yes,you got it. hadoop1.0.x cannot failover auto or mannual. you have to copy fsimage from SNN to the primary NN. On Mar 27, 2013 11:29 AM, "David Parks" <davidpark...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the update, I understand now that I'll be installing a > "secondary > name node" which performs checkpoints on the primary name node and keeps a > working backup copy of the fsimage file. > > The primary name node should write its fsimage file to at least 2 different > physical mediums for improved safety as well (example: locally and an nfs > share). > > One point of query: were the primary name node to be lost, we would be best > off re-building it and copying the fsimage files into place, either from > the > nfs share, or from the secondary name node, as the situation dictates. > There's no mechanism to "fail over" to the "secondary name node" per-se. > > Am I on track here? > > Thanks! > David > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Konstantin Shvachko [mailto:shv.had...@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2013 5:07 AM > To: user@hadoop.apache.org > Cc: davidpark...@yahoo.com > Subject: Re: For a new installation: use the BackupNode or the > CheckPointNode? > > There is no BackupNode in Hadoop 1. > That was a bug in documentation. > > Here is the updated link: > http://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r1.1.2/hdfs_user_guide.html > > Thanks, > --Konstantin > > On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 12:04 AM, varun kumar <varun....@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hope below link will be useful.. > > > > http://hadoop.apache.org/docs/stable/hdfs_user_guide.html > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 12:29 PM, David Parks <davidpark...@yahoo.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> For a new installation of the current stable build (1.1.2 ), is there > >> any reason to use the CheckPointNode over the BackupNode? > >> > >> > >> > >> It seems that we need to choose one or the other, and from the docs > >> it seems like the BackupNode is more efficient in its processes. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Regards, > > Varun Kumar.P > >
