accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From ke...@deenlo.com
Subject Re: Review Request 19790: ACCUMULO-378 Design document
Date Fri, 28 Mar 2014 19:01:12 GMT


> On March 28, 2014, 6:06 p.m., Mike Drob wrote:
> > I did not see any considerations for dealing with limited WAN capacity. If data
ingest is local to the master, then it is feasible that the ingest bandwidth is much higher
than can be efficiently acheived between e.g. Oregon and Virginia. We would also probably
need some sequence function so that while clients reading from the slave might see stale information,
they are not at risk of seeing Key combinations that have never existed.

Are you concerned about data being written in a different order on the slave?  Or mutations
being broken up?  Or something else?


- kturner


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/19790/#review38922
-----------------------------------------------------------


On March 28, 2014, 5:54 p.m., kturner wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/19790/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated March 28, 2014, 5:54 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for accumulo.
> 
> 
> Bugs: ACCUMULO-378
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-378
> 
> 
> Repository: accumulo
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> ACCUMULO-378 Design document.  Posting for review here, not meant for commit.  Final
version of document should be posted on issue.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   docs/src/main/resources/design/ACCUMULO-378-design.mdtext PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/19790/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> kturner
> 
>


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message