hbase-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "stack (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-12259) Bring quorum based write ahead log into HBase
Date Sat, 18 Oct 2014 03:15:34 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-12259?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14175826#comment-14175826
] 

stack commented on HBASE-12259:
-------------------------------

bq. Since Hydrabase is based upon 0.89 most of the code is not directly applicable. So lots
of work will probably need to be done in a feature branch before a merge vote.

Agree. Feature branch would be way to go.

bq. Is this something that's wanted?

Sounds good. Lets take a look at what is involved (From what I know of hydrabase, its a X-DC
WAN story.. An in-DC, in-cluster deploy is probably what we'd be interested in doing first).

bq. Is there anything clean up that needs to be done before the log implementation is able
to be replaced like this?

See Sean's comment above.  He is doing nice WAL Interface refactor/cleanup. Does current hydrabase
need more than current WAL API or it just works using current API w/ the magic going on behind
WAL append, sync, close, roll, calls?

bq. What's our story with upgrading to this? Are we ok with requiring down time ?

If downtime, would imply a 2.0 (or 3.0) feature (IMO).

> Bring quorum based write ahead log into HBase
> ---------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-12259
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-12259
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: wal
>    Affects Versions: 2.0.0
>            Reporter: Elliott Clark
>
> HydraBase ( https://code.facebook.com/posts/321111638043166/hydrabase-the-evolution-of-hbase-facebook/
) Facebook's implementation of HBase with Raft for consensus will be going open source shortly.
We should pull in the parts of that fb-0.89 based implementation, and offer it as a feature
in whatever next major release is next up. Right now the Hydrabase code base isn't ready to
be released into the wild; it should be ready soon ( for some definition of soon).
> Since Hydrabase is based upon 0.89 most of the code is not directly applicable. So lots
of work will probably need to be done in a feature branch before a merge vote.
> Is this something that's wanted?
> Is there anything clean up that needs to be done before the log implementation is able
to be replaced like this?
> What's our story with upgrading to this? Are we ok with requiring down time ?



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Mime
View raw message