Thanks Cheolsoo! My opinion is provide backward compatibility for PigStats
is a must, otherwise it could be a havoc. I imagine PigStats is widely used
by Pig users via PigRunner and PPNL interface. People use PigStats to
collect MR job details of the Pig job. Though PigStats is marked for
To be specific, we will need to revert all the following commits in order:
commit ad1b87d4ba073680ad0a7fc8c76baeb8b611c982
Author: Cheolsoo Park cheol...@apache.org
Date: Fri Sep 20 22:47:29 2013 +
PIG-3471: Add a base abstract class for ExecutionEngine (cheolsoo)
git-svn-id:
What about the option of leaving all of the MR specific logic in the
original classes but marking those methods as deprecated and telling people
to switch to using a MR specific object that extends the original class.
So for example:
JobStats - Reverted to being as it was before PIG-3419 but
Hi Jeremy,
What you're saying makes sense, and patch is welcome. ;-) But complexity
comes from that there are many classes that are associated with one
another, and it seems necessary to bring back all of them together in order
to provide full backward compatibility.
After spending many hours on
I don't mind trying to put together a patch for what I described above if
there's a general consensus on the strategy we should take (or at least no
big objections).
I think the multiple jars solution could be troublesome, but maybe after
seeing what a patch looks like for a single jar solution
Thanks Jeremy. That sounds absolutely fine. The only reservation is I don't
want to delay 0.12.0 release. We need to either do it quickly, or rollback
PIG-3419 and then do it on 0.13.
Thanks,
Daniel
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Jeremy Karn jk...@mortardata.com wrote:
I don't mind trying
Ok, sounds good. I'll take a shot at it tonight.
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Daniel Dai da...@hortonworks.com wrote:
Thanks Jeremy. That sounds absolutely fine. The only reservation is I don't
want to delay 0.12.0 release. We need to either do it quickly, or rollback
PIG-3419 and then
I myself am in favor of the two branch approach. It won't block the 0.12
release and it is easier to maintain.
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 12:56 PM, Jeremy Karn jk...@mortardata.com wrote:
Ok, sounds good. I'll take a shot at it tonight.
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Daniel Dai
We should separate out two separate concerns. If I understand correctly we
don't need any of these changes in 0.12. So we should revert these patches
from the 12 branch so that we can get it released quickly in a backwards
compatible way.
We will then have plenty of time to discuss the
+1. I was already asking for keeping the new API changes only in Tez branch
till it evolves and is finalized, so I have no objections to reverting it.
Regards,
Rohini
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Alan Gates ga...@hortonworks.com wrote:
We should separate out two separate concerns. If I
I am waiting for +1 from Twitter.
Like Alan suggested, let's revert PIG-3419 et al in 0.12 first. Then, we
can decide what to do in trunk. I volunteer to do grunt work since I am the
one who committed them.
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Rohini Palaniswamy rohini.adi...@gmail.com
wrote:
+1 on reverting PIG-3419 and applying it to tez branch if its blocking
pig-0.12 release.
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Cheolsoo Park piaozhe...@gmail.com wrote:
I am waiting for +1 from Twitter.
Like Alan suggested, let's revert PIG-3419 et al in 0.12 first. Then, we
can decide what to do
Thanks Aniket.
I'll revert the aforementioned commits in 0.12 tonight. I will leave them
in trunk until we decide what to do.
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Aniket Mokashi aniket...@gmail.com wrote:
+1 on reverting PIG-3419 and applying it to tez branch if its blocking
pig-0.12 release.
OK, I reverted PIG-3471, 3457, 3464, and 3419 in 0.12:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=1527867
You can also view each revert here:
https://github.com/piaozhexiu/apache-pig/commits/revert
I had to manually resolve some conflicts particularly due to PIG-3430. I
believe I didn't
Thanks a lot!
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Cheolsoo Park piaozhe...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, I reverted PIG-3471, 3457, 3464, and 3419 in 0.12:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=1527867
You can also view each revert here:
15 matches
Mail list logo
