请大家帮忙翻译下面的英文,不要机翻,谢谢.MCKUSICK One of the more interesting—and significant—aspects of the original GFS architecture was the decision to base it on a single master. Can you walk us through what led to that decisi

请大家帮忙翻译下面的英文,不要机翻,谢谢.MCKUSICK One of the more interesting—and significant—aspects of the original GFS architecture was the decision to base it on a single master. Can you walk us through what led to that decisi
请大家帮忙翻译下面的英文,不要机翻,谢谢.
MCKUSICK One of the more interesting—and significant—aspects of the original GFS architecture was the decision to base it on a single master. Can you walk us through what led to that decision?
QUINLAN The decision to go with a single master was actually one of the very first decisions, mostly just to simplify the overall design problem. That is, building a distributed master right from the outset was deemed too difficult and would take too much time. Also, by going with the single-master
FILE SYSTEMS
2
approach, the engineers were able to simplify a lot of problems. Having a central place to control replication and garbage collection and many other activities was definitely simpler than handling it all on a distributed basis. So the decision was made to centralize that in one machine.
MCKUSICK Was this mostly about being able to roll out something within a reasonably short time frame?
QUINLAN Yes. In fact, some of the engineers who were involved in that early effort later went on to build BigTable, a distributed storage system, but that effort took many years. The decision to build the original GFS around the single master really helped get something out into the hands of users much more rapidly than would have otherwise been possible.
Also, in sketching out the use cases they anticipated, it didn’t seem the single-master design would cause much of a problem. The scale they were thinking about back then was framed in terms of hundreds of terabytes and a few million files. In fact, the system worked just fine to start with.

请大家帮忙翻译下面的英文,不要机翻,谢谢.MCKUSICK One of the more interesting—and significant—aspects of the original GFS architecture was the decision to base it on a single master. Can you walk us through what led to that decisi
这是一个在mckusick 和quinlan之间的对话.single master和distributed master在文中指单一的和分布式（就像是把一个任务分给很多台电脑做）的主机.这个太专业了,我不懂,但是从字面上分析师这样子的.
---------------在原始网格文件系统的中最有趣,最重要的就是以单一主机为基础,做错决策.你能够给我们介绍介绍是什么帮助产生决策吗
-------------就单一主机做出的决策事实上是最先要做的决策.通常这可以简化全套的设计.从一开始,就建造一个分布式主机肯定很困难,也会浪费很多时间.同样,使用单一主机
2个方法,使得工程师能够简化许多问题.有中央空间去控制复制和碎片处理工作,相比用分布式去解决它,能使许多其他任务更为简便
---------这主要指能够在短时间帧中解决一些问题吗?
--------是的,事实上,一些工程师,在率先开拓那个领域之前,都去打造了BigTable（大桌面?）.大桌面是一个分布式存储的系统,打造它花费了很多时间.依靠单一主机打造原始网格文件系统的尝试,使得信息更快速地传递到了使用者,而不是其他可能的媒介手中.
同时,在哪个系统的草拟过程中,似乎单一主机的设计不会产生很多问题.他们正在思量的系统,是由数以百计的兆字节和几百万的文件打造而成的.事实上,从那个的系统开始,很不错

MCKUSICK之一significant-aspects interesting-and原服务队建筑基地的决定在一个单一的主人。 你可以走了,我们通过什么决定?
昆兰决定去一个单个主人实际上是一个最早的决定,多半只是简化了系统总体设计的问题。构建一个分布式的主人对从一开始就被认为是太难了,会花太多时间。同时,通过single-master去了
文件系统
2
方法,...

全部展开

MCKUSICK之一significant-aspects interesting-and原服务队建筑基地的决定在一个单一的主人。 你可以走了,我们通过什么决定?
昆兰决定去一个单个主人实际上是一个最早的决定,多半只是简化了系统总体设计的问题。构建一个分布式的主人对从一开始就被认为是太难了,会花太多时间。同时,通过single-master去了
文件系统
2
方法,工程师们能够简化很多问题。有一个中心位置来控制复制和垃圾收集和许多其他活动无疑是所有简单的比处理一个分布式的基础。因此,一致决定将集中在一台机器。
这是MCKUSICK是能够推出一些合理的短时间范围内吗?
昆兰是的。事实上,一些工程师参与,早期努力建立BigTable随后,分布式存储系统,但工作花费了好几年。决定建立原服务队在单个主人得到一些东西真的帮助用户的手远快于否则会成为可能。
在草图使用情况下,他们的预期,这似乎是不single-master的设计会引起大麻烦。他们正在思考规模当时被镶在成百上千的terabytes条款和几百万的文件。事实上,此系统开始工作,只是罚款。

收起