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 06:37:03 GMT
No worries. Thanks to both Eli & Todd for the discussion. 

I look forward to getting this done and moving ahead to 0.22 and beyond.

thanks,
Arun

On Jan 13, 2011, at 10:29 PM, "Eli Collins" <eli@cloudera.com> wrote:

> Sorry for rattling you guys, definitely wasn't discussing a veto.  I'm
> absolutely not opposed, just thought the alternative Todd raised was
> worth a couple emails since users have requested both security and
> append, and such a branch that includes both of those plus
> enhancements and substantial testing exists.
> 
> Arun - I appreciate all the info, looking forward to the release.
> 
> Thanks,
> Eli
> 
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 10:21 PM, Arun C Murthy <arunc@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
>> *nod* Ok.
>> 
>> Arun
>> 
>> 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 enough.
>>> 
>>> 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 0.20.104.3 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
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 

Mime
View raw message