hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Arun C Murthy <ar...@yahoo-inc.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Hadoop Security Release off Yahoo! patchset
Date Fri, 14 Jan 2011 06:21:39 GMT
*nod* Ok.


On Jan 13, 2011, at 10:08 PM, "Nigel Daley" <ndaley@mac.com> wrote:

> I say just do it.  Eli said it wasn't a blocker. Sure it ain't perfect, but it's good
> Let's move on to 0.22 and beyond.
> Nige
> On Jan 13, 2011, at 8:23 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
>> On Jan 13, 2011, at 6:50 PM, Eli Collins wrote:
>>> The cdh3 patch set Todd is talking about is not vanilla 104.3, it's
>>> 104.3 re-based onto 20.2 plus patches from branch-20 and trunk (the
>>> performance and stability fixes I think you're referring to, at least
>>> the ones that have been posted to Apache jira).
>>> Can you post a pointer to the version you're referring to, eg on
>>> github?  If there isn't a big delta between it and the cdh3 patch set
>>> (which should have the 20-based patches from jira) perhaps you and
>>> Todd could easily merge in the delta to create 0.20.x?
>> I can guarantee it will need work to merge the enhancements since 20.104.3, it's
over 6 months of development. The enhancements includes work on stability such as iterative
ls, limits on JT to prevent single jobs/users from taking it down etc. and lots of bug-fixes
to security. So, unfortunately the delta is pretty large.
>> I'm working on a CHANGES.txt which should reflect all the changes i.e. bug-fixes
and enhancements.
>>>> The version I'm offering to push to the community has fixed all of them,
>>>> *plus* the added benefit of several stability and performance fixes we have
>>>> done since 20.104.3, almost 10 internal releases. This is a battle tested
>>>> and hardened version which we have deployed on 40,000+ nodes. It is a
>>>> significant upgrade on which we never deployed. I'm pretty sure
>>>> *some* users will find that valuable. ;)
>>> Definitely, but better to hit two birds with one stone right?  Instead
>>> of a security + enhancements release and an append release we could
>>> have a single security + append + enhancements release and users don't
>>> have to choose.
>> We are discussing two options:
>> 20 + security + enhancements
>> 20 + security + append
>> I think the value we provide via 20+security+enhancements release is that it's stable,
tested and deployed at scale. Doing any more work merging 6 months of work at Yahoo (again,
I guarantee it's a lot of work) will need a lots of cycles to validate, test and stabilize.
>> I feel the alternative is a distraction for me, I'd rather work on 0.22.
>> I can get 20+security+enhancements done very, very, quickly precisely because I don't
have to spend cycles testing it.
>> Does that make sense? Thanks for being patient and bearing with me...
>> Arun

View raw message