I'd be ok with saying hadoop2.0 as a min for hbase 1.0. If we can support fewer versions we have fewer compat cases to maintain and can clean up code sooner.
0.96 defaults to 1.x 0.98 defaults to 2.x trunk defaults to 2.x The major distros (CDH, HWX, Intel?) have been on hadoop2 so we'd be keeping support for other users. Can we do a quick survey on user@ to see if we should support it? Jon. On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > bq. I'll update that chart > > Please do so. > > bq. should 1.0 support hadoop1 > > hadoop1 support should be kept. > This would allow users whose hbase deployment only occupies a portion of > the whole hadoop-1 cluster flexibility of upgrading hbase only. > > Cheers > > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 4:55 PM, Enis Söztutar <e...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > The matrix in http://hbase.apache.org/book/configuration.html shows that > > 0.98 DOES NOT support hadoop-1. > > > > I though we kept the support in 0.98. We have the build profile and > jenkins > > build, etc. Did we decide to drop support. Maybe I am misremembering. > > > > I'll update that chart otherwise. > > > > While we are at it, should 1.0 support hadoop1 or not. I think it would > be > > good to keep support for h1 in 1.0, and drop it in 2.0 line. But it would > > mean if we do not drop support, we have to keep the support through 1.1, > > 1.2, etc. > > > > Enis > > > -- // Jonathan Hsieh (shay) // HBase Tech Lead, Software Engineer, Cloudera // j...@cloudera.com // @jmhsieh
