On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Jimmy Xiang <[email protected]> wrote:
> In implementing HBASE-10569 (co-locating meta and master), I run into some > issue with the connections. > > The issue is that ClusterConnection is package private (on purpose). I have > to create an adapter (see the patch here > https://reviews.apache.org/r/19198/) > so that I can override some of the logic. Because meta and master are on > the same JVM, I'd like to bypass the network/RPC layer when master tries to > scan the meta table, or assign the meta region, and when the same > regionserver tries to send reports to the master. > > I was wondering what we can do here. Is it a good solution to create an > adapter? That's kind of similar to make the connection public, right? > One thought I was having this morning about your fancy patch Jimmy is that making it so the master regionserver has the meta region only might not be the way to go. Rather than have a single 'special' meta region, we might want to distribute it around the cluster -- i.e. let it split (like the accumulo fellows do) -- so that when meta is offline, it is less of a body blow. That would mean that though the meta was on the same server as the master, you'd access it as you would any other region. So, I'm asking if we should be going the above route at all? St.Ack
