Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

Hi Owen, Thanks for the proposal. I was hoping for same releases, but I am okay with different releases as well. @Konstantin, I am completely open to the name changes, let us discuss that in HDFS-10419 and we can make the corresponding change. --Anu On 3/19/18, 10:52 AM, "Owen

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

Andrew and Daryn, Do you have any feedback on the proposal? Otherwise, we can start a vote for "adoption of new codebase" tomorrow. .. Owen On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 1:50 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: > This discussion seems to have died down coming closer consensus without

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

The proposal to add it as a subproject of Hadoop makes sense to me. Thank you Owen. I am glad to have a path for scaling HDFS further, especially as it enters areas like IoT and self-driving cars, where storage requirements are huge. I am not very fond of the name HDSL, though. "Storage Layer"

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

> On Mar 5, 2018, at 4:08 PM, Andrew Wang wrote: > > - NN on top HDSL where the NN uses the new block layer (Both Daryn and Owen > acknowledge the benefit of the new block layer). We have two choices here > ** a) Evolve NN so that it can interact with both old and

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

This discussion seems to have died down coming closer consensus without a resolution. I'd like to propose the following compromise: * HDSL become a subproject of Hadoop. * HDSL will release separately from Hadoop. Hadoop releases will not contain HDSL and vice versa. * HDSL will get its own jira

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

Hi Joep, On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 6:50 PM, J. Rottinghuis wrote: Obviously when people do want to use Ozone, then having it in the same repo > is easier. The flipside is that, separate top-level project in the same > repo or not, it adds to the Hadoop releases. > Apache

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

t;> To: Wangda Tan <wheele...@gmail.com> >> Cc: Owen O'Malley <owen.omal...@gmail.com>, Daryn Sharp >> <da...@oath.com.invalid>, Jitendra Pandey <jiten...@hortonworks.com>, >> hdfs-dev <hdfs-...@hadoop.apache.org>, "common-dev@hadoop.apache.

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

t;jiten...@hortonworks.com>, > hdfs-dev <hdfs-...@hadoop.apache.org>, "common-dev@hadoop.apache.org" < > common-dev@hadoop.apache.org>, "yarn-...@hadoop.apache.org" < > yarn-...@hadoop.apache.org>, "mapreduce-...@hadoop.apache.org" < > m

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

oop.apache.org" <yarn-...@hadoop.apache.org>, "mapreduce-...@hadoop.apache.org" <mapreduce-...@hadoop.apache.org> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk Hi Owen, Wangda, Thanks for clearly laying out the subproject options, that helps the discussion. I'm all onboard with

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

Hi Sanjay, thanks for the response, replying inline: - NN on top HDSL where the NN uses the new block layer (Both Daryn and Owen > acknowledge the benefit of the new block layer). We have two choices here > ** a) Evolve NN so that it can interact with both old and new block layer, > ** b)

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

Hi Owen, Wangda, Thanks for clearly laying out the subproject options, that helps the discussion. I'm all onboard with the idea of regular releases, and it's something I tried to do with the 3.0 alphas and betas. The problem though isn't a lack of commitment from feature developers like Sanjay

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

Andrew Thanks for your response. In this email let me focus on maintenance and unnecessary impact on HDFS. Daryn also touched on this topic and looked at the code base from the developer impact point of view. He appreciated that the code is separate and I agree with his suggestion to move

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

Hi Owen, >> 1. It is hard to tell what has changed. git rebase -i tells me the >> branch has 722 commits. The rebase failed with a conflict. It would really >> help if you rebased to current trunk. Thanks for the comments. I have merged trunk to HDFS-7240 branch. Hopefully, this makes it

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

I like the idea of same source / same release and put Ozone's source under a different directory. Like Owen mentioned, It gonna be important for all parties to keep a regular and shorter release cycle for Hadoop, e.g. 3-4 months between minor releases. Users can try features and give feedbacks to

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 11:03 PM, Andrew Wang wrote: Owen mentioned making a Hadoop subproject; we'd have to > hash out what exactly this means (I assume a separate repo still managed by > the Hadoop project), but I think we could make this work if it's more > attractive

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

Hi Sanjay, I have different opinions about what's important and how to eventually integrate this code, and that's not because I'm "conveniently ignoring" your responses. I'm also not making some of the arguments you claim I am making. Attacking arguments I'm not making is not going to change my

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

I’m generally neutral and looked foremost at developer impact. Ie. Will it be so intertwined with hdfs that each project risks destabilizing the other? Will developers with no expertise in ozone will be impeded? I think the answer is currently no. These are the intersections and some concerns

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

I think it would be good to get this in sooner rather than later, but I have some thoughts. 1. It is hard to tell what has changed. git rebase -i tells me the branch has 722 commits. The rebase failed with a conflict. It would really help if you rebased to current trunk. 2. I think

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

Oops, retrying now subscribed to more than solely yarn-dev. -Clay On Wed, 28 Feb 2018, Clay B. wrote: +1 (non-binding) I have walked through the code and find it very compelling as a user; I really look forward to seeing the Ozone code mature and it maturing HDFS features together. The

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

Andrew, thanks for your response. 1) Wrt to NN on top of HDSL. You raised the issue of FSN lock separation . This was a key issue we discussed heavily in the past in the context of “Show the community a way to connect NN into the the new block layer”. We heard you clearly and thought deeply

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

Resending since the formatting was messed up, let's try plain text this time: Hi Jitendra and all, Thanks for putting this together. I caught up on the discussion on JIRA and document at HDFS-10419, and still have the same concerns raised earlier about merging the Ozone branch to trunk. To

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

*Hi Jitendra and all,Thanks for putting this together. I caught up on the discussion on JIRA and document at HDFS-10419, and still have the same concerns raised earlier