For Huawei, Vinay/Brahma should know about their usage. I think after QJM
stabilized and ready they also adopted to QJM is what I know, but they
should know more than me as I left that employer while ago.
If no one is using it, It is ok to remove.
Regards,
Uma
On 7/27/16, 9:49 PM, "Rakesh Radhak
If I remember correctly, Huawei also adopted QJM component. I hope @Vinay
might have discussed internally in Huawei before starting this e-mail
discussion thread. I'm +1, for removing the bkjm contrib from the trunk
code.
Also, there are quite few open sub-tasks under HDFS-3399 umbrella jira,
whic
Liu Guannan created HDFS-10700:
--
Summary: I increase the value of the GC_OPTS on namenode. After I
modified the value ,namenode start failed.
Key: HDFS-10700
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10700
Yiqun Lin created HDFS-10699:
Summary: Log object instance get incorrectly in TestDFSAdmin
Key: HDFS-10699
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10699
Project: Hadoop HDFS
Issue Type: B
Done. Thanks for your interest in contributing to Hadoop.
On 7/27/16, 6:47 PM, "hufh" wrote:
Hi guys,
I have opened a JIRA(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10690) and
want to fix it, but i can't assign it to myself, anyone can give me a hand?
Thanks a lot!
Hi guys,
I have opened a JIRA(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10690) and
want to fix it, but i can't assign it to myself, anyone can give me a hand?
Thanks a lot!
Fenghua
+1 (binding)
- downloaded both source and binary tarballs and verified the signatures
- set up a pseudo-distributed cluster
- ran some simple mapreduce jobs
- checked the basic web UI
Sangjin
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:57 PM, John Zhuge wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> - Build source with Java 1.
Hi Junping, thanks for sharing your thoughts, inline,
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 9:10 AM, 俊平堵 wrote:
> Thanks Vinod for bringing up this topic for discussion. I share the same
> concern here from my previous experience and I doubt some simple rules
> proposed below could make life easier.
>
> > The
+ Rakesh and Uma
Rakesh and Uma might have a better idea on this. I think Huawei was using
it when Rakesh and Uma worked there.
- Sijie
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Chris Nauroth
wrote:
> I recommend including the BookKeeper community in this discussion. I’ve
> added their user@ and dev@
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10698?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Wei-Chiu Chuang resolved HDFS-10698.
Resolution: Duplicate
thx Youngjun for filing the jira.
This is a dup of HDFS-10696 where a
+1 (non-binding)
- Build source with Java 1.8.0_101 on Centos 7.2 with native
- Build source with Java 1.7.0_79 on Mac
- Verify license and notice using the shell script in HADOOP-13374
- Deploy a pseudo cluster
- Run basic dfs, distcp, ACL, webhdfs commands
- Run MapReduce workcount and pi exampl
Yongjun Zhang created HDFS-10698:
Summary: Test org.apache.hadoop.cli.TestHDFSCLI fails in trunk
Key: HDFS-10698
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10698
Project: Hadoop HDFS
Iss
>
> The -alphaX versions we're using leading up to 3.0.0 GA can be treated as
>> a.b.c versions, with alpha1 being the a.b.0 release.
>>
>
> Once 3.0.0 GA goes out, a user would want to see the diff from the latest
> 2.x.0 release (say 2.9.0).
>
> Are you suggesting 3.0.0 GA would have c = 5 (say)
I recommend including the BookKeeper community in this discussion. I’ve added
their user@ and dev@ lists to this thread.
I do not see BKJM being used in practice. Removing it from trunk would be
attractive in terms of less code for Hadoop to maintain and build, but if we
find existing users t
+1 (binding)
- Downloaded binary tarball
- verified signatures
- setup pseudo cluster
- ran some of the example jobs, clicked around the UI a bit
- Robert
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 3:28 PM, Jason Lowe
wrote:
> +1 (binding)
> - Verified signatures and digests- Built from source with native supp
Hi Roy,
(a) In your last email, I am sure you meant => "... submitting read
requests to fetch "any" (instead of all) the 'k' chunk (out of k+m-x
surviving chunks) ?
Do you have any optimization in place to decide which data-nodes will
be part of those "k" ?
Answer:-
I hope you know the
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-8224?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Rushabh S Shah reopened HDFS-8224:
--
Saw one more occurrence of this bug.
We should atleast add this block to the front of the scanning qu
Thanks Vinod for bringing up this topic for discussion. I share the same
concern here from my previous experience and I doubt some simple rules
proposed below could make life easier.
> The question now is what we do for the 2.8.0 and 3.0.0-alpha1 fix
versions.
> Allen's historical perspective is t
For more details, see
https://builds.apache.org/job/hadoop-qbt-trunk-java8-linux-x86/115/
[Jul 26, 2016 1:30:02 PM] (stevel) Revert "HDFS-10668. Fix intermittently
failing UT
[Jul 26, 2016 1:53:37 PM] (kai.zheng) HADOOP-13041. Adding tests for coder
utilities. Contributed by Kai
[Jul 26, 2016 3
Inline.
> 1) Set the fix version for all a.b.c versions, where c > 0.
> 2) For each major release line, set the lowest a.b.0 version.
>
Sounds reasonable.
>
> The -alphaX versions we're using leading up to 3.0.0 GA can be treated as
> a.b.c versions, with alpha1 being the a.b.0 release.
>
Once
Alberic Liu created HDFS-10697:
--
Summary: Erasure Code(6:3) can not work, using get fs shell when 2
datanode down
Key: HDFS-10697
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10697
Project: Hadoop HDF
Akira Ajisaka created HDFS-10696:
Summary: TestHDFSCLI fails
Key: HDFS-10696
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10696
Project: Hadoop HDFS
Issue Type: Bug
Components: t
Thanks Andrew for sharing your thoughts,
It looks better if we can put multiple versions on the fix version, with
that we can at least do some queries on JIRA to check the issues like "in
branch-2.6.5 but not in branch-2.7.4".
I still have a couple of questions:
*1) How CHANGES.txt (or release n
> I think I understand a bit better, though now I ask how this date is
> different from the release date.
OIC. I also assume that the freezing branch cannot include the changes
between freezing date and the release date. This is for strict
ordering to ensure which is the newer. If we have lots ma
24 matches
Mail list logo
