hadoop-hdfs-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Suresh Srinivas <sur...@hortonworks.com>
Subject Re: VOTE: HDFS-347 merge
Date Tue, 26 Feb 2013 17:33:06 GMT
> There's no reason to maintain multiple implementations of the same
> feature, that's why per the 2246 jira it was proposed as a "good short
> term solution till HDFS-347 is completed".   Why is ATM's compromise
> unacceptable?

We have already discussed this.

Here is the recap:
HDFS-347 does not support all the platforms. HDFS-2246 does.
So removing HDFS-2246 does not make sense unless HDFS-347
supports all the platforms.

I am not arguing we should retain HDFS-2246 forever. I do not currently
have bandwidth to add HDFS-347 windows equivalent functionality.
When I or someone else adds support for that we can discuss removing
HDFS-2246. Until then I can support HDFS-2246 mechanism. I have
also proposed how to make the current patch simpler where both the
features can live together.

I will change my vote to +1 in following two cases.
1. HDFS-347 supports all the other platforms HDFS-2246 supported and
    hence truly becomes replacement.
2. Do not remove HDFS-2246 support.

BTW I think we should switch to some other thread given this merge vote
is already past 7 days.


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