Thanks for the input. My concern with waiting on hbase 3.x is that it's already been pending for years, and comes with many big architectural changes. It will probably be a risky upgrade for users, and we will end up supporting hbase 2.x for years to come. This is probably a separate discussion, but I do wonder if we should target a specific major release cadence (yearly) so that we can move forward on deprecations, etc. Not every major release has to be huge (ideally isn't).
I agree we need to support hadoop-2.x for a while, but we can keep that support in hbase 2.5. This is how we've handled other hadoop versions according to our compatibility matrix. On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 1:53 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> wrote: > Better also send the email to user@hbase to see what our users think. > > I think we could change the default profile to hadoop3, but better > still have the hadoop2 profile as there could still be users on > hadoop-2.x. > > We will completely drop the hadoop2 support in hbase 3.x. > > Tak Lon (Stephen) Wu <tak...@apache.org> 于2023年12月6日周三 12:08写道： > > > > When Wei-Chiu and I were working on Ozone support via HBASE-27769, we > asked > > once when we could supporting hadoop-3.3+, the answer from Duo was HBase > > community supports the oldest version of hadoop > > https://hadoop.apache.org/releases.html (it was 2.10, 3.2.4 and 3.3.6). > > > > If this strategy remains and once 2.10 becomes EOL then HBase 2.6 should > be > > able to support 3.2.x and 3.3.x. At the same time, IMO 3.2.x is also an > > inactive release version, we can discuss if we should just change our > base > > of hadoop to 3.3.6 maybe starting from HBase 3.0+ > > > > -Stephen > > > > On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 7:51 AM Bryan Beaudreault < > bbeaudrea...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > On the hdfs dev list, they are talking about EOL Hadoop 2.10 (and thus > > > 2.x). They may cherry-pick back critical CVE fixes but not create any > more > > > releases. Of course, the decision is not final yet, but I wonder if we > > > should make a similar decision for supporting 2.10 in hbase. > > > > > > Given that 2.6 is soon, we could mark the end of support in that > release. > > > While it may seem like a major change, there is some precedent for > this. > > > Looking at our compatibility matrix, we have dropped support for Hadoop > > > releases in minor releases in the past. > > > > > > Dropping support for Hadoop 2 in HBase 2.6 would allow us to start > cleaning > > > up our POMs and some of the hacks we've had to do to reflect around > Hadoop > > > releases. It may also free up Jenkins capacity since we can turn off > some > > > builds for our primary branches. > > > >
