flink-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Question on providing CDH packages
Date Mon, 18 Aug 2014 17:43:09 GMT
I like Sean's idea very much: Creating the three packages (Hadoop 1.x,
Hadoop 2.x, Hadoop 2.0 with Yarn beta).

Any objections to creating a help site that says "For that vendor with this
version pick the following binary release" ?

Stephan



> >> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 5:58 PM, Henry Saputra <henry.saputra@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>> As for Flink, for now the additional CDH4 packaged binary is to
> >>> support "non-standard" Hadoop version that some customers may already
> >>> have.
> >>>
> >>> Based on "not a question of supporting a vendor but a Hadoop version
> >>> combo.", would the approach that Flink had done to help customers get
> >>> go and running quickly seemed fair and good idea?
> >>>
> >>> There had been a lot of discussion about ASF release artifacts and the
> >>> consistent answer is that ASF validate release of source code and not
> >>> binaries.
> >>> Release of binaries only used to help customers, which is the case
> >>> that Flink is doing with different Hadoop versions.
> >>>
> >>> - Henry
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Sean Owen <srowen@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> It's probably the same thing as with Spark. Spark doesn't actually
> >>>> work with YARN 'beta'-era releases, but works 'stable' and specially
> >>>> supports 'alpha'. CDH 4.{2-4} or so == YARN 'beta' (not non-standard,
> >>>> but, is probably the only distro of it you'll still run into in
> >>>> circulation). (And so it's kind of unhelpful that Spark has build
> >>>> instructions for CDH 4.2 + YARN.) Yeah, that's the thing you may
> >>>> handle as a corner case, or not handle and punt to the vendor. But
> >>>> even that -- if that's the same issue -- it's not a question of
> >>>> supporting a vendor but a Hadoop version combo.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Stephan Ewen <sewen@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>> I think the main problem was that CDH4 is a non standard build.
All
> others
> >>>>> we tried worked with  hadoop-1.2 and 2.2/2.4 builds.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> But I understand your points.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So, instead of creating those packages, we can make a guide "how
to
> pick
> >>>>> the right distribution", which points you to the hadoop-1.2 and
> 2.2/2.4
> >>>>> builds. For some cases, the guide will ask you to "compile-your-own".
> >>>>>
>

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