Hey Allen, I agree with you that we should avoid future regressions like this. I think the tradeoff that got security working well on one heavily used platform was the right one for hadoop-with-security, but I'll be sure to raise such issues for discussion in the future as soon as I become aware of them.
I agree that we should think about how to generalize the security work for other platforms. That work is just waiting for someone to jump in.... On ganglia and the metrics framework, it would be great if you could put your head together with rajive and come up with a joint proposal on what docs / code is needed to fix the regression in a clean way. That sounds like something we should be thinking about fixing in the 20 line and all future releases. thanks, E14 On Jun 17, 2011, at 10:33 AM, Allen Wittenauer wrote: > > On Jun 17, 2011, at 12:36 AM, Ryan Rawson wrote: > >> HDFS-918 and HDFS-347 are absolutely critical for random read >> performance. The smarter sites are already running HDFS-347 (I guess >> they aren't running "Hadoop" then?), and soon they will be testing and >> running HDFS-918 as well. Opening 1 socket for every read just isn't >> really scalable. > > Isn't "random read [on HDFS]" and "smarter sites" in the same breath an > oxymoron? > >
