+ 1
On 4/2/10, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > Please on committing HDFS-1024 to the hadoop 0.20 branch. > > Background: > > HDFS-1024 fixes possible trashing of fsimage because of failed copy > from 2NN and NN. Ordinarily, possible corruption of this proportion > would merit commit w/o need of a vote only Dhruba correctly notes that > UNLESS both NN and 2NN are upgraded, HDFS-1024 becomes an incompatible > change (the NN<->2NN communication will fail always). IMO, this > incompatible change can be plastered over with a release note; e.g. > WARNING, you MUST update NN and 2NN when you go to 0.20.3 hadoop. If > you agree with me, please vote +1 on commit. > > Thanks, > St.Ack > -- Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com Connect to me at http://www.facebook.com/dhruba
