hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Dunning <tdunn...@maprtech.com>
Subject Re: move meta table to ZK
Date Fri, 18 Mar 2011 05:01:10 GMT
When does ZK plan to adopt this extension?

In general, I agree with Ryan that ZK is a good coordination layer, but the
data (and associated meta-data should be self-hosted to simplify the
consistency problem).

On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 9:54 PM, jiangwen w <wjiangwen@gmail.com> wrote:

> yes , it is possible, only enhance zookeeper a little, and i have already
> implement it.
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Ryan Rawson <ryanobjc@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Is it possible to search a list of z nodes? That is what we do now with
> > meta
> > in hbase.
> >
> > I used to be a fan, but I think self hosting all important meta data is
> the
> > best approach. It makes lots of things easier, like replication,
> snapshots,
> > etc.
> > On Mar 17, 2011 9:27 PM, "jiangwen w" <wjiangwen@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > how do you think about moving meta table to ZK, so no meta table are
> > needed.
> > > if we do so, we need enhance ZK in the following way:
> > > 1. let children of ZNode in order.
> > >
> > > if we do so, we can benifit:
> > >
> > > 1. no need to treat meta table as a special way. this will simplify the
> > code
> > > a lot
> > > 2. ZK is highly available, so we don't worry the availablility of the
> > meta
> > > data.
> > > 3. currently if the region server where meta table is on failed, the
> > whole
> > > cluster may pause.
> > > if we move meta table to ZK, there is no such problem.
> > > 4. meta table may be a hotspot, but in ZK reading is scalable by adding
> > more
> > > observers.
> > >
> > >
> > > Sincerely
> >
>

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