accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Keith Turner <ke...@deenlo.com>
Subject Re: [1/2] git commit: ACCUMULO-1833 Rework the getBatchWriter method on MTBW to remove zookeeper lock contention and get better concurrent throughput.
Date Fri, 08 Nov 2013 18:27:10 GMT
On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey+ml@clouderagovt.com>wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Keith Turner <keith@deenlo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Sean Busbey <busbey+ml@clouderagovt.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > I believe that's a level of compatibility we haven't had in the past.
> Are
> > > we sure we want to restrict ourselves like that?
> > >
> >
> > I think its a good goal that causes less confusion over time.  It
> certainly
> > does not have to be a hard and fast rule.  I think API changes in bug fix
> > release should have a strong justification.
> >
> >
>
> I agree in principle, however when we only have major and bugfix versions
> something like this introduces another pressure to churn the major version
> number.
>
> I'm not generally one to worry about running out of numbers, but I do worry
> about giving our users versioning fatigue. I also worry about the
> maintenance overhead for devs; we still don't have any lifecycle plan for
> major versions.
>
> All-in-all, I think this comes back to the deeper discussion about what we
> intend version number changes in Accumulo to signal. This general topic has
> come up a few times, and we should probably get to a point where we have it
> resolved.
>
> Is now a good time for that discussion? Does it need to wait until
> post-1.6.0?
>

Discussing after 1.6.0 would be good for me.


>
>
> --
> Sean
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message