Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hadoop-hdfs-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-hdfs-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AE67FF079 for ; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 04:59:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 94902 invoked by uid 500); 24 Mar 2013 04:59:40 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-hdfs-user-archive@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 94466 invoked by uid 500); 24 Mar 2013 04:59:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@hadoop.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 94445 invoked by uid 99); 24 Mar 2013 04:59:36 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 04:59:36 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of azuryyyu@gmail.com designates 209.85.223.182 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.223.182] (HELO mail-ie0-f182.google.com) (209.85.223.182) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 04:59:31 +0000 Received: by mail-ie0-f182.google.com with SMTP id at1so2315843iec.27 for ; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 21:59:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=R6JpiMBgrR7+WP2kGgNLz9rnR2O5RNCVX7gsG05im+4=; b=HuNwmjwi5Zv+SIJzkX0R8mCLsMvgADGzt/aYAU68akyvq8qncp6mK8hC90T8uGCtfZ F/ScTUaZeUQG6oKJcsmZMgn1k2Kd9o0dLTKECLunz13TpQx0zQHjwuEKN7hdfjy6g5q1 +ryVrxKZ+OhuWQ3KQYLwJBubcExGtw0gU8xF9yTqSfI4HzdVfxdVINxYw+ita5dGECRM otPFFGim2AxMQbtYexlpGh2kxB4NurBYqmBJKxZwBUKU39VwowrTQ/lvP7Hv/M8RbuEj EBa01muj7JcCpIhbCM2ZlPZ8pTtlxzf4zTEffSzUvkAWGHrPZ8afrGUc0Sr0yfov5aCr 8+cw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.42.168 with SMTP id p8mr4878522igl.106.1364101150356; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 21:59:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.26.70 with HTTP; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 21:59:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.26.70 with HTTP; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 21:59:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <001b01ce2794$022d4f50$0687edf0$@yahoo.com> <00d901ce282d$e5349170$af9db450$@yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 12:59:10 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: For a new installation: use the BackupNode or the CheckPointNode? From: Azuryy Yu To: user@hadoop.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae934108d81571c04d8a48c2d X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --14dae934108d81571c04d8a48c2d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 IMO, if you run HA, then SSN is not necessary. On Mar 24, 2013 12:40 PM, "Harsh J" wrote: > Yep, this is correct - you only need the SecondaryNameNode in 1.x. In > 2.x, if you run HA, the standby NameNode role also doubles up > automatically as the SNN so you don't need to run an extra. > > On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 6:51 AM, David Parks > wrote: > > So... the answer is... SecondaryNameNode is what I should be installing > > here. And the SecondaryNameNode is essentially just an earlier version of > > the checkpoint node, in terms of functionality. If I understood > everything > > correctly. Can you confirm? > > > > Thanks, > > David > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Harsh J [mailto:harsh@cloudera.com] > > Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2013 5:33 PM > > To: > > Cc: davidparks21@yahoo.com > > Subject: Re: For a new installation: use the BackupNode or the > > CheckPointNode? > > > > Neither CheckpointNode nor BackupNode exists in version 1.x. This was a > > documentation oversight that should be cleared in the docs now (or by > next > > release I think). > > > > And on 2.x, neither has been tested for stability and the > SecondaryNameNode > > continues to exist and is fully supported (not deprecated). > > > > On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 12:34 PM, varun kumar > wrote: > >> Hope below link will be useful.. > >> > >> http://hadoop.apache.org/docs/stable/hdfs_user_guide.html > >> > >> > >> On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 12:29 PM, David Parks > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> For a new installation of the current stable build (1.1.2 ), is there > >>> any reason to use the CheckPointNode over the BackupNode? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> It seems that we need to choose one or the other, and from the docs > >>> it seems like the BackupNode is more efficient in its processes. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Regards, > >> Varun Kumar.P > > > > > > > > -- > > Harsh J > > > > > > -- > Harsh J > --14dae934108d81571c04d8a48c2d Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

IMO, if you run HA, then SSN is not necessary.

On Mar 24, 2013 12:40 PM, "Harsh J" &l= t;harsh@cloudera.com> wrote:
Yep, this is correct - you only need the SecondaryNameNode in 1.x. In
2.x, if you run HA, the standby NameNode role also doubles up
automatically as the SNN so you don't need to run an extra.

On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 6:51 AM, David Parks <davidparks21@yahoo.com> wrote:
> So... the answer is... SecondaryNameNode is what I should be installin= g
> here. And the SecondaryNameNode is essentially just an earlier version= of
> the checkpoint node, in terms of functionality. If I understood everyt= hing
> correctly. Can you confirm?
>
> Thanks,
> David
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Harsh J [mailto:harsh@clou= dera.com]
> Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2013 5:33 PM
> To: <user@hadoop.apache.o= rg>
> Cc: davidparks21@yahoo.com
> Subject: Re: For a new installation: use the BackupNode or the
> CheckPointNode?
>
> Neither CheckpointNode nor BackupNode exists in version 1.x. This was = a
> documentation oversight that should be cleared in the docs now (or by = next
> release I think).
>
> And on 2.x, neither has been tested for stability and the SecondaryNam= eNode
> continues to exist and is fully supported (not deprecated).
>
> On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 12:34 PM, varun kumar <varun.uid@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hope below link will be useful..
>>
>> http://hadoop.apache.org/docs/stable/hdfs_user_guide.= html
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 12:29 PM, David Parks <davidparks21@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> For a new installation of the current stable build (1.1.2 ), i= s there
>>> any reason to use the CheckPointNode over the BackupNode?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It seems that we need to choose one or the other, and from the= docs
>>> it seems like the BackupNode is more efficient in its processe= s.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Varun Kumar.P
>
>
>
> --
> Harsh J
>



--
Harsh J
--14dae934108d81571c04d8a48c2d--