bq. Maybe a new hadoop-compat module for 2.3.0 +? +1
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 3:39 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > > > But if we instead allow that our versioning currently is of-kilter -- > Lars > > Hofhansl has argued off-line that 0.96.0 should have been 1.0 > > > > Related, is Hadoop 2.3.0 more like 3.0 ? > > If, for example, we wanted to pin the HFiles of IN_MEMORY tables in HDFS's > centralized cache, as HDFS-4949 suggests, then how different will our view > of the HDFS interfaces be between 2.0.0 and 2.3.0+? Would the (I'm > guessing) necessary reflection be a perf issue? Maybe a new hadoop-compat > module for 2.3.0 +? Or drop support for Hadoop < 2.3.0 ? > > Point is - after we finish this discussion about Hadoop 1 or not (seems > not), then what to do about the different flavors of Hadoop 2. > > -- > Best regards, > > - Andy > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > (via Tom White) >
