raise a new one.

Alternately (especially if your communication is not a bug report), you can send mail to our [mailing lists](http://rocketmq.apache.org/about/contact/). We welcome any friendly suggestions, bug fixes, collaboration and other improvements.

Please ensure that your bug report is clear and that it is complete. Otherwise, we may be unable to understand it or to reproduce it, either of which would prevent us from fixing the bug. We strongly recommend the report(bug report or feature request) could include some hints as the following:

**BUG REPORT**

1. Please describe the issue you observed:

In MappedFileQueue:273 we have

```
while (iterator.hasPrevious()) {
mappedFileLast = iterator.previous();
if (offset >= mappedFileLast.getFileFromOffset()) {
int where = (int) (offset % mappedFileLast.getFileSize());
mappedFileLast.setFlushedPosition(where);
mappedFileLast.setWrotePosition(where);
mappedFileLast.setCommittedPosition(where);
break;
} else {
// Can we add destroy here ?
// mappedFileLast.destroy();
iterator.remove();
}
}
```

- What did you expect to see?

- What did you see instead?

2. Please tell us about your environment:

3. Other information (e.g. detailed explanation, logs, related issues, suggestions how to fix, etc):

**FEATURE REQUEST**

1. Please describe the feature you are requesting.

2. Provide any additional detail on your proposed use case for this feature.

2. Indicate the importance of this issue to you (blocker, must-have, should-have, nice-to-have). Are you currently using any workarounds to address this issue?

4. If there are some sub-tasks using -[] for each subtask and create a corresponding issue to map to the sub task:

- [sub-task1-issue-number](example_sub_issue1_link_here): sub-task1 description here,
- [sub-task2-issue-number](example_sub_issue2_link_here): sub-task2 description here,
- ...

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

Assessment

This issue has not been assessed yet.

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.