If you do not enable any of the security features in CDH3b3 or another flavor of secure Hadoop, it should just work, right?
Friso On 22 dec 2010, at 11:16, Andrew Purtell wrote: > Bill, > > I believe using CDH3B*2* will get you what you want. > > ASF HBase 0.90 will not be compatible with secure versions of Hadoop, which > includes CDH3B3. > > Best regards, > > - Andy > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. > - Piet Hein (via Tom White) > > > --- On Tue, 12/21/10, Bill Graham <[email protected]> wrote: > >> From: Bill Graham <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: provide a 0.20-append tarball? >> To: [email protected], [email protected] >> Cc: [email protected] >> Date: Tuesday, December 21, 2010, 11:41 PM >> Hi Andrew, >> >> Just to make sure I'm clear, are you saying that HBase 0.90.0 is >> incompatible with CDH3b3 due to the security changes? >> >> We're just getting going with HBase and have been running 0.90.0rc1 on >> an un-patched version of Hadoop in dev. We were planning on upgrading >> to CDH3b3 to get the sync patches. >> >> thanks, >> Bill >> >> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 6:44 PM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> The latest CDH3 beta includes security changes that >> currently HBase 0.90 and trunk don't incorporate. Of course >> we can help out with clear HBase issues, but for security >> exceptions or similar, what about that? Do we draw a line? >> Where? >>> >>> I've looked over the CDH3B3 installation documentation >> but have not installed it nor do presently use it. >>> >>> If we draw a line, then as an ASF community we should >> have a fallback option somewhere in ASF-land for the user to >> try. Vanilla Hadoop is not sufficient for HBase. Therefore, >> I propose we make a Hadoop 0.20-append tarball available. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> - Andy >>> >>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting >> back. >>> - Piet Hein (via Tom White) >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > >
