+1 Cosmin
On 12/15/09 10:44 AM, "Lars George" <lars.geo...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > > Lars > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans > <jdcry...@apache.org>wrote: > >> +1 for 0.21.0 >> >> J-D >> >> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:30 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> >> wrote: >>> +1 >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 3:54 PM, stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: >>> >>>> HDFS-630 is kinda critical to us over in hbase. We'd like to get it >> into >>>> 0.21 (Its been committed to TRUNK). Its probably hard to argue its a >>>> blocker for 0.21. We could run a vote. Or should we just file it >> against >>>> 0.21.1 hdfs and commit it after 0.21 goes out? What would folks >> suggest? >>>> >>>> Without it, a node crash (datanode+regionserver) will bring down a >> second >>>> regionserver, particularly if the cluster is small (See HBASE-1876 for >>>> description of the play-by-play where NN keeps giving out dead DN as >> place >>>> to locate new blocks). Since the bulk of hbase clusters are small -- >>>> whether evaluations, test, or just small productions -- this issue is an >>>> important fix for us. If the cluster is of 5 or less nodes, we'll >> probably >>>> recover but there'll be a period of churn. At a minimum mapreduce jobs >>>> running against the cluster will fail (usually some kind of bullk >> upload). >>>> >>>> St.Ack >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>
