accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Htrace4, Hadoop 2.7
Date Fri, 08 Jul 2016 20:40:10 GMT
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 11:20 AM Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Christopher <ctubbsii@apache.org> wrote:
> > Ah, my mistake. I thought it was 2.7 and later. Well, then I guess the
> > question is whether we should bump to 2.8, then. I'm not a fan of the
> shim
> > layer. I'd rather provide support for downstream packagers trying to
> > backport for HTrace3, if anybody ends up requiring that, than provide a
> > shim to preserve use of the older HTrace.
> >
>
> Hadoop 2.8 isn't out yet, though it now has no blockers listed in
> JIRA. We could ask the Hadoop community what their current thoughts
> are on timing. Hadoop 3 has a release manager that has said an initial
> alpha release is "close", so maybe we'd be dealing with that first.
>
>
Oh, I see. Well, in that case, I think we should stick with whatever ships
with 2.7, and if it's not the same as 2.6, we should bump our dependency on
Hadoop to 2.7 to stay in sync.


>
> > On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 5:30 PM Billie Rinaldi <billie.rinaldi@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I'm in favor of bumping our Hadoop version to 2.7. We are already on the
> >> same htrace version as Hadoop 2.7. (The discussion in ACCUMULO-4171 is
> >> relevant to Hadoop 2.8 and later.)
> >>
> >> Billie
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Christopher <ctubbsii@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Thinking about https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4171,
> I'm
> >> of
> >> > the opinion that we should probably bump our Hadoop version to 2.7 and
> >> > HTrace version to what Hadoop is using, to keep them in sync.
> >> >
> >> > Does anybody disagree?
> >> >
> >>
>
> Would we be bumping the Hadoop version while incrementing our minor
> version number or our major version number?
>
>
>
Minor only, because it's not a breaking change necessarily, and it's
unrelated to API. It'd still be reasonable for somebody to patch the 1.x
version to use the earlier Hadoop/HTrace versions easily.

Specifically, I was thinking for 1.8.0. Since H2.8 isn't out yet, that'd
mean either no change in 1.8.0, or a change to make it sync up with H2.7.

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