Hi!

Based on your replies, we do want to drop Tephra and Tephra support from
Phoenix, as no-one has volunteered to
fix the existing issues with it.

The next question is: How do we go about it ?

Code-wise, I think the following would work:


   1. Decide if we want to remove Tephra from the 5.1 and 4.16 branches or
   leave the code in as unsupported. (perhaps port the exclude-profile to
   4.x/4.16 from 5.x/5.16)
   2. Remove the exclude-tephra profile and make its behaviour the default.
   This takes care of the problematic dependencies.
   3. Remove references to the Tephra code from Phoenix. This is just a few
   files for the Phoenix runtime, but touches a LOT of tests.
   The test clean-up can be done in several steps, and is not super-urgent,
   we just don't want to carry around dead code.
   4. Remove All Tephra dependencies from the Phoenix project POMs.


Organizationally, it's much less clear to me:

   - Do we want a formal [VOTE] process, or is this [DISCUSS] thread enough
   ?
   - Do we notify the ASF project governance about this, or is this an
   internal Project issue ?
   - Public communication: [ANNOUNCE] the retirement on the dev and user
   lists ?
   - What happens to repo ? Move it to the Attic, or just leave it as is ?
   - What happens to the Tephra web site ?


regards
Istvan


On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 6:56 AM Istvan Toth <[email protected]> wrote:

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

Reply via email to