On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:39 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote:
> I've been running CI tests against 1.5.1 with HA (QJM) Namenode support > for a few weeks now. Earlier this week I started running the same against > 1.6.0. > > AFAICT, everything has been fine so far. This is with the > hdfs-agitation.pl (causing a failover using the haadmin command every ten > minutes) script that Sean provided a while back. > > I was not using the correct terminology for what I was thinking, but I am not sure what the correct terminology is. I do not want to be limited by the memory of one machine for hdfs metadata and I want HA. So would it be correct to say that I want to test with multiple HA nameservices? For example test 1.6 w/ three nameservices, where each nameservice has two HA namenodes. This would allow hdfs metadata to spread across the memory of three machines. > > On 12/17/13, 11:32 PM, Keith Turner wrote: > >> Has anyone has done any HA namenode testing w/ 1.6.0? >> >> I have started poking at viewfs:// w/ two regular namenodes and have been >> finding issues. I want to eventually run the test suite against Accumulo >> 1.6.0 w/ multiple HA namenodes. >> >>
