hbase-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ferdy <ferdy.gal...@kalooga.com>
Subject Re: About HDFS-630 and hbase 0.20.5
Date Fri, 02 Jul 2010 08:25:02 GMT
Cool thanks. These cloudera distributions certainly look promising.

One final note, I could not find the HDFS-630 patch in the CDH2. I don't 
mean to nitpick but I'm still left wondering if I should include it or not.

Do you guys patch the CDH2 with HDFS-630 or what? Or would you say this 
patch is not so important after all?

Ferdy

This seems to be the newest CDH2 release:
http://archive.cloudera.com/cdh/2/hadoop-0.20.1+169.89.releasenotes.html

Jean-Daniel Cryans wrote:
> Yes, and to deploy the cloudera release on your cluster :)
>
> J-D
>
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Ferdy <ferdy.galema@kalooga.com> wrote:
>   
>> Allright so I will use a cloudera release. If I understand correctly, this
>> includes simply replacing the Hadoop jar in the hbase/lib folder with the
>> cloudera hadoop core jar?
>>
>> Ferdy.
>>
>> On 07/01/2010 08:23 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans wrote:
>>     
>>> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 5:42 AM, Ferdy<ferdy.galema@kalooga.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> http://hbase.apache.org/docs/r0.20.5/api/overview-summary.html#overview_description
>>>>
>>>> Here is states that it is recommended to use HDFS-630 patch for Hadoop.
>>>> So,
>>>> why does the hbase 0.20.5 contains a stock hadoop 0.20.2 jar? (Hadoop
>>>> 0.20.2
>>>> does not have HDFS-630 fixed).
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> What Ted said, and also we cannot ship with a patched jar simply
>>> because it's not a client side-only change. If we did, it would mean
>>> that our release of HBase wouldn't be compatible with any official
>>> Apache Hadoop release.
>>>
>>> I agree with Todd, you can simply use CDH2. This is what we do on all
>>> our clusters at StumbleUpon.
>>>
>>> J-D
>>>
>>>       

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message