>> I vote for pulling "Online schema update". I have the same vote.
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 9:05 PM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 6:04 PM, lars hofhansl <[email protected]> wrote: > > How much duplicate code are we talking about? Do these share common code > to close/open the regions, or is it a completely different code path? (I > know I could look myself, but it's easier to ask) > > > > From a gut reaction it feels cleaner to keep track of the state of the > alter in ZK. > > > > > > Both are incomplete. The approaches share no code. The conversation > Ted cites is from nearly a year ago (and is nought but our platitudes > that the authors get together on the problem which didn't happen; the > context did not help w/ one part-time on the job and the other a > summer intern). Neither has a sponsor. The "Online schema update" is > at least used in a few places, cautiously. What should happen is we > should pull out both and replace with a working online schema > mechanism. Until that happens undo at least one of them before > someone other than J-D gets hurt. I vote for pulling "Online schema > update". > > St.Ack >
