Early report from my testing is it's going to break a lot of our code, so, perhaps a bridge too far now.
There's one reason I'm keen to move forward and it's not merely wanting to be on the bleeding edge, far from it. It's that 0.20.x does not work at all for my jobs. It runs into bugs that 0.20.1 does not appear to fix. So I'm kind of between a rock and hard place. My alternative is to go back to 0.19, which isn't the end of the world, but feels wrong. On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 8:25 AM, Robin Anil <robin.a...@gmail.com> wrote: > 0.22 is supposed to stabilize the new mapreduce package and remove > support for the old mapred package. So I am guessing the reason for > moving to 0.22 would go side by side with conversion of all our > existing mapred programs to mapreduce ones. And I believe I read > somewhere that this is the api that is going to used as they move > closer to hadoop 1.0 > > Robin > > > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I hate it when people on the commons list start whining about dropping >> support for java version -17 (joke, exaggeration warning), but here I am >> about to do it. >> >> I still run 0.19. A fair number of production clusters run 0.18.3. Many >> run 0.20 >> >> Hopefully when 1.0 comes out there will be a large move to that, but is it >> important yet to gauge where our largest audience is or even will be in, >> say, 6-12 months? >> >> I don't see a large benefit to moving to the latest just because it is the >> latest. I do see a benefit in moving to a future-proof API sooner rather >> than later, but is 0.22 realistic yet? >> >> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Sean Owen <sro...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> In my own client, I'm forging ahead to Hadoop 0.22 to see if it works >>> for me. If it's not too much change to update what we've got to 0.22 >>> (and the change is nonzero) and it works better for me, maybe we can >>> jump ahead to depend on it. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Ted Dunning, CTO >> DeepDyve >> >
