Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Hadoop >> mail # dev >> Hadoop 0.19.1


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Hadoop 0.19.1

On Feb 2, 2009, at 4:23 PM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:

>
>  >  What do you recommend?
>
> In general. There may be people/organizations, which will not  
> compromise
> on the reduced functionality in favor of the stability, this is  
> understandable.
> I would propose to create a separate (unofficial experimental)  
> branch, which
> would track changes like HADOOP-4379. The branch may later either  
> die when the
> main stream is fixed or be merged with the trunk if the changes  
> proved to be stable.
>
This is very a interesting suggestion.
Many in the team  have come to the conclusion that complex projects  
like append should be done on a separate branch in the first place and  
integrated with trunk when the project is stable.

sanjay
>
>
>  >1. the file length (as returned by getFileStatus) is incorrect
>
> May be the following work around will be useful.
> If you read from a file you always try to read more data than the  
> length reported
> by the name-node. How much more? The size of one block would be  
> enough, or
> even to the next (ceiling) block boundary.
>
>  >2. When an application comes up after a crash, it seems to hang  
> for about 60
>
> Don't have enough context on that, sorry.
>
> Thanks,
> --Konstantin
>
> Doug Judd wrote:
> > Sounds good.  I would much rather wait and have fsync() done  
> correctly in
> > 0.20 than get some sort of hacked version in 0.19.  I'll create a  
> couple of
> > issues and mark them for 0.20  Thanks.
> >
> > - Doug
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Owen O'Malley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
> wrote:
> >
> >> On Feb 2, 2009, at 12:51 PM, Doug Judd wrote:
> >>
> >>  What do you recommend?  Is there anyway we could get these two  
> issues
> >>> fixed
> >>> for 0.19.1, or should I file issues for them and get them on the  
> schedule
> >>> for 0.19.2?
> >>>
> >> Given the outstanding problems and general level of uncertainty,  
> I'd favor
> >> releasing a 0.19.1 with the equivalent of the 0.18.3 disable on  
> fsync and
> >> append. Let's get them fixed in 0.20 first and then we can debate  
> whether
> >> the rewards of pushing them back into an 0.19.2 would make sense.  
> I'm pretty
> >> uncomfortable at the moment with how the entire functional  
> complex seems to
> >> cause a continuous stream of problems.
> >>
> >> -- Owen
> >>
> >
>

NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB