+1 (non-binding)
Thanks
Shashi
On 8/8/18, 9:04 AM, "Mukul Kumar Singh" <msi...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
+1, Thanks for the great work.
Thanks,
Mukul
On 08/08/18, 8:55 AM, "Rakesh Radhakrishnan" <rake...@apache.org> wrote:
+1
Thanks,
Rakesh
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:08 PM, Uma Maheswara Rao G
<hadoop....@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> From the positive responses from JIRA discussion and no objections
from
> below DISCUSS thread [1], I am converting it to voting thread.
>
>
>
> Last couple of weeks we spent time on testing the feature and so far
it is
> working fine. Surendra uploaded a test report at HDFS-10285: [2]
>
>
>
> In this phase, we provide to run SPS outside of Namenode only and as
a
> next phase we continue to discuss and work on to enable it as
Internal SPS
> as explained below. We have got clean QA report on branch and if
there are
> any static tool comments triggered later while running this thread,
we will
> make sure to fix them before merge. We committed and continue to
improve
> the code on trunk. Please refer to HDFS-10285 for discussion details.
>
>
>
> This has been a long effort and we're grateful for the support we've
> received from the community. In particular, thanks to Andrew Wang,
Anoop
> Sam John, Anu Engineer, Chris Douglas, Daryn Sharp, Du Jingcheng ,
Ewan
> Higgs, Jing Zhao, Kai Zheng, Rakesh R, Ramkrishna , Surendra Singh
Lilhore
> , Thomas Demoor, Uma Maheswara Rao G, Vinayakumar, Virajith, Wei
Zhou,
> Yuanbo Liu. Without these members effort, this feature might not have
> reached to this state.
>
>
>
> To start with, here is my +1
>
> It will end on 6th Aug.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Uma
>
> [1] https://s.apache.org/bhyu
> [2] https://s.apache.org/AXvL
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 3:21 PM, Uma Maheswara Rao G
<hadoop....@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > After long discussions(offline and on JIRA) on SPS, we came to a
> > conclusion on JIRA(HDFS-10285) that, we will go ahead with External
SPS
> > merge in first phase. In this phase process will not be running
inside
> > Namenode.
> > We will continue discussion on Internal SPS. Current code base
supports
> > both internal and external option. We have review comments for
Internal
> > which needs some additional works for analysis and testing etc. We
will
> > move Internal SPS work to under HDFS-12226 (Follow-on work for SPS
in NN)
> > We are working on cleanup task HDFS-13076 for the merge. .
> > For more clarity on Internal and External SPS proposal thoughts,
please
> > refer to JIRA HDFS-10285.
> >
> > If there are no objections with this, I will go ahead for voting
soon.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Uma
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Uma Maheswara Rao G <
> hadoop....@gmail.com
> > > wrote:
> >
> >> Update: We worked on the review comments and additional JIRAs above
> >> mentioned.
> >>
> >> >1. After the feedbacks from Andrew, Eddy, Xiao in JIRA reviews, we
> >> planned to take up the support for recursive API support.
HDFS-12291<
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-12291>
> >>
> >> We provided the recursive API support now.
> >>
> >> >2. Xattr optimizations HDFS-12225<https://issues.apac
> >> he.org/jira/browse/HDFS-12225>
> >> Improved this portion as well
> >>
> >> >3. Few other review comments already fixed and committed
HDFS-12214<
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-12214>
> >> Fixed the comments.
> >>
> >> We are continuing to test the feature and working so far well.
Also we
> >> uploaded a combined patch and got the good QA report.
> >>
> >> If there are no further objections, we would like to go for merge
vote
> >> tomorrow. Please by default this feature will be disabled.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Uma
> >>
> >> On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 11:27 PM, Gangumalla, Uma <
> >> uma.ganguma...@intel.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Andrew,
> >>>
> >>> >Great to hear. It'd be nice to define which use cases are met by
the
> >>> current version of SPS, and which will be handled after the merge.
> >>> After the discussions in JIRA, we planned to support recursive
API as
> >>> well. The primary use cases we planned was for Hbase. Please
check next
> >>> point for use case details.
> >>>
> >>> >A bit more detail in the design doc on how HBase would use this
> feature
> >>> would also be helpful. Is there an HBase JIRA already?
> >>> Please find the usecase details at this comment in JIRA:
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10285?focusedComm
> >>> entId=16120227&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issueta
> >>> bpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-16120227
> >>>
> >>> >I also spent some more time with the design doc and posted a few
> >>> questions on the JIRA.
> >>> Thank you for the reviews.
> >>>
> >>> To summarize the discussions in JIRA:
> >>> 1. After the feedbacks from Andrew, Eddy, Xiao in JIRA reviews, we
> >>> planned to take up the support for recursive API support.
HDFS-12291<
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-12291> (Rakesh started
the
> >>> work on it)
> >>> 2. Xattr optimizations HDFS-12225<https://issues.apac
> >>> he.org/jira/browse/HDFS-12225> (Patch available)
> >>> 3. Few other review comments already fixed and committed
HDFS-12214<
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-12214>
> >>>
> >>> For tracking the follow-up tasks we filed JIRA HDFS-12226, they
should
> >>> not be critical for merge.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Uma
> >>>
> >>> From: Andrew Wang <andrew.w...@cloudera.com<mailto:
> >>> andrew.w...@cloudera.com>>
> >>> Date: Friday, July 28, 2017 at 11:33 AM
> >>> To: Uma Gangumalla <uma.ganguma...@intel.com<mailto:
> >>> uma.ganguma...@intel.com>>
> >>> Cc:
"hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org>" <
> >>> hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org>>
> >>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Merge Storage Policy Satisfier (SPS)
> [HDFS-10285]
> >>> feature branch to trunk
> >>>
> >>> Hi Uma,
> >>>
> >>> > If there are still plans to make changes that affect
compatibility
> >>> (the hybrid RPC and bulk DN work mentioned sound like they would),
> then we
> >>> can cut branch-3 first, or wait to merge until after these tasks
are
> >>> finished.
> >>> [Uma] We don’t see that 2 items as high priority for the feature.
Users
> >>> would be able to use the feature with current code base and API.
So, we
> >>> would consider them after branch-3 only. That should be perfectly
fine
> IMO.
> >>> The current API is very much useful for Hbase scenario. In Hbase
case,
> they
> >>> will rename files under to different policy directory. They will
not
> set
> >>> the policies always. So, when rename files under to different
policy
> >>> directory, they can simply call satisfyStoragePolicy, they don’t
need
> any
> >>> hybrid API.
> >>>
> >>> Great to hear. It'd be nice to define which usecases are met by
the
> >>> current version of SPS, and which will be handled after the merge.
> >>>
> >>> A bit more detail in the design doc on how HBase would use this
feature
> >>> would also be helpful. Is there an HBase JIRA already?
> >>>
> >>> I also spent some more time with the design doc and posted a few
> >>> questions on the JIRA.
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>> Andrew
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-dev-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-dev-h...@hadoop.apache.org
