On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 8:29 AM, Mike Spreitzer <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, I simply took the Hadoop 0.20.2 release, deleted its hadoop-core.jar, > and replaced it with the contents of > lib/hadoop-core-0.20-append-r1056497.jar from hbase. > > I'm not sure what to do with "this approach might work". How can I know > if it really does?
I'm not sure, maybe it'll great until one day in a month everything will crash and burn due to <thing no one could have guessed>. Perhaps someone with extensive hdfs code experience might be able to tell you. > > BTW, I see that HBase's lib/hadoop-core-0.20-append-r1056497.jar contains > org/apache/hadoop/hdfs/server/datanode/BlockChannel.class but I am having > trouble figuring out why. From where in SVN does that come? Is it not in the append-20-branch ? > > Thanks, > Mike Spreitzer > > > > > From: Ryan Rawson <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: stack <[email protected]> > Date: 02/13/2011 02:33 AM > Subject: Re: Using the Hadoop bundled in the lib directory of HBase > > > > If you are taking the jar that we ship and slamming it in a hadoop > 0.20.2 based distro that might work. I'm not sure if there are any > differences than pure code (which would then be expressed in the jar > only), so this approach might work. > > You could also check out to the revision that we built our JAR and > trying that. By default you need apache forrest (argh) and java5 to > build hadoop (ARGH) which makes it not buildable on OSX. > > Building sucks, there are no short cuts. Good luck out there! > -ryan > > On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 11:24 PM, Mike Spreitzer <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Let me be clear about the amount of testing I did: extremely little. I >> should also point out that at first I did not appreciate fully the > meaning >> of you earlier comment to Vijay saying "this is a little off" --- I now >> realize you were in fact saying that Vijay told me to do things > backward. >> >> Since my note saying the backward approach worked, two things have >> happened: (1) someone make a link to it from ( >> http://hbase.apache.org/notsoquick.html), and (2) Ryan Rowson replied >> saying, in no uncertain terms, that the backward approach is unreliable. > I >> would not have noticed a reliability issue in the negligible testing I >> did. >> >> Having gotten two opposite opinions, I am now unsure of the truth of the >> matter. Is there any chance of Vijay and Ryan agreeing? >> >> Thanks, >> Mike Spreitzer >> SMTP: [email protected], Lotus Notes: Mike Spreitzer/Watson/IBM >> Office phone: +1-914-784-6424 (IBM T/L 863-) >> AOL Instant Messaging: M1k3Sprtzr >> > >
