I can't say, I think there just isn't a push for it since mapreduce would not benefit from it as much nas HBase. Futhermore the patch proposals have to deal with HDFS security, and the one I'm testing just does not worry about security (and hence is a security hole itself).
HDFS is just a slow moving project alas. On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 6:35 PM, Jason Rutherglen <[email protected]> wrote: >> There is a patch that causes us to evict the block cache on close of >> hfile, and populate the block cache during compaction write out. This >> is included in 0.90. > > That's good! > >> HDFS-347, which is a huge >> clear win but still no plans to include it in any hadoop version. > > Why's that? It seems to be fairly logical. Does it affect the > 'over-the-wire' protocol? > > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 6:23 PM, Ryan Rawson <[email protected]> wrote: >> There is a patch that causes us to evict the block cache on close of >> hfile, and populate the block cache during compaction write out. This >> is included in 0.90. >> >> So that helps. Fixing VFS issues is quite a bit longer term, since >> the on-wire format of HDFS rpc is kind of "fixed", petitioning for >> changes will be a little tricky. Again, see HDFS-347, which is a huge >> clear win but still no plans to include it in any hadoop version. >> >> -ryan >> >
