accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From joshelser <...@git.apache.org>
Subject [GitHub] accumulo pull request #211: ACCUMULO-4480 - update user manual for 1.8
Date Sun, 05 Feb 2017 19:15:54 GMT
Github user joshelser commented on a diff in the pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/211#discussion_r99496915
  
    --- Diff: docs/src/main/asciidoc/chapters/administration.txt ---
    @@ -1182,17 +1182,19 @@ conditions that vary from the environments individually tested
in the various
     components. For example, Accumulo's use of HDFS includes many short block
     reads, which differs from the more common full file read used in most
     map/reduce applications. We have found that certain versions of Accumulo and
    -Hadoop will include stability bugs that greatly affect overall stability. In
    -our testing, Accumulo 1.6.2, Hadoop 2.6.0, and Zookeeper 3.4.6 resulted in a
    -stable VM clusters that did not fail a month of testing, while Accumulo 1.6.1,
    -Hadoop 2.5.1, and Zookeeper 3.4.5 had a mean time between failure of less than
    -a week under heavy ingest and query load. We expect that results will vary with
    -other configurations, and you should choose your software versions with that in
    -mind.
    -
    -
    -
    -
    -
    -
    -
    +Hadoop will include stability bugs that greatly affect overall stability.
    +Release notes typically contain information about versions used in
    +release testing.
    +
    +The following table shows the Hadoop, Zookeeper and
    +Thrift versions defined in the dependency section of the POM for building the
    +artifacts.  
    +
    +|================================================
    +|Accumulo |Hadoop |Zookeeper |Thrift
    +|1.7            |2.2.0     |3.4.6          |0.9.1
    +|1.8            |2.6.4     |3.4.6          |0.9.3
    +|================================================
    +
    --- End diff --
    
    > I just don't think the user manual is the appropriate place for it and think the
release notes are better
    
    I don't think it's particularly onerous to keep a simple table of "general compatibility"
in the user manual. I think a fair number of people would check there first. 
    
    > since they are tied to the characteristics of a specific release, and are far less
likely to be stale.
    
    I was basing my suggestion on the simplification of the table. Given that we're good about
not breaking compatibility across versions, I would think the user manual would only have
to be update on new major/minor versions.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastructure@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Mime
View raw message