| clear query|facets|time |
Search criteria: .
Results from 11 to 20 from
37 (0.175s).
|
|
|
Loading phrases to help you
refine your search...
|
|
Re: VOTE: HDFS-347 merge - HDFS - [mail # dev]
|
|
...Hi Colin, It is great to hear that you agree to keep HDFS-2246. Please as well address my comments posted on HDFS-347 and let me know once you have posted a new patch on HDFS-347. Th...
|
|
|
Author: Tsz Wo Sze,
2013-03-05, 23:08
|
|
|
Re: VOTE: HDFS-347 merge - HDFS - [mail # dev]
|
|
...I agree that HDFS-2246 is a short term solution and we should not keep it there forever. However, we still need a transition period to replace an old mechanism by a new one. No? Tsz-...
|
|
|
Author: Tsz Wo Sze,
2013-02-25, 20:50
|
|
|
Re: VOTE: HDFS-347 merge - HDFS - [mail # dev]
|
|
...I still do not see a valid reason to remove HDFS-2246 immediately. Some users may have insecure clusters and they don't want to change their configuration. BTW, is Unix Domain Socket ...
|
|
|
Author: Tsz Wo Sze,
2013-02-24, 00:23
|
|
|
Re: VOTE: HDFS-347 merge - HDFS - [mail # dev]
|
|
...Eli, please see my earlier response below. On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Aaron T. Myers wrote: Another substantive concern is that HDFS-347 is not as well tested...
|
|
|
Author: Tsz Wo Sze,
2013-02-23, 02:32
|
|
|
Re: VOTE: HDFS-347 merge - HDFS - [mail # dev]
|
|
...On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Aaron T. Myers wrote: Another substantive concern is that HDFS-347 is not as well tested as HDFS-2246. So, we should keep HDFS-2246 around for ...
|
|
|
Author: Tsz Wo Sze,
2013-02-21, 22:15
|
|
|
Re: VOTE: HDFS-347 merge - HDFS - [mail # dev]
|
|
...The reason to keep it around is that the HDFS-347 only support Unix but not other OS. Tsz-Wo ________________________________ From: Todd Lipcon To: [EMAIL PRO...
|
|
|
Author: Tsz Wo Sze,
2013-02-20, 23:08
|
|
|
Re: VOTE: HDFS-347 merge - HDFS - [mail # dev]
|
|
...Also, the patch seems to have removed the existing short-circuit read feature (HDFS-2246). It is an incompatible change. I think the patch is farther away from being ready and I would keep...
|
|
|
Author: Tsz Wo Sze,
2013-02-20, 23:01
|
|
|
Re: VOTE: HDFS-347 merge - HDFS - [mail # dev]
|
|
...The previous patch of HDFS-347 was posted on Jan 31 (2013.01.31.consolidated2.patch) I have tried to review it but the code is quite unreadable at that time. Then, the next patch is the la...
|
|
|
Author: Tsz Wo Sze,
2013-02-20, 21:48
|
|
|
Re: VOTE: HDFS-347 merge - HDFS - [mail # dev]
|
|
...-1 The patch seems not ready yet. I have posted some comments/suggestions on the JIRA. Colin also has agreed that there are some bugs to be fixed. Sorry. Tsz-Wo ______...
|
|
|
Author: Tsz Wo Sze,
2013-02-20, 19:56
|
|
|
Re: VOTE: HDFS-347 merge - HDFS - [mail # dev]
|
|
...Hi Colin, The latest HDFS-347 patch was posted on Feb 16. Because of the long weekends, I still do not have a chance to check it. Will do it in this week. Nicholas ...
|
|
|
Author: Tsz Wo Sze,
2013-02-18, 22:03
|
|
|
|
