Please keep this thread focused on Tephra. Lars gives an overview of the difference in the comments of https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-6615 . If you want to discuss Omid further, open a new thread for that.
On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 3:49 AM luoc <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi there, please forgive my silliness, could you share the difference > between Omid and Tephra? > > > Just last year, I tried to use the OMID to across the Phoenix cluster, and > found that the TSO component of Omid does not support the HA. > > > > > ------------------ Original ------------------ > From: "Istvan Toth";<[email protected]>; > Send time: Wednesday, Jan 5, 2022 3:22 PM > To: "dev"<[email protected]>; > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] The future of Tephra > > > > I was about 80% percent done with the rebase to the latest Twill version > when its retirement was announced :) > Took me about a week. > > On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 6:34 PM Andrew Purtell <[email protected] > > > wrote: > > > As someone who investigated an internal mitigation for pulling up > Tephra > > to a newer Guava version, and decided it was too much work after > hitting > > some Twill issues in the process, I feel your pain directly and > > enthusiastically +1 removal. > > > > > On Jan 4, 2022, at 7:46 AM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > Agreed. As the person who did the work of pulling Tephra in > from the > > incubator, I think we were already then in the state of "does someone > > actually care about Tephra?". > > > > > > Without digging into the archives, I think someone was > interested, but > > it seems like this never manifested. > > > > > > +1 to remove Tephra integration from Phoenix. > > > > > >> On 1/3/22 1:38 PM, Viraj Jasani wrote: > > >> +1 (unless any volunteer comes forward to support Tephra > going forward) > > >>> On Mon, 3 Jan 2022 at 4:34 PM, Istvan Toth < > [email protected]> wrote: > > >>> Hi! > > >>> > > >>> As recently noticed by Lars, Tephra hasn't been working > in Phoenix > > since > > >>> 5.1/4.16 due to a bug. > > >>> > > >>> The fact that this went unnoticed for a year, and the > fact that > > generally > > >>> there seems to be minimal interest in Tephra suggests > that we should > > >>> re-visit the decision to maintain Tephra within the > Phoenix project. > > >>> > > >>> The last two commits that were not aimed at fighting > bit-rot, but were > > real > > >>> fixes were committed in Jun 2019 by Lars. In the last > two and a half > > years, > > >>> all we did was try to keep ahead of bit-rot, so that > Tephra keeps up > > with > > >>> new HBase and maven releases, and the changes in the CI > infra. > > >>> > > >>> Tephra uses an old Guava version, and depends heavily on > the retired > > Apache > > >>> Twill project. > > >>> This is a major tech debt, and an adoption blocker (CVEs > in direct > > Tephra > > >>> dependencies), which is also carried over into the > Phoenix > > dependencies and > > >>> shaded artifacts that we should rectify. > > >>> PHOENIX-6064 < > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-6064> , > > which > > >>> broke Tephra support, itself is a workaround so that we > can avoid > > shipping > > >>> Tephra, and its problematic dependencies. > > >>> > > >>> Ripping out Twill, and updating Guava and other > dependencies is a > > >>> non-trivial amount of work (I estimate 1-4 weeks, > depending on > > familiarity > > >>> with Tephra/Twill/Guava). > > >>> > > >>> At the moment, no-one seems to be interested enough in > Tephra to bring > > its > > >>> tech debt to acceptable levels, and in fact no-one seems > to be using it > > >>> with any recent Phoenix release (as it doesn't work in > them). > > >>> > > >>> I suggest that you also check out the discussion between > Lars and me in > > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-6615 for > some more > > details > > >>> and background. > > >>> > > >>> Based on the above, I propose retiring Tephra, and > removing Tephra > > support > > >>> from Phoenix 5.2 / 4.17, unless someone steps up to > solve the above > > issues > > >>> and maintain Tephra. > > >>> > > >>> Note that this would not mean dropping transaction > support from > > Phoenix, as > > >>> Omid support is in much better shape, and is actively > used. > > >>> > > >>> Please share your thoughts on the issue, if you are > using Tephra > > and/or can > > >>> commit to solving the issues above, or if you agree on > its removal, or > > any > > >>> other suggestions or objections. > > >>> > > >>> regards > > >>> Istvan > > >>> > > > > > -- > *István Tóth* | Staff Software Engineer > [email protected] <https://www.cloudera.com> > [image: Cloudera] <https://www.cloudera.com/> > [image: Cloudera on Twitter] <https://twitter.com/cloudera> [image: > Cloudera on Facebook] <https://www.facebook.com/cloudera> [image: > Cloudera > on LinkedIn] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/cloudera> > <https://www.cloudera.com/> > ------------------------------
