See https://builds.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Hdfs-22-branch/36/
###
## LAST 60 LINES OF THE CONSOLE
###
[...truncated 3297 lines...]
compile-hdfs-test:
[delete] D
See https://builds.apache.org/hudson/job/Hadoop-Hdfs-trunk/648/
###
## LAST 60 LINES OF THE CONSOLE
###
[...truncated 730032 lines...]
[junit] at
org.apache.had
When all data directory volumes pulled out in DataNode, Its better to shutdown.
---
Key: HDFS-1863
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-1863
Project: Hadoop HDFS
Doug,
> 1. Can you please describe the significant advantages this approach has
> over a symlink-based approach?
Federation is complementary with symlink approach. You could choose to
provide integrated namespace using symlinks. However, client side mount
tables seems a better approach for many
Hadoop Namenode not starting up.
Key: HDFS-1864
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-1864
Project: Hadoop HDFS
Issue Type: Task
Reporter: Ronak Shah
1. Checked to make sure hadoop was
Doug, please reply back. I am planning to commit this by tonight, as I would
like to avoid unnecessary merge work and also avoid having to redo the merge
if SVN is re-organized.
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 10:29 AM, suresh srinivas wrote:
> Doug,
>
>
>> 1. Can you please describe the significant adva
On Apr 25, 2011, at 2:36 PM, Doug Cutting wrote:
A couple of questions:
1. Can you please describe the significant advantages this approach
has
over a symlink-based approach?
It seems to me that one could run multiple namenodes on separate boxes
and run multile datanode processes per storage
Sanjay,
I assume the outlined changes won't an earlier version of HDFS from
upgrads to the federation version, right?
Cos
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 17:26, Sanjay Radia wrote:
>
> Changes to the code base
> - The fundamental code change is to extend the notion of block id to now
> include a block
I feel that making the datanode talk to multiple namenodes is very valuable,
especially when there is plenty of storage available on a single datanode
machine (think 24 TB to 36 TB) and a single namenode does not have enough
memory to hold all file metadata for such a large cluster in memory.
This
Share LeaseChecker thread among DFSClients
--
Key: HDFS-1865
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-1865
Project: Hadoop HDFS
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: hdfs client
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-1864?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Aaron T. Myers resolved HDFS-1864.
--
Resolution: Invalid
Hey Ronak, this isn't really something that should be tracked in JIRA, since
Suresh, Sanjay,
Thank you very much for addressing my questions.
Cheers,
Doug
On 04/26/2011 10:29 AM, suresh srinivas wrote:
> Doug,
>
>
>> 1. Can you please describe the significant advantages this approach has
>> over a symlink-based approach?
>
> Federation is complementary with symlink a
Agree. It is a step forward to distributed namespace.
Regards,
Nicholas
From: Dhruba Borthakur
To: hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org
Cc: sra...@yahoo-inc.com; Doug Cutting
Sent: Wed, April 27, 2011 12:27:30 AM
Subject: Re: [Discuss] Merge federation branch HDFS-10
Suresh, Sanjay.
1. I asked for benchmarks many times over the course of different
discussions on the topic.
I don't see any numbers attached to jira, and I was getting the same
response,
Doug just got from you, guys: which is "why would the performance be worse".
And this is not an argument for me
Dhruba,
It would be very valuable for the community to share your experience
if you performed any independent testing of the federation branch.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 9:27 PM, Dhruba Borthakur wrote:
> I feel that making the datanode talk to multiple namenodes is very
> v
Oops, the message came out garbled. I meant to say
I assume the outlined changes won't prevent an earlier version of HDFS from
upgrades to the federation version, right?
Thanks in advance,
Cos
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 17:59, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> Sanjay,
>
> I assume the outlined changes
Upgrades from earlier version is supported. The existing configuration
should run without any change.
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 10:40 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> Oops, the message came out garbled. I meant to say
>
> I assume the outlined changes won't prevent an earlier version of HDFS from
>
Konstantin,
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
wrote:
> Suresh, Sanjay.
>
> 1. I asked for benchmarks many times over the course of different
> discussions on the topic.
> I don't see any numbers attached to jira, and I was getting the same
> response,
> Doug just got from you,
Konstantin,
Could you provide me link to how this was done on a big feature, like say
append and how benchmark info was captured? I am planning to run dfsio
tests, btw.
Regards,
Suresh
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 11:34 PM, suresh srinivas wrote:
> Konstantin,
>
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 10:26 PM, K
19 matches
Mail list logo
