01.09.11 18:14, Per Steffensen написав(ла):
Well I am not sure I get you right, but anyway, basically I want a timer framework that triggers my jobs. And the triggering of the jobs need to work even though one or two particular machines goes down. So the "timer triggering mechanism" has to live in the cluster, so to speak. What I dont want is that the timer framework are driven from one particular machine, so that the triggering of jobs will not happen if this particular machine goes down. Basically if I have e.g. 10 machines in a Hadoop cluster I will be able to run e.g. MapReduce jobs even if 3 of the 10 machines are down. I want my timer framework to also be clustered, distributed and coordinated, so that I will also have my timer jobs triggered even though 3 out of 10 machines are down.
Hello.
AFAIK now you still have HDFS NameNode and as soon as NameNode is down - your cluster is down. So, putting scheduling on the same machine as NameNode won't make you cluster worse in terms of SPOF (at least for HW failures).
Best regards, Vitalii Tymchyshyn
