Thanks to all who participated in the vote.
I'll commit in a minute.
St.Ack
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Stack wrote:
> Please on committing HDFS-1024 to the hadoop 0.20 branch.
>
> Background:
>
> HDFS-1024 fixes possible trashing of fsimage because of failed copy
> from 2NN and NN. Ordi
Performance regression in DistributedFileSystem::getFileBlockLocations in
secure systems
Key: HDFS-1081
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-1081
Proj
SecondaryNameNode image transfer should use the defined http address rather
than local ip address
-
Key: HDFS-1080
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-1080
HDFS implementation should throw exceptions defined in AbstractFileSystem
-
Key: HDFS-1079
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-1079
Project: Hadoop HDFS
Issu
+1
I also thought that version mismatch is FB specific.
Other people will not be able to run different versions of NN and SNN.
--Konstantin
On 4/2/2010 10:41 AM, Todd Lipcon wrote:
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Stack wrote:
> Please on committing HDFS-1024 to the hadoop 0.20 branch.
>
>
+1.
Hairong Kuang wrote:
+1 Good catch!
Hairong
On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 12:55 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
+1
On 4/2/10, Stack wrote:
Please on committing HDFS-1024 to the hadoop 0.20 branch.
Background:
HDFS-1024 fixes possible trashing of fsimage because
of failed copy from 2NN and NN.
+1 Good catch!
Hairong
On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 12:55 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> +1
>
> > On 4/2/10, Stack wrote:
> > > Please on committing HDFS-1024 to the hadoop 0.20 branch.
> > >
> > > Background:
> > >
> > > HDFS-1024 fixes possible trashing of fsimage because
> > > of failed copy from 2
