+1

Utkarsh

On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Mahadev Konar <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1.
>
> thanks
> mahadev
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> -0. I'm all for bk/hedwig moving out from contrib, but as I stated earlier
>> I think it should move to incubator and not subproject. At the same time
>> it's important that the project can develop on it's own, so I won't stand in
>> the way.
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Flavio Junqueira <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> +1.
>>>
>>> -Flavio
>>>
>>> On Mar 18, 2011, at 10:11 PM, Benjamin Reed wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 i'm all for it of course :)
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Benjamin Reed <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Proposal
>>>
>>>
>>> BookKeeper is a distributed write ahead logging (WAL) service. It is
>>>
>>> built on top of ZooKeeper and is used for distributed recovery and
>>>
>>> reliability. Much like ZooKeeper itself, BookKeeper is a distributed
>>>
>>> tool used for reliability, but unlike ZooKeeper it is used to store
>>>
>>> large amounts of application data in the form of byte streams, which
>>>
>>> we call ledgers. It is made up of Bookies, which store data, and a
>>>
>>> client library. All other meta-data is stored in ZooKeeper.
>>>
>>>
>>> The BookKeeper subproject also includes Hedwig, which is a pub/sub
>>>
>>> system built on both BookKeeper and ZooKeeper. It's coupling with
>>>
>>> BookKeeper is tight and many of the performance features of BookKeeper
>>>
>>> were added in response to Hedwig's requirements. Hedwig is made up of
>>>
>>> a rather thin client library and stateless Brokers that cache and
>>>
>>> distribute messages.
>>>
>>>
>>> Background
>>>
>>>
>>> BookKeeper was developed as a WAL for the Hadoop NameNode and was also
>>>
>>> used to build the Hedwig pub/sub system. Both are currently contribs
>>>
>>> to ZooKeeper. The work to get the hooks necessary to integrate
>>>
>>> BookKeeper with the NameNode is almost complete (HDFS-1580).
>>>
>>>
>>> Rational
>>>
>>>
>>> We have contributors that we would like to make committers to
>>>
>>> BookKeeper and Hedwig. It would be nice to allow a development
>>>
>>> community to grow around BookKeeper.
>>>
>>>
>>> Also, hudson does not run against contrib. Making BookKeeper its own
>>>
>>> subproject would allow us to better qa our changes.
>>>
>>>
>>> We also would like to decouple BookKeeper releases from ZooKeeper
>>>
>>> releases. ZooKeeper is quite mature and has relatively long release
>>>
>>> cycles. We would like shorter release cycles for BookKeeper.
>>>
>>>
>>> In theory we could make two projects BookKeeper and Hedwig, but doing
>>>
>>> so would double the project management and release overhead. The
>>>
>>> development community between BookKeeper and Hedwig overlaps heavily,
>>>
>>> so we would be increasing the burden on the same group of
>>>
>>> contributors.
>>>
>>>
>>> Because of the developer community overlap with ZooKeeper and the fact
>>>
>>> that BookKeeper is inline with the general mission of ZooKeeper, we
>>>
>>> think BookKeeper should be a subproject of ZooKeeper.
>>>
>>>
>>> Call for vote
>>>
>>>
>>> I propose that BookKeeper become a ZooKeeper subproject subject to
>>>
>>> ZooKeeper PMC and Bylaws. I, Benjamin Reed, will champion the
>>>
>>> proposal. BookKeeper will have the following initial committers:
>>>
>>>
>>> Dhruba Borthakur (Facebook)
>>>
>>> Flavio Junqueira (Yahoo)
>>>
>>> Ivan Kelly (Yahoo)
>>>
>>> Benjamin Reed (Yahoo)
>>>
>>> Utkarsh Srivastava (Twitter)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>   *flavio*
>>> *junqueira*
>>>
>>> research scientist
>>>
>>> [email protected]
>>> direct +34 93-183-8828
>>>
>>> avinguda diagonal 177, 8th floor, barcelona, 08018, es
>>> phone (408) 349 3300    fax (408) 349 3301
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to