> From: Konstantin Shvachko <[email protected]> > Indeed we have been testing extensively Hadoop-0.22 branch for the > last two months and beyond. Latest tests on a relatively large dev > cluster were going well. I reported this recently on general@hadoop. > > HBase is the main focus for us and was one of the primary motivations > for choosing the branch. We also run Hive and Pig. Oozie is in the > pipeline. And it all is coming together nicely on top of .22 so far. > > 0.22 branch has a pretty long history. And has been tested at > different times by different groups of contributors. Stack et.al. were > the first to test the new implementation of append, thanks for that. > Now I see .22 as (the only ?) alternative (to the 0.20-append branch > variations) for HBase community to move forward with your development. > You have been asking for it afair.
Thank you very much. This is illuminating. Best regards, - Andy Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White) ----- Original Message ----- > From: Konstantin Shvachko <[email protected]> > To: Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]>; Andrew Purtell > <[email protected]>; Roman Shaposhnik <[email protected]>; > "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 12:34 AM > Subject: Re: proper pace for JIRA integration > > Roman, thanks for including me in this discussion. > > Indeed we have been testing extensively Hadoop-0.22 branch for the > last two months and beyond. Latest tests on a relatively large dev > cluster were going well. I reported this recently on general@hadoop. > > HBase is the main focus for us and was one of the primary motivations > for choosing the branch. We also run Hive and Pig. Oozie is in the > pipeline. And it all is coming together nicely on top of .22 so far. > > 0.22 branch has a pretty long history. And has been tested at > different times by different groups of contributors. Stack et.al. were > the first to test the new implementation of append, thanks for that. > Now I see .22 as (the only ?) alternative (to the 0.20-append branch > variations) for HBase community to move forward with your development. > You have been asking for it afair. > > Not sure when 0.23 will be ready/stable. We have seen a push to 0.21 > then to 0.22 only to return back to the 0.20 series afterwards. I am > very glad the .23 effort went all the way to alpha release. As I > previously said it takes time to stabilize a new file systems, which > essentially what you have in .23. HDFS .22 has been around for more > than a year. > > Roman just created first hadoop 0.22 assemble build. Check the > artifact out, see for yourself if it's DoA or AaR, or may be WfM. > There isn't much buzz about .22 because nobody is commercializing it. > It's the community work. And it's up to us (you) to make it happen. > > Thanks, > --Konstantin > > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 02:57PM, Andrew Purtell wrote: >>> Roman, >>> >>> > Personally, I think it is extremely unfair to refer to .22 as >>> > DoA/ignored. Unless,═of course, such statement can be backed up > with facts. >>> >>> >>> Yeah, DoA is harsh, when I meant more like "abandoned at > release". Similar to 0.21. >>> >>> Well that is my question, really. Is it? >>> >>> We've heard that CDH4 is going to be start from something a lot > closer to >>> 0.23 than 0.22, that Hortonworks is committed to 0.23. It seems 0.23 is > the >>> future, and a RC may be happening as early as the end of this year, > i.e. in >>> the next month or so. >> >> Hadoop contributions are coming from many places, so I don't see why > this is >> so important to know how close a particular distro will be to this a that > ASF >> release. Just the other day we had this long thread about contributions on >> Hadoop general@ - it might be interesting to re-read it. >> >>> Given recent history and the above described═commitments, I think there > is >>> confusion about where/if 0.22 fits in. People will work on what > inspires >>> them, but it seems the center of gravity has already moved beyond 0.22. > Is >>> that a fair statement? >> >> Perhaps I am missing the point of this discussion, but according to Hadoop >> bylaws (available to anyone from https://hadoop.apache.org/bylaws.html): >> <quote> >> Product Release >> >> When a release of one of the project's products is ready, a vote is > required >> to accept the release as an official release of the project. >> >> Lazy Majority of active PMC members >> >> </quote> >> >> What anything in this thread has to do with the quote above? Hadoop is >> released when it is ready and a release is official by the lazy majority. >> >> If downstream projects decide not to participate in support a release - > well, >> this is sad, but this happens. And this means that a particular release > will >> have a somewhat smaller stack available to our users. >> >> -- >> Take care, >> Konstantin (Cos) Boudnik >> 2CAC 8312 4870 D885 8616 6115 220F 6980 1F27 E622 >> >> Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author, and > do >> not necessarily represent the views of any company the author might be >> affiliated with at the moment of writing. >> >>> > The facts that I have are such that there will be a reasonably > large >>> > deployment of═Hadoop 0.22 and HBase at EBay makes me believe that > such >>> > a combination═should be of interest to HBase community. >>> >>> >>> Then I'm sure the eBay guys will have that interest. :-) >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> >>> ═ - Andy >>> >>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet > Hein (via Tom White) >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> > From: Roman Shaposhnik <[email protected]> >>> > To: [email protected]; Andrew Purtell > <[email protected]>; Konstantin Shvachko <[email protected]> >>> > Cc: Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]> >>> > Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2011 2:16 PM >>> > Subject: Re: proper pace for JIRA integration >>> > >>> > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Andrew Purtell > <[email protected]> >>> > wrote: >>> >>> ═There will be some deployment of .22 in big shops as far > as I know. >>> >> >>> >> Who are these "big shops"? >>> > >>> > EBay is a good example here I'm CCing Konstantin if you want > to find >>> > out more details. >>> > >>> >> AFAIK, compared to 0.20.x or 0.23, 0.22 has a number of > regressions. >>> > >>> > I'm NOT sure I agree as far as 0.23 goes. The state of 0.23 is > an >>> > early alpha. There's >>> > lots of work that still need to go into it before it graduates > from an >>> > alpha stage. As such >>> > it is premature to talk about its quality. Now, the question of > how >>> > long it takes .23 >>> > to get to the same point of HDFS stability that .22 has -- is an > open >>> > one. And I'd >>> > rather hear what Konstantin has to say about it. >>> > >>> >> We need to assess how healthy 0.22 is. >>> > >>> > It is pretty healthy.═ If anybody is looking for a stable and > up-to-date >>> > HDFS feature set -- it is the one I'd recommend taking a look > at. It is >>> > assumed that MR is slower in .22 compared to 20.205, but frankly, >>> > I haven't seen the numbers yet, so I can't speculate. >>> > >>> > I've run a reasonable # of integration tests on that combo and > I liked >>> > the results. >>> > >>> >> How much time/attention should the HBase community pay to > what might be a >>> > DoA/ignored release? >>> >> Or is that in fact the case (that it is DoA...)? >>> > >>> > Personally, I think it is extremely unfair to refer to .22 as >>> > DoA/ignored. Unless, >>> > of course, such statement can be backed up with facts. >>> > >>> > The facts that I have are such that there will be a reasonably > large >>> > deployment of >>> > Hadoop 0.22 and HBase at EBay makes me believe that such a > combination >>> > should be of interest to HBase community. >>> > >>> > Thanks, >>> > Roman. >>> > >> >
