Christopher Tubbs 2012-11-28, 22:55
Eric Newton 2012-11-28, 23:50
Looking more carefully at the history, it appears this is the result of
ACCUMULO-467. I think I can get a more consistent expected behavior if I
wrap the AccumuloFileOutputFormat configuration options for RFile in an
AccumuloConfiguration instance, so from RFileOperation's perspective, it
looks as though it could just as easily have come from a per-table
Christopher L Tubbs II
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 6:50 PM, Eric Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sounds to me like an ancient holdover from the days of MapFile.
> If we can change it easily, I'm all for that.
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Christopher Tubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > It seems RFile has a preference for the Hadoop configuration object
> > Accumulo configuration over Accumulo per-table configuration in
> > See RFileOperations.openWriter(...).
> > The affected configuration properties are:
> > table.file.replication
> > table.file.blocksize
> > table.file.compress.blocksize
> > table.file.compress.blocksize.index
> > table.file.compress.type
> > Furthermore, when they appear in Hadoop configuration, they cannot
> > the Accumulo shortcuts for specifying byte sizes (like "1G").
> > Is this a bug, or a feature? It seems like there's a potential for it to
> > a feature, particularly in AccumuloFileOutputFormat, so one can specify
> > property in Hadoop, but it could also be a bug if it shows up in the
> > configuration files... especially since we don't prefix these
> > properties with something unique, like "accumulo."
> > Thoughts?
> > --
> > Christopher L Tubbs II
> > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii