On Wednesday, September 7, 2011 1:34:20 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> I agree w/ Doug that 'unlikely to' is not a correct characterization. Would the following alteration be more accurate? "It may be possible to incorporate the desired features of Accumulo into HBase. However, the amount of work required at the current time would slow development of HBase and Accumulo considerably." > But rumor has it though that the differences while small looking when > described in a short incubator proposal, in implementation, the code > is very different making an integration project, unfortunately, a > piece of work. Yes, the implementation is very different, and we had difficulty capturing that in the proposal. > hbase TRUNK coprocessors seem to be a more generic Iterator facility Some types of functions (e.g. query-time aggregation) can be implemented in both coprocessors and iterators, but coprocessors will not easily support the entirety of iterator functionality. Nor is the reverse true. The two models present different programming mechanisms for server-side processing. It would be useful to have both in the same project. Also, I saw that you wondered in a different forum whether editing locality groups requires taking a table offline. The table can remain online because files contain information about their own column groupings. Thus the changes can take place as new files are written to disk and old files are compacted. Billie --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
