accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Josh Elser <josh.el...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.5.1-RC3
Date Thu, 27 Mar 2014 19:28:58 GMT
Ack, sorry about that, Don.

We probably should have been more strict about that. It's tough to make 
a call about a public class that someone *might* be using.

On 3/27/14, 12:26 PM, Donald Miner wrote:
> Sorry to necro this thread, just wanted to throw my 2 cents in.
>
> We had some user code referencing this code directly and our application no
> longer works in 1.5.1. Just found out today when installing on 1.5.1. In
> retrospect, we should have been using .listSplits from TableOperatons, but
> instead we were using the RangeInputSplit method to get the splits for a
> table.
>
> I guess since we probably shouldn't have been doing that, I don't know if
> that's a case for this not being deleted without going to deprecated... but
> we did have a nasty surprise and a deprecation warning would have been nice.
>
> -d
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 11:33 PM, Adam Fuchs <afuchs@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I'll buy that the RangeInputSplit is probably not referenced directly in
>> user code. In this case it's probably not a big enough change to delay the
>> release.
>>
>> Adam
>>   On Feb 25, 2014 6:19 PM, "Christopher" <ctubbsii@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't know that this inner class used for M/R should be considered
>>> public API... nor do I imagine it will cause compatibility problems if
>>> users aren't referencing it in their code (which there's no reason to
>>> expect them to). I don't know if anybody is subclassing
>>> RangeInputSplit, but I'd suspect that it's an acceptable risk.
>>> Re-adding an inner class that subclasses the now external one may be a
>>> good workaround. I don't think this would require recompilation for
>>> runtime compatibility, but if it does, I think that's probably
>>> acceptable.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Christopher L Tubbs II
>>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 6:13 PM, Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>> I haven't checked what would happen. If you subclassed the
>>> RangeInputSplit,
>>>> it's rather likely that you'd need a recompilation.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2/25/14, 5:59 PM, John Vines wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Will it? Clients don't interact with that code at all directly.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Adam Fuchs <afuchs@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for running that checker, Keith. Should we not be worried
>> about
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> removal of InputFormatBase.RangeInputSplit? If I read correctly this
>>> will
>>>>>> break both binary (runtime) compatibility and code (compile-time)
>>>>>> compatibility. Can somebody make an argument for why this is not
a
>>>>>> problem
>>>>>> in a minor release with no previous deprecation?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there a quick way to fix this, like by subclassing the
>>>>>> org.apache.accumulo.core.client.mapred.RangeInputSplit in a
>>>>>> o.a.a.c.c.mapred.InputFormatBase.RangeInputSplit that we mark as
>>>>>> deprecated?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Adam
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Keith Turner <keith@deenlo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I ran a utility [1] to analyze API diffs [2] between 1.5.0 and
>>>>>>> 1.5.1-RC3.
>>>>>>> The configs I used are the two xml files in the parent [3] of
the
>>>>>>> report.
>>>>>>> I think the diff looks ok.  I used jars from 1.5.0 and 1.5.1-RC3
>>>>>>> bin.tar.gz.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [1] :
>>> http://ispras.linuxbase.org/index.php/Java_API_Compliance_Checker
>>>>>>> [2] :
>>>>>>>
>>> http://people.apache.org/~kturner/1.5.0_to_1.5.1-RC3/compat_report.html
>>>>>>> [3] : http://people.apache.org/~kturner/1.5.0_to_1.5.1-RC3/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 8:01 PM, Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> All,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please consider the following candidate as Apache Accumulo
1.5.1 --
>>> now
>>>>>>>> with 100% more CHANGES changes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Git artifacts: The staging repository was built from the
tag
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "1.5.1-rc3"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (3478f71a).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maven Staging Repo:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> orgapacheaccumulo-1002
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Source tarball: http://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
>>>>>>>> orgapacheaccumulo-1002/org/apache/accumulo/accumulo/1.5.
>>>>>>>> 1/accumulo-1.5.1-src.tar.gz
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Binary tarball: http://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
>>>>>>>> orgapacheaccumulo-1002/org/apache/accumulo/accumulo/1.5.
>>>>>>>> 1/accumulo-1.5.1-bin.tar.gz
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Changes since 1.5.1-RC2: ACCUMULO-2324, ACCUMULO-2361,
>> ACCUMULO-2369,
>>>>>>>> ACCUMULO-2378, ACCUMULO-2379, ACCUMULO-2380, ACCUMULO-2385,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ACCUMULO-2387,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ACCUMULO-2390
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Keys: http://www.apache.org/dist/accumulo/KEYS
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Final CHANGES:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=accumulo.git;a=
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> blob_plain;f=CHANGES;hb=3478f71ae888f8d73aaa93837319a6dbb4ba0c8a
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Testing: Unit test and auto-tests passed successfully. Ran
a short
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (~2hrs)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> CI on 6 node installation. Ran a brief (~1hr) CI test on
one
>> machine
>>>>>>
>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> the newly-released Hadoop-2.3.0. Built from src tarball,
and
>> verified
>>>>>>>> functionality with bin tarball.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Since there are very minor changes compared to 1.5.1-RC2,
this vote
>>>>>>
>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> be open for the next 72 hours (2/28/2014 0100 UTC).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Upon successful completion of this vote, a 1.5.1 gpg-signed
Git tag
>>>>>>
>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> be created from 3478f71a and the above staging repository
will be
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> promoted.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - Josh
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message