+1.
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Ted Yu wrote:
> Now that hadoop-1 support is dropped from trunk,
> should HBase-TRUNK-on-Hadoop-1.1 build be disabled ?
>
> Cheers
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Enis Söztutar wrote:
>
> > Ok, the consensus seems to be to drop the support. I am all i
Now that hadoop-1 support is dropped from trunk,
should HBase-TRUNK-on-Hadoop-1.1 build be disabled ?
Cheers
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Enis Söztutar wrote:
> Ok, the consensus seems to be to drop the support. I am all in favor of
> less overhead, but was initially concerned about leaving
Thanks Biju.
I just sent out a heads-up announcement to user@.
Enis
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 6:00 PM, Biju G.S Nair wrote:
> If we haven't done already, as some body suggested earlier, it would be
> good to communicate this to the "user" mailing list as well. This will help
> anyone using HBase
If we haven't done already, as some body suggested earlier, it would be
good to communicate this to the "user" mailing list as well. This will help
anyone using HBase to plan to move to hadoop 2.
Thanks,
Biju
Tel#: 978-707-5066
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 8:16 PM, Enis Söztutar wrote:
> Ok, the c
Ok, the consensus seems to be to drop the support. I am all in favor of
less overhead, but was initially concerned about leaving some of the users
behind. If we are ok with that, lets pull the trigger.
Opened an issue for doc and tasks :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10690. Marked as
bq. Maybe a new hadoop-compat module for 2.3.0 +?
+1
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 3:39 AM, Stack wrote:
>
> > But if we instead allow that our versioning currently is of-kilter --
> Lars
> > Hofhansl has argued off-line that 0.96.0 should have
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 3:39 AM, Stack wrote:
> But if we instead allow that our versioning currently is of-kilter -- Lars
> Hofhansl has argued off-line that 0.96.0 should have been 1.0
>
Related, is Hadoop 2.3.0 more like 3.0 ?
If, for example, we wanted to pin the HFiles of IN_MEMORY tables i
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 7:43 AM, Stack wrote:
> Suggest leaving 0.98 as is shipping hadoop1 w/ an X in its hadoop1 support
> column that we will point people at should they ask questions about 0.98 on
> hadoop1 and then, in 1.0, purge hadoop1 (give it XXX in the hadoop grid).
>
+1
--
Best reg
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Enis Söztutar wrote:
...
>
> > Currently it is X. Do we want to go back up to NT?
> >
>
> I thought we did not explicitly decide to be that case (see my question in
> the first email in the thread). It is X possibly because we overlooked. We
> are still releasing
>
> Just to say that there is no NS, its X:
> http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hadoop
Yep.
> Currently it is X. Do we want to go back up to NT?
>
I thought we did not explicitly decide to be that case (see my question in
the first email in the thread). It is X possibly because we overlooked.
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Enis Söztutar wrote:
> In the matrix, we have NS = Not supported, and NT = Not tested.
>
>
Just to say that there is no NS, its X:
http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hadoop
> We can go 0.98 with hadoop 1 = NT.
Currently it is X. Do we want to go back up to NT
In the matrix, we have NS = Not supported, and NT = Not tested.
We can go 0.98 with hadoop 1 = NT. It seems that the consensus is to either
go with NS or NT for 1.0. I would like to completely commit and drop
support completely (not releasing the artifacts, possibly breaking the
build with hadoop1
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 11:51 AM, lars hofhansl wrote:
> I suppose the next question is: Do we intentionally drop it, or just not
> spend any additional time on it? (I.e. some new features might not work
> with Hadoop-1, etc).
> We could keep the -hadoop1 test suites running and fix failures, but
From: Stack
To: HBase Dev List ; lars hofhansl
Sent: Wednesday, March 5, 2014 11:39 AM
Subject: Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0
(Good discusssion)
Intellectually and if we go by the numbers, it makes 'sense' keeping
hadoop1 support in hbase1.
But if we instead allo
apache.org"
> Sent: Tuesday, March 4, 2014 5:09 PM
> Subject: Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 4:57 AM, Enis Söztutar wrote:
>
>
> > Hadoop-2.2 which is the first GA release of Hadoop, was released in
> October
> > 2013. It
ubject: Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 4:57 AM, Enis Söztutar wrote:
> Hadoop-2.2 which is the first GA release of Hadoop, was released in October
> 2013. It is not enough time passed to drop support I feel.
>
This makes a lot of sense for 0.94. That is our (u
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 4:57 AM, Enis Söztutar wrote:
> Hadoop-2.2 which is the first GA release of Hadoop, was released in October
> 2013. It is not enough time passed to drop support I feel.
>
This makes a lot of sense for 0.94. That is our (un)official (?)
long-term-stable release.
The 0.96 "
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Jonathan Hsieh wrote:
>
The major distros (CDH, HWX, Intel?) have been on hadoop2 so we'd b
e
keeping support for other users.
Yes, Intel's distro is Hadoop 2 based. There is a legacy product that uses
Hadoop 1 but, legacy.
> Can we do a quick survey on user@ to s
I would love to drop hadoop-1 support as soon as possible, but I don't
think we should do it in HBase-1.0.
Hadoop-2.2 which is the first GA release of Hadoop, was released in October
2013. It is not enough time passed to drop support I feel.
Enis
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 5:07 AM, Jonathan Hsieh
I'd be ok with saying hadoop2.0 as a min for hbase 1.0. If we can support
fewer versions we have fewer compat cases to maintain and can clean up code
sooner.
0.96 defaults to 1.x
0.98 defaults to 2.x
trunk defaults to 2.x
The major distros (CDH, HWX, Intel?) have been on hadoop2 so we'd be
keepi
bq. I'll update that chart
Please do so.
bq. should 1.0 support hadoop1
hadoop1 support should be kept.
This would allow users whose hbase deployment only occupies a portion of
the whole hadoop-1 cluster flexibility of upgrading hbase only.
Cheers
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 4:55 PM, Enis Söztuta
Hi,
The matrix in http://hbase.apache.org/book/configuration.html shows that
0.98 DOES NOT support hadoop-1.
I though we kept the support in 0.98. We have the build profile and jenkins
build, etc. Did we decide to drop support. Maybe I am misremembering.
I'll update that chart otherwise.
While
22 matches
Mail list logo