If I remember correctly, Huawei also adopted QJM component. I hope @Vinay might have discussed internally in Huawei before starting this e-mail discussion thread. I'm +1, for removing the bkjm contrib from the trunk code.
Also, there are quite few open sub-tasks under HDFS-3399 umbrella jira, which was used for the BKJM implementation time. How about closing these jira by marking as "Won't Fix"? Thanks, Rakesh Intel On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 1:53 AM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote: > + Rakesh and Uma > > Rakesh and Uma might have a better idea on this. I think Huawei was using > it when Rakesh and Uma worked there. > > - Sijie > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Chris Nauroth <cnaur...@hortonworks.com> > wrote: > > > I recommend including the BookKeeper community in this discussion. I’ve > > added their user@ and dev@ lists to this thread. > > > > I do not see BKJM being used in practice. Removing it from trunk would > be > > attractive in terms of less code for Hadoop to maintain and build, but if > > we find existing users that want to keep it, I wouldn’t object. > > > > --Chris Nauroth > > > > On 7/26/16, 11:14 PM, "Vinayakumar B" <vinayakumar...@huawei.com> wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > BKJM was Active and made much stable when the NameNode HA was > > implemented and there was no QJM implemented. > > Now QJM is present and is much stable which is adopted by many > > production environment. > > I wonder whether it would be a good time to retire BKJM from > trunk? > > > > Are there any users of BKJM exists? > > > > -Vinay > > > > > > >
