hadoop-hdfs-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Konstantin Boudnik <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Remove append?
Date Thu, 22 Mar 2012 22:11:18 GMT
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 10:25AM, Eli Collins wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 1:26 AM, Konstantin Shvachko
> <shv.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Eli,
> >
> > I went over the entire discussion on the topic, and did not get it. Is
> > there a problem with append? We know it does not work in hadoop-1,
> > only flush() does. Is there anything wrong with the new append
> > (HDFS-265)? If so please file a bug.
> > I tested it in Hadoop-0.22 branch it works fine.
> >
> > I agree with people who were involved with the implementation of the
> > new append that the complexity is mainly in
> > 1. pipeline recovery
> > 2. consistent client reading while writing, and
> > 3. hflush()
> > Once it is done the append itself, which is reopening of previously
> > closed files for adding data, is not complex.
> >
> > You mentioned it and I agree you indeed should be more involved with
> > your customer base. As for eBay, append was of the motivations to work
> > on stabilizing 0.22 branch. And there is a lot of use cases which
> > require append for our customers.
> > Some of them were mentioned in this discussion.
> >
> 
> From what I've seen 0.22 isn't ready for production use. Aside from
> not supporting critical features like security, it doesn't have a
> size-able user-base behind it testing and fixing bugs, etc. All things
> I'd imagine an org like eBay would want.  I've never gotten a request
> to support 0.22 from a customer.

This statement looks like FUD to me, because eBay (and a coupla other shops,
as has been stated elsewhere) are using 0.22 in the production and are
seemingly happy with that.

And employing FUD always means that there's a reason to bring it about.

Cos

> Thanks,
> Eli

Mime
View raw message