Thanks Alan. I created [1] to revert the non-passive changes from 1.x. Out of curiosity, what are your plans on merging the metastore branch to master? It seems like some coordination might be needed as some of the stuff in the hive hbase integration might need some massaging before that is done.
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-11559 On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Alan Gates <alanfga...@gmail.com> wrote: > On the hbase-metastore branch I've actually already moved to HBase 1.1. > I'm +1 for moving to 1.1 or 1.0 on master and staying at 0.98 on branch-1. > > Alan. > > kulkarni.swar...@gmail.com > August 12, 2015 at 8:43 > Hi all, > > It seems like our current dependency on HBase is a little fuzzy to say the > least. And with increased features relying on HBase(HBase integration, > HBase metastore etc), I think it would be worth giving a thought into how > we want to manage this dependency. I have also seen regressions[1][2] come > up recently due to this dependency not managed properly. Plus we need to > think about moving to HBase 1.0 soon as well to take advantage of the > backwards compatibility guarantees that HBase is providing. > > Our current HBase dependency is 0.98.9. Also with out current bifurcation > of branches to create a 1.x branch for stability and 2.x for bleeding edge, > I propose that we still keep the version to 0.98.9 on the 1.x branch and > move to HBase 1.0 in our 2.0 branch. In that way we can start taking > advantage of the latest updates to the HBase API in our 2.x branch and > still keep 1.x backwards compatible by avoiding a direct jump to HBase 1.0. > If we decide to go this route, we might need to revert back some of the > compatibility breaking changes[2] that sneaked into 1.x and move them over > to 2.x. > > Thoughts? > > Thanks, > Swarnim > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-10990 > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-8898 > > -- Swarnim
