hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Todd Lipcon <t...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: 0.21 Release
Date Fri, 19 Mar 2010 19:31:25 GMT
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Jeremy Davis <jerdavis@speakeasy.net>wrote:

> Thank you for your reply,
>
> So what would be your (or anyones) advice on getting, HDFS
> sync/flush/append functionality?
> You seem to indicate that 0.21 branch as is might not be the best idea,
> with your preference being a patch set against 0.20.
>
> We definitely have an application for this specific functionality, and I
> need to provide some direction/answers in this area for my colleagues.
>
> For example, I might say: We will install the current 0.21 now, and develop
> against it.. But in X time we will install CDH2 (and get all the goodness it
> brings), and then apply a given patch set against it. Is this in line with
> what you are thinking? If so, could I get your perceived level of effort,
> maybe a time frame? April/May/June/ etc..
>
>
FYI the 0.20 sync patches mentioned by Stack will be going into CDH3 at some
point this spring. This is mainly for the benefit of HBase but of course
other applications will benefit as well.

Thanks
-Todd


> I'm sure I'm not the only one that has plans for this feature, as it's in
>  "Hadoop: the Definitive Guide" by O'Reilly published in September '09.
>
> Thanks,
> -JD
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 19, 2010, at 11:51 AM, Stack wrote:
>
>  On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 9:43 AM, Jeremy Davis <jerdavis@speakeasy.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> ...and I also saw release 0.21 as is with stack as the release manager.
>>> Was
>>> there a final decision on this off list?
>>>
>>>
>> On the above, I was toying with the idea of being release manager for
>> releasing as hadoop 0.21.0 what is in current 0.21 hadoop branch but I
>> subsequently decided against it after chatting with folks and figuring
>> that the only group that seemed interested in driving a release of the
>> hadoop 0.21 branch was the hbase crew.  If I were to guess, an hadoop
>> vouched for by a couple of hbasers with their spotty hdfs and
>> mapreduce knowledge probably wouldn't have the penetration of a
>> release backed by, say, a Yahoo.  No one would trust their data to
>> such a release.  If no data in hadoop 0.21 clusters, hbase wouldn't
>> have anything to run against.  So I let it go and figured time could
>> be spent better elsewhere; e.g. helping test the set of patches that
>> could get us a sync/flush/append on a patched hadoop 0.20 (hdfs-200,
>> etc.).
>>
>> Sorry, I should have added a note to cited thread that I'd wandered...
>>
>> St.Ack
>>
>
>


-- 
Todd Lipcon
Software Engineer, Cloudera

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