Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 77A759B68 for ; Sat, 24 Dec 2011 20:40:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 76839 invoked by uid 500); 24 Dec 2011 20:40:34 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 76805 invoked by uid 500); 24 Dec 2011 20:40:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@hbase.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 76797 invoked by uid 99); 24 Dec 2011 20:40:33 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 24 Dec 2011 20:40:33 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.3 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of octo47@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.169 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.212.169] (HELO mail-wi0-f169.google.com) (209.85.212.169) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 24 Dec 2011 20:40:28 +0000 Received: by wibhq12 with SMTP id hq12so5222423wib.14 for ; Sat, 24 Dec 2011 12:40:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=7FwKvb55LReiZv/Dji2jtWqxXM5Tou12+2kqePOBPKU=; b=Gl1h5q/nxKyqnE48YWwT9WzPFnOgI+gRxtnr9wsmGu7igG3XePZv/uhuVhK0AniIWq J6gpdMY3QHB6CRmSV3SwJdmsWp7kkeRJq6P2Z7/ur1LGOdNCJ1PnN66wh0PPHwwLz4NO 5w25MR20t4S/wLDghJJxmoPwPL5eOPSSIkkPY= Received: by 10.180.94.97 with SMTP id db1mr42241116wib.16.1324759207184; Sat, 24 Dec 2011 12:40:07 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.87.69 with HTTP; Sat, 24 Dec 2011 12:39:46 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Andrey Stepachev Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2011 00:39:46 +0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: ceph and hbase. To: user@hbase.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0442681af5071404b4dc898f --f46d0442681af5071404b4dc898f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 23 =D0=B4=D0=B5=D0=BA=D0=B0=D0=B1=D1=80=D1=8F 2011 =D0=B3. 22:48 =D0=BF=D0= =BE=D0=BB=D1=8C=D0=B7=D0=BE=D0=B2=D0=B0=D1=82=D0=B5=D0=BB=D1=8C Todd Lipcon= =D0=BD=D0=B0=D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=81=D0=B0=D0=BB: > On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 12:56 AM, Andrey Stepachev > wrote: > > I see, that most issues addressed to HA branch. > > What version this branch is applied to? 0.22 or > > i should build hadoop from sources? > > It's currently only available in the HDFS-1623 branch, which is in > active development and definitely shouldn't be used unless you plan to > help us finish debugging it :) There are still some known bugs and > deficiencies to address before we merge. > Looks like this is one of possible scenarios :). We need some solution for HA, but no one (except MapR) still exists. So we must use MapR (costs, closed) or debug some not-ready-yet solution. > > The plan is to merge it into 0.23 but not 0.22 - it will hopefully be > merged in January. We'll also make it available in CDH4 beta releases > early next year. > Sounds good. But still can't find such branch in cloudera (or any other) github repositories. Is it publicly available right now, or it in some private repository? > > -Todd > > > > > 20 =D0=B4=D0=B5=D0=BA=D0=B0=D0=B1=D1=80=D1=8F 2011 =D0=B3. 11:46 =D0=BF= =D0=BE=D0=BB=D1=8C=D0=B7=D0=BE=D0=B2=D0=B0=D1=82=D0=B5=D0=BB=D1=8C Todd Lip= con >=D0=BD=D0=B0=D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=81=D0=B0=D0=BB: > > > >> Hi Andrey, > >> > >> I don't think anyone has ever run Ceph in a production use case, much > >> less run it in a production use case with HBase. > >> > >> The SPOF problem is currently being addressed and will be available > >> for production use by the middle of next calendar year. It will be > >> available for preview/beta usage in Q1 (it's already working in > >> development setups - feel free to follow HDFS-1623 for details) > >> > >> I think you're way better off waiting for the HA NameNode support in > >> HDFS than going with an unproven FS like Ceph. Ceph certainly has > >> promise and is a nice design, but it hasn't had the years of pounding > >> that HDFS has. > >> > >> -Todd > >> > >> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:23 PM, Andrey Stepachev > >> wrote: > >> > Hi all. > >> > > >> > I have requirements to use hbase in several datacenters. > >> > But HDFS has as SPOF, so we can't use it. > >> > I plan to use ceph as the file system for hbase. > >> > > >> > In general, interested in issues of: > >> > a) use the hadoop + =D1=81eph in the production environment > >> > b) using hbase + ceph in the production environment > >> > > >> > In particular: > >> > Ceph Wiki states that the integration of hadoop/ceph has the problem > in > >> the > >> > form of modification dates of the files. > >> > Does hbase uses modification times for some critical tasks? > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Andrey. > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Todd Lipcon > >> Software Engineer, Cloudera > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > =D0=90=D0=BD=D0=B4=D1=80=D0=B5=D0=B9. > > > > -- > Todd Lipcon > Software Engineer, Cloudera > --=20 =D0=90=D0=BD=D0=B4=D1=80=D0=B5=D0=B9. --f46d0442681af5071404b4dc898f--