[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20429?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16591976#comment-16591976
]
Andrew Purtell edited comment on HBASE-20429 at 8/24/18 5:45 PM:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
[~zyork] Yes there are two improvements I've become aware of since that I'd
like to apply and then retest
# HBASE-20723
# S3Guard
Edit: It's been a while but I also seem to remember some failures where
PUT-COPY failed server side but we didn't catch it, so committed store files
went missing in a way that S3Guard wouldn't address.
was (Author: apurtell):
[~zyork] Yes there are two improvements I've become aware of since that I'd
like to apply and then retest
# HBASE-20723
# S3Guard
> Support for mixed or write-heavy workloads on non-HDFS filesystems
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-20429
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20429
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Umbrella
> Reporter: Andrew Purtell
> Priority: Major
>
> We can support reasonably well use cases on non-HDFS filesystems, like S3,
> where an external writer has loaded (and continues to load) HFiles via the
> bulk load mechanism, and then we serve out a read only workload at the HBase
> API.
> Mixed workloads or write-heavy workloads won't fare as well. In fact, data
> loss seems certain. It will depend in the specific filesystem, but all of the
> S3 backed Hadoop filesystems suffer from a couple of obvious problems,
> notably a lack of atomic rename.
> This umbrella will serve to collect some related ideas for consideration.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
