1.2 is good, but are we aware of anything that precludes 1.1? 0.98? On disk compatibility (HFile, WAL, AMv2) should be the limiting factor here, right? Wire protocols have been compatible all the while...
On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 5:56 PM Zach York <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 for having the minimum (supported) hbase1 version be 1.2.x. > > On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Over in the adjacent "[DISCUSS] hbase-2.0.0 compatibility expectations" > > thread, we chatted some on what would be the minimum hbase-1.x version > from > > which you can upgrade to hbase-2. > > > > The last statement made on this topic by Sean was that only upgrades from > > 1.2.x, our current stable offering, or later should be supported. > > > > There was no dissent. > > > > We all good w/ this? Speak up if you disagree else 1.2.x becomes the > > 'official' minimum. > > > > NOTES: > > > > + We need to agree on a minimum so we know what migrations to test. > > + It might be possible to upgrade from versions before 1.2.x but we (or > at > > least I -- smile) won't have tried it or run verifications to ensure all > > made it over (let us know if you successfully migrate from a baseline > that > > precedes 1.2). > > + Hopefully we can avoid requiring Users move to the latest on the 1.2 > > branch. This shouldn't be necessary doing a stop/start upgrade. It might > be > > needed doing a rolling upgrade. Lets see. > > > > Thanks, > > St.Ack > > >
