Mailing-List: contact hdfs-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: 98.139.253.104 is neither permitted
 nor denied by domain of daryn@yahoo-inc.com)
From: Daryn Sharp <daryn@yahoo-inc.com>
To: "hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 12:03:01 -0500
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Remove append?
Thread-Topic: [DISCUSS] Remove append?
Thread-Index: Ac0JFs9mAJNUXV87SZ2tneRhIhj+Lw==
Message-ID: <D39E454D-FF8A-4498-9CB6-ADFC67CBBBAF@yahoo-inc.com>
References: 
 <CAPn_vTvK8pU+_bneo-fBkt6hGcTAa5AZMvSJyY29NUn4-_fMXA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CB90FF9D.2E109%Milind.Bhandarkar@emc.com>
 <1332461012.65143.YahooMailNeo@web65905.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
 <CAPn_vTuynqBad-47wr6Mr9AATo_DEttVaxRJ+eToeiU=q03BPw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMwMvV5cKW31oRVSprDPJjoe=vnJfzTiJKKJNtnTtnu8S4BB1w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAMwMvV5cKW31oRVSprDPJjoe=vnJfzTiJKKJNtnTtnu8S4BB1w@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0

I think Yarn/MR might be able to benefit from the ability to append to logs=
 in hdfs.  It might reduce some of the after-the-fact copying of logs into =
hdfs.

Daryn


On Mar 22, 2012, at 8:18 PM, Dhruba Borthakur wrote:

> I think "append" would be useful. But not precisely sure which applicatio=
ns
> would use it. I would vote to keep the code though and not remove it.
>=20
> -dhruba
>=20
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Eli Collins <eli@cloudera.com> wrote:
>=20
>> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Tsz Wo Sze <szetszwo@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> @Eli, Removing a feature would simplify the design and code.  I think
>> this is a generally true statement but not specific to Append.  The
>> question is whether Append is useless and it should be removed?  I think=
 it
>> is clear from this email thread that the answer is no.
>>=20
>> @Nicholas, no one is saying append is "useless and should be removed."
>> The discussion is perhaps a little more subtle than you've understood
>> it to be.
>>=20
>> If there are a lot of good use cases I'm all for it, I just don't see
>> downstream projects using it any time soon (which is not to say they
>> don't want it, just that they can't depend on something not in 1.x),
>> and I haven't seen much demand.  I wanted to hear from others if they
>> had.  When I brought it up with a room of hdfs developers from 3
>> different companies no one felt strongly. And so far only a handful of
>> people have chimed in, I actually thought more would.
>>=20
>> Thanks,
>> Eli
>>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> --=20
> Subscribe to my posts at http://www.facebook.com/dhruba