Re: [DISCUSS] Merge HDFS-13891(RBF) to trunk

+1 from my side. On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 10:56 AM Arpit Agarwal wrote: > Thanks for the explanation Brahma and Iñigo! > > +0 from me (haven’t looked at it closely enough to give a +1). > > Regards, > Arpit > > > > On Jun 10, 2019, at 10:12 AM, Brahma Reddy Battula > wrote: > > > > Dear Arpit,

Re: [DISCUSS] Merge HDFS-13891(RBF) to trunk

Thanks for the explanation Brahma and Iñigo! +0 from me (haven’t looked at it closely enough to give a +1). Regards, Arpit > On Jun 10, 2019, at 10:12 AM, Brahma Reddy Battula wrote: > > Dear Arpit, > > Thanks for taking look into it. > > ECBlockGroupStats.merge() is Utility method which is

Re: [DISCUSS] Merge HDFS-13891(RBF) to trunk

Dear Arpit, Thanks for taking look into it. ECBlockGroupStats.merge() is Utility method which is moved to hadoop-hdfs-client module. Ideally it could have been seperate jira. But this changes will not induce any issues, will take necessary action for this. On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 8:40 PM Arpit A

Re: [DISCUSS] Merge HDFS-13891(RBF) to trunk

+1 from my side. I also added a comment to HDFS-14268 explaining the reasons to modify ECBlockGroupStats. We can follow up into possible changes there if needed. On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 8:10 AM Arpit Agarwal wrote: > I scanned the merge payload for changes to non-RBF code. The changes are > mi

Re: [DISCUSS] Merge HDFS-13891(RBF) to trunk

I scanned the merge payload for changes to non-RBF code. The changes are minimal, which is good. The only commit that I didn’t understand was: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14268 The jira description doesn’t make it clear why ECBlo

Re: [DISCUSS] Merge HDFS-13891(RBF) to trunk

Thanks Brahma for starting the thread. +1 for merging. He Xiaoqiao On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 1:53 PM Chittaranjan Hota wrote: > Thanks Brahma initiating this. > +1(non-binding) for merge. > > @Uber we have almost all changes specially rbf security in production for a > while now without issues. >

Re: [DISCUSS] Merge HDFS-13891(RBF) to trunk

Thanks Brahma initiating this. +1(non-binding) for merge. @Uber we have almost all changes specially rbf security in production for a while now without issues. On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 12:56 PM Giovanni Matteo Fumarola < giovanni.fumar...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 on merging. > > Thanks Brahma for st

Re: [DISCUSS] Merge HDFS-13891(RBF) to trunk

+1 on merging. Thanks Brahma for starting the thread. On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 10:00 AM Iñigo Goiri wrote: > Thank you Brahma for pushing this. > > As you mentioned, we have already taken most of the changes into > production. > I want to highlight that the main contribution is the addition of se

Re: [DISCUSS] Merge HDFS-13891(RBF) to trunk

Thank you Brahma for pushing this. As you mentioned, we have already taken most of the changes into production. I want to highlight that the main contribution is the addition of security. We have been able to test this at a smaller scale (~500 servers and 4 subclusters) and the performance is grea

Re: [DISCUSS] Merge HDFS-13891(RBF) to trunk

Thanks Brahma for starting the discussion. I'm +1 for merging this. FYI: In Yahoo! JAPAN, deployed all these changes in 20 nodes cluster with 2 routers (not in production) and running several tests. Regards, Akira On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 12:40 PM Brahma Reddy Battula wrote: > > Dear Hadoop Devel

[DISCUSS] Merge HDFS-13891(RBF) to trunk

Dear Hadoop Developers I would like to propose RBF Branch (HDFS-13891) merge into trunk. We have been working on this feature from last several months. This feature work received the contributions from different companies. All of the feature development happened smoothly and collaboratively in JIR