[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-11288?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17155192#comment-17155192
]
Francis Christopher Liu commented on HBASE-11288:
-------------------------------------------------
{quote}
Do you agree with the above statements?
{quote}
>From what I can read in the doc and my understanding of the discussions so far
>the main difference between the two implementations is the tiering. “Master
>local region”’s only advantage is that it stays 1-tier for assignment,
>although at the cost of making compromises to avoid 2-tier. The caching as
>mentioned is not specific to one implementation.
{quote}
After rethinking, I think you misuderstood me. It seems that you are trying to
show that the 'general root table' solution can work. It definately can work as
you already have a cluster running with the solution. This is not my point. I
do not mean the 'general root table' can not work.
{quote}
I see so you agree it can work for HBase? Yes it seemed unclear wether you
thought it could work or not in general. Thanks for clarifying that. If you
could also clarify another thing, you seemed to imply there might be problems
with it for HBase currently (Eg ProcV2 is not mature enough) is this correct?
Just trying to make sure I understand your position.
{quote}
In general, I think both of the solution can work. Here we just want to choose
the 'better' solution.
{quote}
I see that’s good to know. So we can continue discussing on validating the main
difference (2-tier vs 1-tier)?
> Splittable Meta
> ---------------
>
> Key: HBASE-11288
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-11288
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Umbrella
> Components: meta
> Reporter: Francis Christopher Liu
> Assignee: Francis Christopher Liu
> Priority: Major
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
