[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13449?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Mingliang Liu updated HADOOP-13449: ----------------------------------- Attachment: HADOOP-13449-HADOOP-13345.005.patch Thanks for the discussion, [~fabbri]. That's very helpful. {quote} for v1, you could always return authoritative = false. {quote} Yes, it's the current patch. Let's address this as a follow-up JIRA after the [HADOOP-13651] and this both be committed. {quote} The interface allows any of these behaviors.... The filesystem is responsible for ensuring that the delete to /a must be recursive since it is not empty. MetadataStore explicitly does not do that. {quote} Agreed. For example, {{delete(path)}} does not check the directory path being empty. {quote} You either have to (A) pay money to store an extra copy of your metadata forever, or (B) spend money and time hydrating the MetadataStore each time you start a cluster. {quote} The metadata size is considered small and the price of DDB storage is low comparing with read/write operations pricing. If I have to choose, (A) makes more sense. {quote} and we don't assume everything is always in DynamoDB, it makes recovery much easier {quote} That's very valid. Altering S3 and MetadataStore is not atomic. {quote} The other concern is that I just don't understand why you would want to do the preloading. {quote} You mean import? I suppose not. For read/write existing s3 buckets, importing the structure first seems a prerequisite unless we assume it discovers/converges fast or we reach little consistency. I guess you mean the constrictions on the pre-creating parent directories. I re-read the design doc and [HADOOP-13651] patch, and think you made a good point about this. Let S3AFileSystem ensure the contract. Moreover, I now think storing the is_empty bit in DynamoDB is not ideal. Maintaining it needs non-trivial effort and it's easy to make it wrong. Perhaps we can query via parent directories as HASH key when we need this information. This is non-trivial either; I'll think about this as my next work. We can either fix this in next patch, or I'll work on a follow-up JIRA. If this patch is still in question, a conference call will be very helpful. Let's schedule next week. [~ste...@apache.org] is traveling this week. [~eddyxu] you have more comments since I revised the latest patch? Thank you, > S3Guard: Implement DynamoDBMetadataStore. > ----------------------------------------- > > Key: HADOOP-13449 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13449 > Project: Hadoop Common > Issue Type: Sub-task > Components: fs/s3 > Reporter: Chris Nauroth > Assignee: Mingliang Liu > Attachments: HADOOP-13449-HADOOP-13345.000.patch, > HADOOP-13449-HADOOP-13345.001.patch, HADOOP-13449-HADOOP-13345.002.patch, > HADOOP-13449-HADOOP-13345.003.patch, HADOOP-13449-HADOOP-13345.004.patch, > HADOOP-13449-HADOOP-13345.005.patch > > > Provide an implementation of the metadata store backed by DynamoDB. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: common-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org