hadoop-hdfs-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Allen Wittenauer ...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Merging Namenode Federation feature (HDFS-1052) to trunk
Date Tue, 22 Mar 2011 20:11:37 GMT

On Mar 21, 2011, at 4:08 PM, Sanjay Radia wrote:
> Allen, not sure if I explained the difference above.
> Base on the discussion we had at the Hug, I want to clarify a few things

	Thanks for taking the time at HUG.  (I've since figured out that I lost your messages as
part of my email list transition.)

> A DN stores block for only ONE cluster.

	But this does make things easier.  Although I'm still fairly confident that it adds too much
complexity for little gain though.  So put this in the 'agree to disagree' column.  It would
still be nice if you guys could lay off the camelCase options though.  Admins hate the shift

	BTW, Robert C. asked what I thought you guys should have been working on instead of Federation.
 I told him (and you) high availability of the namenode (which I still believe is necessary
for HDFS in more and more cases), but I've had more time to think about it.  So expect my
list (which I'll post here) soon.  :p

View raw message