I prefer choice A below. Let's vote on which implementation is the better approach.
My vote is for 4213. Subbu implemented hbase-451 and has deep understanding of related code. Using zookeeper to record transient state is Andy's favorite choice. Cheers On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Todd Lipcon <[email protected]> wrote: > In my opinion we have three options: > > (a) have the two contributors work together on a single JIRA > (b) factor out what's common between their approaches into a new JIRA, > then let them proceed independently > or (c) let them proceed independently, and whichever one reaches a > suitable commitable state first, we go with > > If they both become committable around the same time, then we should > go to benchmarks as well as comparisons of which codebase seems more > maintainable. > > -Todd > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > Due to lack of coordination, HBASE-1730 and HBASE-4213 try to implement > the > > same feature at roughly the same pace. > > > > I want to hear your opinion on how we should plan to move forward with > these > > two JIRAs. > > One possibility is to provide two policies, one accommodating each JIRA. > But > > that requires even more work. > > > > It would be nice if we can have some performance numbers for both > > implementations on comparable cluster(s). > > > > Cheers > > > > > > -- > Todd Lipcon > Software Engineer, Cloudera >
