Return-Path: 
 <user-return-31092-apmail-hbase-user-archive=hbase.apache.org@hbase.apache.org>
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 78858D295
	for <apmail-hbase-user-archive@www.apache.org>;
 Fri, 19 Oct 2012 03:19:59 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 73034 invoked by uid 500); 19 Oct 2012 03:19:56 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@hbase.apache.org
Received: (qmail 72501 invoked by uid 500); 19 Oct 2012 03:19:54 -0000
Mailing-List: contact user-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:user-help@hbase.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:user-unsubscribe@hbase.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:user@hbase.apache.org>
List-Id: <user.hbase.apache.org>
Reply-To: user@hbase.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list user@hbase.apache.org
Received: (qmail 72424 invoked by uid 99); 19 Oct 2012 03:19:51 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 03:19:51 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0
	tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of saint.ack@gmail.com designates
 209.85.219.41 as permitted sender)
Received: from [209.85.219.41] (HELO mail-oa0-f41.google.com) (209.85.219.41)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 03:19:43 +0000
Received: by mail-oa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id k14so26899oag.14
        for <user@hbase.apache.org>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 20:19:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
         :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
        bh=YMg+TkyBypPdFZDIvG4LGedAxag3j4pfs7JAVHR2yFY=;
        b=tJVfAt1kuzsYpPVpxleYjDfeQ4Ek0HvFnGA/FncpRb1koRIh/kuAwXK9oKyDnQffjj
         vQDiK7AQfRS1uMC+affvcf9/OxIAvgnPqLdIQkU2fKTvbdbhpDWgYuPjos1S0Kb84kE8
         pw9G2XPM6j5UqPAEgFHfYm7sg3T4/AWJGL8F2oGaMoYGtJQGFVrpcnnyjdxsisSLBVnA
         F+Ej4Wx56jgvUFVsFDqRrIULIuGZrZCcg2n3OUfWRS5Te/y8AOzWppV9pXFCnYKPDaiN
         G6JoHVTpychnVzt0v65ABAh83mY9ZR6Gc7Nvi0GlPqNLvliWXAquaA41V0DgmhmqWWm4
         5r8Q==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.60.32.243 with SMTP id m19mr9837302oei.21.1350616762239; Thu,
 18 Oct 2012 20:19:22 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: saint.ack@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.23.35 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 20:19:22 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAFUBMqXZR5sZAvjd=KXL+QH7DGnC-R6QOUuFEr8fbsHvcyj77Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAFUBMqXZR5sZAvjd=KXL+QH7DGnC-R6QOUuFEr8fbsHvcyj77Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 20:19:22 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: pw-MD42m2oZfRCv4J0rwdbYHqZU
Message-ID: 
 <CADcMMgF4cB7ya=TZBt8aEVZVFLtYCxeHAwYqPqL6aC6Nect_rg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: WAL.Hlog vs. Hlog
From: Stack <stack@duboce.net>
To: user@hbase.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Maoke <fibrib@gmail.com> wrote:
> hi Stack and all,
>
> i noticed that the regionserver.Hlog is obsoleted by regionserver.wal.Hlog,
> from version 0.20.6 to 0.90+. what is the major difference between the two,
> in principle? what we should pay attention to when using the WAL.Hlog?
>

Your best bet is reviewing the release notes for 0.90 and the issue
that moved WAL, "HBASE-1756 Refactor HLog".  Going by the issue, the
motivation was cleanup.

St.Ack