Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-accumulo-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-accumulo-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BD1659969 for ; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 13:36:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 44330 invoked by uid 500); 26 Jul 2012 13:33:19 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-accumulo-user-archive@accumulo.apache.org Received: (qmail 44298 invoked by uid 500); 26 Jul 2012 13:33:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@accumulo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@accumulo.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@accumulo.apache.org Received: (qmail 44269 invoked by uid 99); 26 Jul 2012 13:33:19 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 13:33:19 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.5 required=5.0 tests=FSL_RCVD_USER,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: softfail (nike.apache.org: transitioning domain of marc@accumulo.net does not designate 209.85.216.169 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.216.169] (HELO mail-qc0-f169.google.com) (209.85.216.169) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 13:33:09 +0000 Received: by qcsd16 with SMTP id d16so1299471qcs.0 for ; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 06:32:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=viNALsMSG2zGTRf/KdviM+1OLQlK4zG5ASDNm371as4=; b=ol2NbQFuMxWfPAnd0hLUU8qpwo314WkdBdVLBytedjMxrUmQbXHi7v37JqRuSz4IEy ebyk3yeEtYeSY1pFyDevR9eXOAL0PBY96Oqs9zU8lKdC60tQih1Ab48InvOOv3AT6ZAM 09eQ+kPAqJY1YLwOk8LWqBI7rvwUDqYqo3mXfhgIdIbMqFZzMZASCcoytPumqNC8i+Ev kqAZ15jicJupoB5M82gJxEligJgyb2ejhlxoZJ5kPSYDG0gXe4IVTP8sRGP8Z6cPrxNj jY/bUuZyhg/y8/lYCZT5nipeNw7PApg714TiBIoIVNqqJk9JZbTwLjXoLSCts7foY+2r 1O+A== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.60.29.72 with SMTP id i8mr41424715oeh.26.1343309567785; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 06:32:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.76.97.197 with HTTP; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 06:32:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [63.239.65.11] In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 09:32:47 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: What happens when tablet is 'lost'? From: Marc Parisi To: user@accumulo.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8fb1f8069c793104c5bba174 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkbnHv79fFRKIXDY6tWUZaqpyd2iSV+ckZqYQkFAP7Phtvkn9hY31RKdQkGZBsvJiU5O/dj --e89a8fb1f8069c793104c5bba174 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 isn't this inherently handled by replication? On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 7:54 AM, David Medinets wrote: > This question was asked at a presentation gave yesterday and I > realized that I don't know the answer. A tablet serves a specific key > of keys which is disjoint from all other tablets. Say a table has ten > tablets with perfectly distributed keys so each tablet serves 10% of > the data. If tablet A is lost, does the system lose access to the > first 10% of the data? > --e89a8fb1f8069c793104c5bba174 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable isn't this inherently handled by replication?

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 7:54 AM, David Medinets = <david.med= inets@gmail.com> wrote:
This question was asked at a presentation ga= ve yesterday and I
realized that I don't know the answer. A tablet serves a specific key of keys which is disjoint from all other tablets. Say a table has ten
tablets with perfectly distributed keys so each tablet serves 10% of
the data. If tablet A is lost, does the system lose access to the
first 10% of the data?

--e89a8fb1f8069c793104c5bba174--