+1.
Hairong Kuang wrote:
+1 Good catch!
Hairong
On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 12:55 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> wrote:
+1
On 4/2/10, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
Please on committing HDFS-1024 to the hadoop 0.20 branch.
Background:
HDFS-1024 fixes possible trashing of fsimage because
of failed copy from 2NN and NN. Ordinarily, possible
corruption of this proportion would merit commit w/o
need of a vote only Dhruba correctly notes that UNLESS
both NN and 2NN are upgraded, HDFS-1024 becomes an
incompatible change (the NN<->2NN communication will
fail always). IMO, this incompatible change can be
plastered over with a release note; e.g.
WARNING, you MUST update NN and 2NN when you go to
0.20.3 hadoop. If you agree with me, please vote +1
on commit.
