hadoop-mapreduce-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rakesh Radhakrishnan <rake...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Retire BKJM from trunk?
Date Thu, 28 Jul 2016 04:49:40 GMT
If I remember correctly, Huawei also adopted QJM component. I hope @Vinay
might have discussed internally in Huawei before starting this e-mail
discussion thread. I'm +1, for removing the bkjm contrib from the trunk
code.

Also, there are quite few open sub-tasks under HDFS-3399 umbrella jira,
which was used for the BKJM implementation time. How about closing these
jira by marking as "Won't Fix"?

Thanks,
Rakesh
Intel

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 1:53 AM, Sijie Guo <sijie@apache.org> wrote:

> + Rakesh and Uma
>
> Rakesh and Uma might have a better idea on this. I think Huawei was using
> it when Rakesh and Uma worked there.
>
> - Sijie
>
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Chris Nauroth <cnauroth@hortonworks.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I recommend including the BookKeeper community in this discussion.  I’ve
> > added their user@ and dev@ lists to this thread.
> >
> > I do not see BKJM being used in practice.  Removing it from trunk would
> be
> > attractive in terms of less code for Hadoop to maintain and build, but if
> > we find existing users that want to keep it, I wouldn’t object.
> >
> > --Chris Nauroth
> >
> > On 7/26/16, 11:14 PM, "Vinayakumar B" <vinayakumar.ba@huawei.com> wrote:
> >
> >     Hi All,
> >
> >        BKJM was Active and made much stable when the NameNode HA was
> > implemented and there was no QJM implemented.
> >        Now QJM is present and is much stable which is adopted by many
> > production environment.
> >        I wonder whether it would be a good time to retire BKJM from
> trunk?
> >
> >        Are there any users of BKJM exists?
> >
> >     -Vinay
> >
> >
> >
>

Mime
View raw message