[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-17723?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=18073859#comment-18073859
 ] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on HDFS-17723:
---------------------------------------

kokonguyen191 commented on PR #8396:
URL: https://github.com/apache/hadoop/pull/8396#issuecomment-4257775239

   > Just wonder what will it happen if remove mount points one by one and cost 
a long time. IMO, this will be one low frequency operation, any cases need to 
improve the performance? Thanks.
   
   Hi @Hexiaoqiao, I think it mostly depends on how the cluster is run. In our 
cluster, we have a lot of mount points and housekeeping them takes a few 
minutes each time. It's a small improvement with no drawback for peeps who do a 
lot of admin mount ops.
   
   Though, internally, we run batches of all mount table operations at the same 
time instead of just adding/removing/updating, and at much higher frequency for 
migrations. But it's a rather niche situation. The difference in run time for 
this particular use case with vs. without the improvement is months vs. days.




> RBF: Optimize multiple mount point removal
> ------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDFS-17723
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-17723
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Felix N
>            Assignee: Felix N
>            Priority: Minor
>              Labels: pull-request-available
>
> Since each remove operation forces an update on all routers, removing a lot 
> of mount points in one go when there are a decent number of routers can take 
> a long time. It's better to just remove all of them in a batch and force 
> update only once. Useful for nuking old unused mount points.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to