+1
Thanks
Shashi
On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 9:32 AM Dinesh Chitlangia wrote:
> Hi Arpit,
> Thanks for initiating this thread.
> +1 for a new release.
>
> I am happy to take the role of RM unless someone has already indicated
> interest.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Dinesh
>
> On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 1:02 PM Arpi
Hi Arpit,
Thanks for initiating this thread.
+1 for a new release.
I am happy to take the role of RM unless someone has already indicated
interest.
Thanks,
Dinesh
On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 1:02 PM Arpit Agarwal
wrote:
> Hi all, it has been some time since the Ozone 1.0.0 release. Would this be
>
On 1/7/21 7:02 PM, Arpit Agarwal wrote:
> Hi all, it has been some time since the Ozone 1.0.0 release. Would
this be a good time to kick off the 1.1.0 release?
>
+1
The original plan was to release at the beginning of December after the
decom merge.
But we need a ratis-thirdparty 0.6 and a
Hi all, it has been some time since the Ozone 1.0.0 release. Would this be a
good time to kick off the 1.1.0 release?
Thanks,
Arpit
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ozone.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev
Hi guys,
I think it really depends on the application that you are using.
In my case on HDFS, we have quite often thousands of custom applications
that read the same data/block at more or less the same time. I can see that
it saves us a lot of IOPS because after some time it reads straight from
th
To be honest, the HDFS caching didn't take off because somehow it didn't
improve application performance a lot (speaking from an Impala perspective,
I've been told it seems to help with Solr).
As a matter of fact we did some performance tests recently comparing HDFS
and Ozone.
Depending on the set
