On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 03:22PM, Eli Collins wrote: > On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 10:25AM, Eli Collins wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 1:26 AM, Konstantin Shvachko > >> <shv.had...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > Eli, > >> > > >> > I went over the entire discussion on the topic, and did not get it. Is > >> > there a problem with append? We know it does not work in hadoop-1, > >> > only flush() does. Is there anything wrong with the new append > >> > (HDFS-265)? If so please file a bug. > >> > I tested it in Hadoop-0.22 branch it works fine. > >> > > >> > I agree with people who were involved with the implementation of the > >> > new append that the complexity is mainly in > >> > 1. pipeline recovery > >> > 2. consistent client reading while writing, and > >> > 3. hflush() > >> > Once it is done the append itself, which is reopening of previously > >> > closed files for adding data, is not complex. > >> > > >> > You mentioned it and I agree you indeed should be more involved with > >> > your customer base. As for eBay, append was of the motivations to work > >> > on stabilizing 0.22 branch. And there is a lot of use cases which > >> > require append for our customers. > >> > Some of them were mentioned in this discussion. > >> > > >> > >> From what I've seen 0.22 isn't ready for production use. Aside from > >> not supporting critical features like security, it doesn't have a > >> size-able user-base behind it testing and fixing bugs, etc. All things > >> I'd imagine an org like eBay would want. ═I've never gotten a request > >> to support 0.22 from a customer. > > > > This statement looks like FUD to me, because eBay (and a coupla other shops, > > as has been stated elsewhere) are using 0.22 in the production and are > > seemingly happy with that. > > > > That's my experience, take it for what it's worth. > > Not having important features like security, having very few commits, > etc is not FUD, you can check that via svn.
Agree. svn statistics are not. However, stating that ">> From what I've seen 0.22 isn't ready for production use" despite the evidence of contrary is. Cos > > Thanks, > Eli
