In our production cluster, it is a common case we just have HDFS and HBase deployed. If our Master/RS depend on MR framework (especially some features we have not used at all), it introduced another cost for maintain. I don't think it is a good idea.
2016-09-23 10:28 GMT+08:00 张铎 <palomino...@gmail.com>: > To be specific, for example, our nice Backup/Restore feature, if we think > this is not a core feature of HBase, then we could make it depend on MR, > and start a standalone BackupManager instance that submits MR jobs to do > periodical maintenance job. And if we think this is a core feature that > everyone should use it, then we'd better implement it without MR > dependency, like DLS. > > Thanks. > > 2016-09-23 10:11 GMT+08:00 张铎 <palomino...@gmail.com>: > >> I‘m -1 on let master or rs launch MR jobs. It is OK that some of our >> features depend on MR but I think the bottom line is that we should launch >> the jobs from outside manually or by other services. >> >> 2016-09-23 9:47 GMT+08:00 Andrew Purtell <andrew.purt...@gmail.com>: >> >>> Ok, got it. Well "shelling out" is on the line I think, so a fair >>> question. >>> >>> Can this be driven by a utility derived from Tool like our other MR apps? >>> The issue is needing the AccessController to decide if allowed? But nothing >>> prevents the user from running the job manually/independently, right? >>> >>> > On Sep 22, 2016, at 3:44 PM, Matteo Bertozzi <theo.berto...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > just a remark. my query was not about tools using MR (everyone i think >>> is >>> > ok with those). >>> > the topic was about: "are we ok with running MR jobs from Master and RSs >>> > code?" since this will be the first time we do this >>> > >>> > Matteo >>> > >>> > >>> >> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Devaraj Das <d...@hortonworks.com> >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Very much agree; for tools like ExportSnapshot / Backup / Restore, it's >>> >> fine to be dependent on MR. MR is the right framework for such. We >>> should >>> >> also do compactions using MR (just saying :) ) >>> >> ________________________________________ >>> >> From: Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> >>> >> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 2:00 PM >>> >> To: dev@hbase.apache.org >>> >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] MR jobs started by Master or RS >>> >> >>> >> I agree - backup / restore is in the same category as import / export. >>> >> >>> >> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Andrew Purtell < >>> andrew.purt...@gmail.com> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> Backup is extra tooling around core in my opinion. Like import or >>> export. >>> >>> Or the optional MOB tool. It's fine. >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Sep 22, 2016, at 1:50 PM, Matteo Bertozzi <mberto...@apache.org> >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>> >>>> What's the latest opinion around running MR jobs from hbase (Master >>> or >>> >>> RS)? >>> >>>> >>> >>>> I remember in the past that there was discussion about not having MR >>> >> has >>> >>>> direct dependency of hbase. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> I think some of discussion where around MOB that had a MR job to >>> >> compact, >>> >>>> that later was transformed in a non-MR job to be merged, I think we >>> >> had a >>> >>>> similar discussion for log split/replay. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> the latest is the new Backup feature (HBASE-7912), that runs a MR job >>> >>> from >>> >>>> the master to copy data or restore data. >>> >>>> (backup is also "not really core" as in.. if you don't use backup >>> >> you'll >>> >>>> not end up running MR jobs, but this was probably true for MOB as in >>> >> "if >>> >>>> you don't enable MOB you don't need MR") >>> >>>> >>> >>>> any thoughts? do we a rule that says "we don't want to have hbase run >>> >> MR >>> >>>> jobs, only tool started manually by the user can do that". or can we >>> >>> start >>> >>>> adding MR calls around without problems? >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >> >>
