Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hadoop-common-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-common-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 10FE4F69A for ; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 03:29:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 88434 invoked by uid 500); 27 Mar 2013 03:29:34 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-common-user-archive@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 88131 invoked by uid 500); 27 Mar 2013 03:29:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@hadoop.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 88113 invoked by uid 99); 27 Mar 2013 03:29:34 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 03:29:34 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.3 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [106.10.148.129] (HELO nm4-vm2.bullet.mail.sg3.yahoo.com) (106.10.148.129) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Wed, 27 Mar 2013 03:29:25 +0000 Received: from [106.10.166.112] by nm4.bullet.mail.sg3.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Mar 2013 03:29:02 -0000 Received: from [106.10.167.195] by tm1.bullet.mail.sg3.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Mar 2013 03:29:02 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp168.mail.sg3.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Mar 2013 03:29:02 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1364354942; bh=V86Cct+RVLtcizxw3HrVYY+AhdjNtq7uU+FQyyzaD2A=; h=X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-Rocket-Received:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:Content-Language; b=RCYaYXHQ4z1edu6M+p6yGDNji7w0VOl2z1uYZe7boFnlF8D6DwhjqwpXrIU6Q2czeq3q8IdlGlViWl77edybJ0xvGy4L1i0LLn11W7qLkRKrwwsyG8BV0MuRORVbD26lmNLwnxdTMWPam1N/OGsArGhnU1ubmxWJliPgs0pBTFs= X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 632465.26661.bm@smtp168.mail.sg3.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: UfeEL0gVM1k5ZbOR5jTxybKGyHzACeIFKC301uZkGEscsda hEAwE1uFMRI1HiQT__GKdpPSoULReDN6tYt65cYdO0jJP_0Ny3YS1eZ.yS.5 g03QFFneW4mkVqEDZnntCLFGir.lonvJjBhi56q9kQbKnV4nB5W0BDFBGn8S LngqcjBZOTOFmwwqxqua_WX__83D4oe5LMxE9K0sWYEuTj.7UDNVBqs3VBBu FB6vvVvhLzblWCOJln1J5VtJkcoYszzZeBaOnh8CpF1kWmMHVzalhA5c8Rdf lkfO4oliQ2IRFry7.QxiLej2_Q9HEyrX6qJ.SOfU8P_UfhIVi7COtoLBxP2t Gs.h2NtcDnLowfbBIBv3jOFddsg5wzK2ZLnH5C2Wez6ouyBQIlF0G93iDDrx A8Y2qd75fgD6hVdQBPongEm8Aar1hdyDmLEw7KbTC78Lhh40- X-Yahoo-SMTP: k2gD1GeswBAV_JFpZm8dmpTCwr4ufTKOyA-- X-Rocket-Received: from sattelite (davidparks21@113.161.75.108 with login) by smtp168.mail.sg3.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 Mar 2013 20:29:02 -0700 PDT From: "David Parks" To: References: <001b01ce2794$022d4f50$0687edf0$@yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: For a new installation: use the BackupNode or the CheckPointNode? Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:28:49 +0700 Message-ID: <016801ce2a9b$3321be70$99653b50$@yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQGdYTbB3mftMd62kQnaHCgNAE7HIAGUUIW5AUnQCIiZA4FfEA== Content-Language: en-us X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Thanks for the update, I understand now that I'll be installing a "secondary name node" which performs checkpoints on the primary name node and keeps a working backup copy of the fsimage file. The primary name node should write its fsimage file to at least 2 different physical mediums for improved safety as well (example: locally and an nfs share). One point of query: were the primary name node to be lost, we would be best off re-building it and copying the fsimage files into place, either from the nfs share, or from the secondary name node, as the situation dictates. There's no mechanism to "fail over" to the "secondary name node" per-se. Am I on track here? Thanks! David -----Original Message----- From: Konstantin Shvachko [mailto:shv.hadoop@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 5:07 AM To: user@hadoop.apache.org Cc: davidparks21@yahoo.com Subject: Re: For a new installation: use the BackupNode or the CheckPointNode? There is no BackupNode in Hadoop 1. That was a bug in documentation. Here is the updated link: http://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r1.1.2/hdfs_user_guide.html Thanks, --Konstantin On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 12:04 AM, varun kumar wrote: > Hope below link will be useful.. > > http://hadoop.apache.org/docs/stable/hdfs_user_guide.html > > > On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 12:29 PM, David Parks > wrote: >> >> For a new installation of the current stable build (1.1.2 ), is there >> any reason to use the CheckPointNode over the BackupNode? >> >> >> >> It seems that we need to choose one or the other, and from the docs >> it seems like the BackupNode is more efficient in its processes. > > > > > -- > Regards, > Varun Kumar.P