On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote: > The issue with the patch on HBASE-3529 is it relies on modifications > to HDFS that the author of HBASE-3529 proposed to the HDFS project as > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-2004. The proposal was > vetoed. Therefore, further progress on HBASE-3529 as currently > implemented is not possible. >
Jason's approach had much merit (IMO). It warrants study at least. Though the indices were written to HDFS, Jason had it so lucene was getting local filesystem access by going via the local read short-circuit facility [1]. Being able to do this made it so he got close to native speeds querying the "HDFS-based" indices. When Jason left it -- he had to get a real job unfortunately -- he was blocked on what to do when a region moved. He wanted to be able to be able to immediately pull the indices local on region reopen. The HDFS fellas who commented in the issue cited by Andrew above thought it a little dodgy adding API for this special case. If you wanted to follow in Jasons footsteps, lets chat. St.Ack 1. http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#perf.hdfs.configs
