On 27/07/11 06:38, Sharad Agarwal wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Steve Loughranste...@apache.org wrote:
Why does the MiniMR cluster go away in MR2?
As Arun pointed out, MiniMR has lot of JT and TT bits ingrained in it which
makes it almost unusable in MR2. I wish tests would have
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Steve Loughran ste...@apache.org wrote:
As long as there is an in-vm mini cluster for testing I'm happy. I am
building up a list of things to fix in MiniDFS cluster, which is going to
stay as is, right?
Right. MR2 doesn't change anything on HDFS side.
Sharad
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Sharad Agarwal
sharad.apa...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Steve Loughran ste...@apache.org wrote:
Why does the MiniMR cluster go away in MR2?
As Arun pointed out, MiniMR has lot of JT and TT bits ingrained in it which
makes it almost
On Jul 27, 2011, at 9:41 AM, Eli Collins wrote:
Is the plan to port all the current MR tests to the new Mini*Cluster classes?
I don't think a straight port is the right way to go - we should stop relying
on the Mini*Clusters for every single test and go the route of unit/mock tests.
The
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
On Jul 27, 2011, at 9:41 AM, Eli Collins wrote:
Is the plan to port all the current MR tests to the new Mini*Cluster classes?
I don't think a straight port is the right way to go - we should stop relying
on the
On 26/07/11 01:23, Arun C Murthy wrote:
On Jul 25, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Eli Collins wrote:
The current plan is to remove the MR1 code from trunk after merging in MR-279.
One issue is that lots of MR 'unit tests' rely on MiniMRCluster which exposes
very minute aspects of the JT/TT -
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Steve Loughran ste...@apache.org wrote:
Why does the MiniMR cluster go away in MR2?
As Arun pointed out, MiniMR has lot of JT and TT bits ingrained in it which
makes it almost unusable in MR2. I wish tests would have used MiniMR via a
interface then the
Hey gang,
We've had some discussion on what to do with regard to MR1 when MR2
gets merged in, and wanted to give you a heads up. By MR1 I mean the
current MR implementation that uses the JobTracker, TaskTracker, etc.
On this thread (http://search-hadoop.com/m/GJliJ1uwjXu) on
mapreduce-dev@ we
On Jul 25, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Eli Collins wrote:
Note! MR2 supports the current job
API - users don't need to rewrite their jobs to run on MR2 - this is
about the MR *implementation* not job compatibility. Note that the
move to MR2 will affect some APIs (eg metrics, contrib projects that
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Allen Wittenauer a...@apache.org wrote:
On Jul 25, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Eli Collins wrote:
Note! MR2 supports the current job
API - users don't need to rewrite their jobs to run on MR2 - this is
about the MR *implementation* not job compatibility. Note that the
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
On Jul 25, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Eli Collins wrote:
The current plan is to remove the MR1 code from trunk after merging in
MR-279.
One issue is that lots of MR 'unit tests' rely on MiniMRCluster which exposes
very
11 matches
Mail list logo