accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Drew Farris <drew.far...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Should we support upgrading 1.4 -> 1.6 w/o going through 1.5?
Date Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:54:06 GMT
Mike,

So works just like upgrading from 1.5?

(After 1.4 shutdown, install 1.6 and restart?)

That sounds entirely reasonable.

Drew
On Jun 17, 2014 10:52 PM, "Mike Drob" <madrob@cloudera.com> wrote:

> We initially tried to set it up as a stand-alone utility but eventually
> gave up. In order to properly do the upgrade, you concurrently need to run
> whatever upgrade code concurrently with a tablet server hosting !METADATA
> and a tablet server that can replay WALs. We ended up duplicating a lot of
> logic already present in master before scrapping that plan. An alternative
> would have been to try to build on MAC, but that was also non-trivial to
> deploy, so we spliced the code into the existing upgrade path. How do you
> feel about that, Drew?
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Drew Farris <drew.farris@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I'm +1 for a utility that would allow us to go directly from 1.4 to 1.6.
> >
> > In terms of a general policy, I suggest we make this sort of decision on
> a
> > case by case basis. My unreasonably self-centered intuition suggests that
> > there may be some folks that want to go from 1.4 to 1.6 now due to a
> > relatively short 1.5 cycle. The need to jump multiple versions like might
> > not exist in the future.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 5:24 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > In an effort to get more users off of our now unsupported 1.4 release,
> > > should we support upgrading directly to 1.6 without going through a 1.5
> > > upgrade?
> > >
> > > More directly for those on user@: would you be more likely to upgrade
> > off
> > > of 1.4 if you could do so directly to 1.6?
> > >
> > > We have this working locally at Cloudera as a part of our CDH
> integration
> > > (we shipped 1.4 and we're planning to ship 1.6 next).
> > >
> > > We can get into implementation details on a jira if there's positive
> > > consensus, but the changes weren't very complicated. They're mostly
> > >
> > > * forward porting and consolidating some upgrade code
> > > * additions to the README for instructions
> > >
> > > Personally, I can see the both sides of the argument. On the plus side,
> > > anything to get more users off of 1.4 is a good thing. On the negative
> > > side, it means we have the 1.4 related upgrade code sitting in a
> > supported
> > > code branch longer.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sean
> > >
> >
>

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