Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal to merge Ozone datanode side RocksDB merge feature branch (HDDS-3630) into master

+1 Regads Lokesh > On 24-May-2022, at 9:56 AM, Uma Maheswara Rao Gangumalla > wrote: > > +1 for the merge. > > Thanks to the Tencent team and Sammi for working on this. > > Regards, > Uma > > On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 5:49 AM Sammi Chen wrote: > >> Dear Ozone Devs, >> >> I 'm starting this

Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal to merge Ozone datanode side RocksDB merge feature branch (HDDS-3630) into master

+1 for the merge. Thanks to the Tencent team and Sammi for working on this. Regards, Uma On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 5:49 AM Sammi Chen wrote: > Dear Ozone Devs, > > I 'm starting this discussion thread for the proposal to merge the Ozone > Datanode RocksDB merge feature branch (HDDS-3630 > https:

Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal to merge Ozone datanode side RocksDB merge feature branch (HDDS-3630) into master

+1 for merging this feature. Thank you Sammi and folks from Tencent for working on this critical improvement. Best, Sid On Mon, May 23, 2022, 5:49 AM Sammi Chen wrote: > Dear Ozone Devs, > > I 'm starting this discussion thread for the proposal to merge the Ozone > Datanode RocksDB merge feat

[VOTE] Merge Ozone S3 Multi-Tenancy feature branch (HDDS-4944) into master

Dear Ozone devs, I am starting this vote thread for merging the Ozone S3 Multi-Tenancy feature branch (HDDS-4944) to the master branch. S3 multi-tenancy allows multiple S3-accessible volumes to be created. Each volume can be managed separately by their own tenant admins via CLI for tenant c

Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal to merge Ozone datanode side RocksDB merge feature branch (HDDS-3630) into master

If the feature flag is enabled, all schema versions(V1, V2, V3) container data will co-exist and be accessible. So I believe there are no backward compatibility issues. On Tue, 24 May 2022 at 00:02, Kaijie Chen wrote: > Besides Arpit's questions, will there be any backward compatibility issues

Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal to merge Ozone datanode side RocksDB merge feature branch (HDDS-3630) into master

Hi Aprit, 1. Will the feature flag disable all the new code paths by default? In the non-rolling upgrade action for an existing Ozone cluster, and for a brand new Ozone cluster, we will create the RocksDB on disk for each data volume no matter whether the feature flag is enabled or disabled. Bu

Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal to merge Ozone S3 Multi-Tenancy feature branch (HDDS-4944) into master

Thanks everyone for the positive feedback! Two out of the three jiras mentioned (HDDS-6371 and HDDS-6612 ) are merged at this point. I will start the formal vote thread once we are close to merging t

Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal to merge Ozone datanode side RocksDB merge feature branch (HDDS-3630) into master

Besides Arpit's questions, will there be any backward compatibility issues if we enable this by default?ThanksKaijie On 星期一, 23 五月 2022 23:51:16 +0800 aagar...@cloudera.com.INVALID wrote +1 for proceeding with the merge. This work is crucial for improving the DataNode stability. Thank

Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal to merge Ozone datanode side RocksDB merge feature branch (HDDS-3630) into master

+1 for proceeding with the merge. This work is crucial for improving the DataNode stability. Thanks to the Tencent team for driving this effort and Sammi for starting the discussion. Two questions: 1. Will the feature flag disable all the new code paths by default? 2. Are the Tencent engineers

[DISCUSS] Proposal to merge Ozone datanode side RocksDB merge feature branch (HDDS-3630) into master

Dear Ozone Devs, I 'm starting this discussion thread for the proposal to merge the Ozone Datanode RocksDB merge feature branch (HDDS-3630 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-3630) to the master branch. Currently there will be one RocksDB for each Container on datanode, which leads to hund