On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 10:27 AM Andrew Purtell wrote:
> If we do this can we also move out hbck version 1? It would be really weird
> in my opinion to have v2 in a separate repo but v1 shipping with the 1.x
> releases. That would be a source of understandable confusion.
>
>
My sense is that
bq. Seems like you're saying it's not a problem now, but
you're not sure if it would become a problem. Regardless of that, it's a
goal to not be version-specific (and thus, we can have generic hbck-v1
and hbck-v2 tools). LMK if I misread, please :)
Thats right.
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 11:11 AM
Thanks Josh! separate 'operator-tools' repo for hbase tools is a great
suggestion. We can work towards it starting with hbck2. Each existing tool
needs to be looked in detail regarding how much code it shares with HBase.
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 11:11 AM Josh Elser wrote:
> Thanks, Umesh. Seems
Yes, and in that vein also VerifyReplication and tools of that nature.
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 11:11 AM Josh Elser wrote:
> Thanks, Umesh. Seems like you're saying it's not a problem now, but
> you're not sure if it would become a problem. Regardless of that, it's a
> goal to not be
Thanks, Umesh. Seems like you're saying it's not a problem now, but
you're not sure if it would become a problem. Regardless of that, it's a
goal to not be version-specific (and thus, we can have generic hbck-v1
and hbck-v2 tools). LMK if I misread, please :)
One more thought, it would be
Okay. I created the backport issue[1].
I will try to attaching a patch.
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20916
Best regards,
Minwoo Kang
보낸 사람: Stack
보낸 날짜: 2018년 7월 24일 화요일 23:36
받는 사람: Hbase-User
제목: Re: confusing heartbeats.
I tried
Hello all,
I have seen that the HBase project provides lot of features for
multi-tenancy like security, isolation in terms of resources, namespaces
etc. I saw some examples of companies like Bloomberg and Yahoo using those
features in production (HBaseCon videos).
It would be helpful if anyone
