hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Todd Lipcon <t...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: Proposal: Further Project Split(s)
Date Fri, 01 Apr 2011 08:25:22 GMT
+4.01. This is a terrific idea.

On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 1:19 AM, Aaron T. Myers <atm@cloudera.com> wrote:

> Hello Hadoop Community,
> Given the tremendous positive feedback we've all had regarding the HDFS,
> MapReduce, and Common project split, I'd like to propose we take the next
> step and further separate the existing projects.
> I propose we begin by splitting the MapReduce project into separate "Map"
> and "Reduce" sub-projects. This will provide us the opportunity to tease
> out
> the complex interdependencies between "map" and "reduce" that exist today,
> to encourage us to write more modular and isolated code, which should speed
> releases. This will also aid our users who exclusively run map-only or
> reduce-only jobs. These are important use-cases, and so should be given
> high
> priority.
> Given that these two portions of the existing MapReduce project share a
> great deal of code, we will likely need to release these two new projects
> concurrently at first, but the eventual goal should certainly be to be able
> to release "Map" and "Reduce" independently. This seems intuitive to me,
> given the remarkable recent advancements in the academic community
> regarding
> "reduce," while the research coming out of the "map" academics has largely
> stagnated of late.
> If this proposal is accepted, and it has the success I think it will, then
> we should strongly consider splitting the other two projects as well. My
> gut
> instinct is that we should split "HDFS" into "HD" and "FS" sub-projects,
> and
> simply rename the "Common" project to "C'Mon." We can think about the
> details of what exactly these project splits mean later.
> Please let me know what you think.
> Best,
> Aaron

Todd Lipcon
Software Engineer, Cloudera

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