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: 1.7 release timeline
Date Wed, 08 Oct 2014 16:43:23 GMT
Sean Busbey wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Christopher<ctubbsii@apache.org>  wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Sean Busbey<busbey@cloudera.com>  wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:13 AM, Josh Elser<josh.elser@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>> Forgot one:
>>>>
>>>> *Drop Hadoop 1 support*
>>>>    - We would no longer care about maintaining Hadoop 1 APIs (get rid of
>>>> crappy reflection)
>>>>    - 2.2.0 (Hadoop 2 "stable") came out just under 1 year ago
>>>>    - Can be done for 1.7 or reconsidered for 2.0
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Do we already know if focusing on just Hadoop 2.2.0+ support will result
>> in
>>> any API impact?
>>>
>>>
>> I can't imagine it will impact our client API much, if any, but it'll
>> certainly help simplify and fix bugs in our use of Hadoop (when they
>> appear), and may result in fewer compatibility issues in MapReduce and
>> elsewhere (dynamic class loading, reflection workarounds). It should also
>> allow us to provide some guarantees in durability-related features (because
>> we'll know they exist). It should also help simplify documentation and
>> example configs, as well as reduce testing burdens.
>>
>> +1 to dropping Hadoop<2.2.0 in 1.7.0.
>>
>>
>
> If it doesn't impact API or usage I'd also be +1. If it ends up leaking out
> somewhere, I'd want to take the opportunity of 1.7.0 to flag deprecations
> so the transition can be made less severe (and remove in 2.0).
>
> Frankly, given the general expectations on durability we formed in 1.4 I'd
> say it's dangerous for people to be running 1.5+ on Hadoop 1.
>

Yeah, that's definitely what has to be weighed. Are we so aggressive to 
prevent users from even running on Hadoop 1 because it is inherently 
missing some of the sync mechanics needed to ensure no data loss 
regardless of redundant power?

We warn users when they don't have the necessary options set at the HDFS 
level to properly sync, but we don't keep them from running like that.

The more I think about it, I think I'd be more in favor of continuing to 
strongly encourage users to adopt Hadoop 2 and revisit dropping Hadoop 1 
for 2.0.0.

Mime
View raw message