I am considering migrating to 0.90 - maybe early next year. Cheers
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 7:23 PM, Ryan Rawson <[email protected]> wrote: > The answer is HDFS-200 and changes to HLog. > > You should start considering what your 0.90 upgrade plan will be, it > is imperative that within 3 months no one is running 0.20.6 or > earlier. Getting the features of 0.90 on 0.20.x is not the right > direction and would take as much effort as creating 0.90 essentially. > > To help the adoption we are using 0.89 at Stumbleupon in production > and will be one of the first users of 0.90 as it comes out. > > -ryan > > On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 7:05 PM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote: > > J-D: > > If you can briefly point out the code in 0.89 which makes using WAL more > > reliable, that would be great. > > > > Thanks > > > > On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > >> Even if HBaseAdmin.flush is made synchronous, that won't get you far > >> since it's still processed sequentially on the region servers. A > >> better well-known option is to set hbase.regionserver.hlog.blocksize > >> to a small number, and if you want high durability you could set that > >> to 1KB (basically rolling at every new insert). Since this is > >> incredibly inefficient, a more wide-spread number (and one we used > >> while we were on 0.20) is 2MB. Set it higher if you have a high insert > >> rate, or lower if you don't insert very often. > >> > >> J-D > >> > >> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > We're still using 0.20.6 :-) > >> > > >> > On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 5:19 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans < > [email protected] > >> >wrote: > >> > > >> >> If your Puts are using the WAL, and you are on 0.89, it's already as > >> >> durable as it can be without forcing flushes. > >> >> > >> >> J-D > >> >> > >> >> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 8:07 PM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > Hi, > >> >> > HBaseAdmin.flush() is asynchronous. > >> >> > In order to achieve high durability, do I have a better choice ? > >> >> > > >> >> > Thanks > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >
