My ACCUMULO-2589 branch in github ( https://github.com/ctubbsii/accumulo/tree/ACCUMULO-2589) does have a commit that drops a bunch of stuff (which may or may not be accepted as is for 2.0). The instance.dfs.{uri,dir} properties aren't so easy and require more planning, because it's not just removing a property... it's also dealing with updating internal data by making relative paths absolute.
For what it's worth, I'm also looking at what changes if we drop Hadoop 1 support. As for the validation of config, I think we do a sanity check on startup already, which we can always extend. Doesn't solve this issue, though. -- Christopher L Tubbs II http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 8:59 PM, dlmarion <[email protected]> wrote: > We should schedule a bunch of deprecated things for removal in 2.0 to ease > maintenance. Do we have a way to validate the site.xml and zookeeper > settings before startup and fail with appropriate error message. > > > > <div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Christopher < > [email protected]> </div><div>Date:12/10/2014 8:44 PM (GMT-05:00) > </div><div>To: Accumulo Dev List <[email protected]> > </div><div>Cc: </div><div>Subject: Planning for (eventual) removal of > instance.dfs.{uri,dir} </div><div> > </div>So, > > instance.volumes replaces instance.dfs.uri and instance.dfs.dir in 1.6. > But, what's our long-term plan for these? I ask, because we still have > internal code that uses instance.dfs.uri to resolve relative paths. > > Should we force these to be re-written at some point (maybe on upgrade to > 1.7)? Should we continue to support the deprecated properties indefinitely > and continue the lazy re-write-on-compact? Do we transition by requiring > instance.volumes to specify the volumes, and only use the old properties to > resolve relative paths? > > My personal view is that we should provide an upgrade-prep/check tool prior > to upgrade to 2.0, which checks and/or re-writes paths and verifies that > instance.volumes is set. > > Does anybody have a different opinion on this? > > -- > Christopher L Tubbs II > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii >
