Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hadoop-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-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 C5E4DD684 for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 21:13:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 66998 invoked by uid 500); 19 Sep 2012 21:13:38 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-user-archive@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 66889 invoked by uid 500); 19 Sep 2012 21:13:38 -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 66880 invoked by uid 99); 19 Sep 2012 21:13:38 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 21:13:38 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=FSL_RCVD_USER,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of visioner.sadak@gmail.com designates 74.125.83.48 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.125.83.48] (HELO mail-ee0-f48.google.com) (74.125.83.48) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 21:13:33 +0000 Received: by eekd41 with SMTP id d41so741188eek.35 for ; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 14:13:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=TmoNA9tsVe7wijZPGSWCNnD4F4saLakAseD6jAvVOrQ=; b=XsqRkUVaL1ykz3vuC+FiJKUBJHkdBZKmdY/thFxtiiXEdYx8+O76ewvYoi+Gij0PJd 4LnYvOQElSlzPVFn6kAUfrgMvxNlnSekZZ/7kYR+Ha//a+yBqcOrsuSc9C+sqnVG8zNk wxG++oCJ2E9B92H7HEAZ3eaDXVH7UN76Jdo0T6zANsluA+M5XIhDQbr0LbN57S6gkfxP 92X+CrLH0AYjl/g22qbTjXFigxl1+mljFD2IMGHJHkgo+VAtjCw2zID2jqIJVgil/YT4 gsXIDawTm1xuhROWucdrKjpOL8bU5PsgA8Ojs35HtVtS7ZKYNEfC5dN/oVzysrsEcJgd TVBA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.14.198.133 with SMTP id v5mr5116941een.7.1348089191952; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 14:13:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.14.220.134 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 14:13:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 02:43:11 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: WEBHDFS vs HDFSPROXY which one is faster From: Visioner Sadak To: user@hadoop.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b343b0069706604ca147964 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --047d7b343b0069706604ca147964 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 can we read HAR files frm webhdfs in that case will my url be like har://http-localhost:50070/webhdfs/v1/HAR/1june2012.har/test.jpg?op=OPEN but will my browser be able to understand this On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 2:38 AM, Visioner Sadak wrote: > Thanks harsh..... > > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 8:41 PM, Harsh J wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> WebHDFS is faster/scalable as it lets the client directly access a DN >> to read off of, and hence requires that the client be able to access >> all nodes of the HDFS cluster. The HttpFs (what hdfsproxy is now >> 'called') is instead useful as a gateway service if clients are not >> allowed to access all DN nodes of a given cluster. >> >> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 7:18 PM, Visioner Sadak >> wrote: >> > Hello experts could you judge whether webhdfs is fast or hdfsproxy is >> fast, >> > is hdfs proxy slower coz it uses https only or can we use http also in >> > hdfsproxy, its also mentioned in this below link,could you guys throw >> more >> > light on advantages and disadvantages of both techniques...... >> > >> > >> http://hadoop.apache.org/docs/hdfs/r0.21.0/hdfsproxy.html#Tomcat-based+Installation+and+Configuration >> > in disadvantages section, >> > >> > >> > >> > Thanks.... >> >> >> >> -- >> Harsh J >> > > --047d7b343b0069706604ca147964 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
can we read=A0=A0HAR files frm webhdfs in that case will my url be lik= e
=A0
har://http-localhost:50070/webhdfs/v1/HAR/1june2012.har/test.jpg?op=3D= OPEN
=A0
but will my browser be able to understand this

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 2:38 AM, Visioner Sadak = <visioner.sadak@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks harsh.....=20


On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 8:41 PM, Harsh J <hars= h@cloudera.com> wrote:
Hi,

WebHDFS is faster/scalable= as it lets the client directly access a DN
to read off of, and hence re= quires that the client be able to access
all nodes of the HDFS cluster. The HttpFs (what hdfsproxy is now
'ca= lled') is instead useful as a gateway service if clients are not
all= owed to access all DN nodes of a given cluster.

On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 7:18 PM, Visioner Sadak
<visioner.sadak@gmail.com= > wrote:
> Hello experts could you judge whether webhdfs is fa= st or hdfsproxy is fast,
> is hdfs proxy slower coz it uses https only or can we use http also in=
> hdfsproxy, its also mentioned in this below link,could you guys th= row more
> light on advantages and disadvantages of both techniques..= ....
>
> http:= //hadoop.apache.org/docs/hdfs/r0.21.0/hdfsproxy.html#Tomcat-based+Installat= ion+and+Configuration
> in disadvantages section,
>
>
>
> Thanks....


--
Harsh J


--047d7b343b0069706604ca147964--