hadoop-hdfs-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Íñigo Goiri (JIRA) <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HDFS-12615) Router-based HDFS federation phase 2
Date Tue, 15 May 2018 18:56:00 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-12615?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16476340#comment-16476340
] 

Íñigo Goiri commented on HDFS-12615:
------------------------------------

[~anu], thanks for your thoughts.
I think your concerns were valid from the beginning and I agree that this umbrella didn't
have a consistent story.
My idea was to have a place to track the RBF related modifications.
In retrospective, if I had just used tags for these features (which is the common approach),
this wouldn't have been noticed and this would now just be hidden under the carpet.
>From this discussion, I think I took the right decision as now we are able to set a better
standard for RBF.
I'm not sure I 100% agree on your statement about that this would require a branch long time
ago.
I agree that some of the features (~30% of the original JIRAs) should have used a branch,
but there is a lot of small bugfixes which should go to trunk without a branch.

I hope you agree your concerns were heard.
To summarize, the actions were:
* Take the larger components into their own JIRAs which potentially will become their own
branch:
** Security: Already on that track. As I have 0 confidence in this part, we were already making
noise trying to get others to review.
** Rebalancer: Already on that track.
** DNs vs Router: Already on that track but still in early discussion.
** Quotas: this grew out of hand and hopefully now is on track in its own umbrella.
* Leave this branch as maintenance bug fixes. If I'm not wrong, all the open JIRAs now would
qualify as "regular maintenance".

The problem is that now we have a few rough edges with some medium features that are still
left here.
I'd like to trim this umbrella further if so.
Any thoughts here? Should we split things further (multi-destination mount points)?

In general, I would like to highlight that all the work here is self-contained to RBF and
shouldn't have an impact to the rest of HDFS.
(Security is a different beast and we should pay special attention within HDFS in general.)
If I'm not wrong the changes to the rest of components has been minimal.

> Router-based HDFS federation phase 2
> ------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDFS-12615
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-12615
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Íñigo Goiri
>            Assignee: Íñigo Goiri
>            Priority: Major
>              Labels: RBF
>
> This umbrella JIRA tracks set of improvements over the Router-based HDFS federation (HDFS-10467).



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-issues-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-issues-help@hadoop.apache.org


Mime
View raw message