> Using zookeeper to record transient state is Andy's favorite choice.
Ted, thank you for the consideration! Best regards, - Andy Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White) ----- Original Message ----- > From: Ted Yu <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: Subbu M Iyer <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2011 5:53 PM > Subject: Re: HBASE-1730 and HBASE-4213 > > 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 >> >
