I'd say we update to HBase-2.0.3 as that is the latest, known-good
version. Of course, I thought the same of that for 2.0.5 up until a week
or two ago :)
Let's get a branch made and check it out.
On 5/13/19 9:00 AM, Jaanai Zhang wrote:
So we can keep the current HBase version in 5.0.1?
So we can keep the current HBase version in 5.0.1?
Jaanai Zhang
Best regards!
Jaanai Zhang 于2019年5月13日周一 下午8:22写道：
> +1
>
>
>Jaanai Zhang
>Best regards!
>
>
>
> Thomas D'Silva 于2019年5月10日周五
+1
Jaanai Zhang
Best regards!
Thomas D'Silva 于2019年5月10日周五 下午1:25写道：
> +1 to this approach.
>
> On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 9:22 AM Josh Elser wrote:
>
> > After working on trying to make Phoenix compatible with >=HBase 2.0.4,
> > I'm wondering if
+1 to this approach.
On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 9:22 AM Josh Elser wrote:
> After working on trying to make Phoenix compatible with >=HBase 2.0.4,
> I'm wondering if it would just be good to get 5.0.1 out the door and try
> to fix HBase compat in a 5.1.0, acknowledging that we don't work with
> the
After working on trying to make Phoenix compatible with >=HBase 2.0.4,
I'm wondering if it would just be good to get 5.0.1 out the door and try
to fix HBase compat in a 5.1.0, acknowledging that we don't work with
the newer 2.0.x HBase versions (really, anything that contains
HBASE-21401[1]).
I think it would be better to figure out if there is anything currently
on master that _shouldn't_ be included in a 5.0.1. My guess would be
"no". It feels like branching for the sake of branching to keep 5.0.1
and 5.1.0 distinct.
On 5/1/19 12:38 AM, Thomas D'Silva wrote:> Should we use 2.0.5
Hi,
I'd like to include the cdh version within the release but I have a few IT
failing in branch 5.x-cdh6 . Any help would be really appreciated.
Is 'MutableIndexSplitForwardScanIT' failing for you guys in 'master' branch?
Thanks!
On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 at 15:39, Josh Elser wrote:
> Let's
Let's leave the other thread for the board report, please. I've changed
the subject as such.
Thanks for volunteering to be RM.
I'm of the opinion that we should just update to the latest HBase 2.0.x
line. The compatibility assertions from HBase should make this a no-op
for us to change
