Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-20 Thread Enis Söztutar
+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

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-19 Thread Ted Yu
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

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-06 Thread Enis Söztutar
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

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-05 Thread Biju G.S Nair
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

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-05 Thread Enis Söztutar
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

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-05 Thread Ted Yu
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

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-05 Thread Andrew Purtell
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

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-05 Thread Andrew Purtell
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

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-05 Thread Stack
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

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-05 Thread Enis Söztutar
> > 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.

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-05 Thread Stack
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

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-05 Thread Enis Söztutar
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

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-05 Thread Stack
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

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-05 Thread lars hofhansl
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

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-05 Thread Stack
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

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-04 Thread lars hofhansl
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

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-04 Thread Andrew Purtell
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 "

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-04 Thread Andrew Purtell
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

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-04 Thread Enis Söztutar
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

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-03-04 Thread 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

Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-02-28 Thread Ted Yu
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

Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0

2014-02-28 Thread Enis Söztutar
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