hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stack <st...@duboce.net>
Subject Re: HBase trunk and Hadoop 0.21
Date Fri, 19 Feb 2010 19:14:22 GMT
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jdcryans@apache.org> wrote:
> Sounds good. For the sake of getting "nice" version numbers, what
> about we do a bug fix-only release for 0.20.4 and then in 0.20.5 we
> break RPC compatibility and add new features.
> Also I we will need to backport cluster replication to 0.20.
Above sounds good.  Lets wrap up a 0.20.4 soon.  Lets see if we can
get another one or two "performance" tweeks in there and put it up on
hadoop 0.20.2 too since it looks imminent.


> J-D
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>> It looks like hbase 0.20.x will be around for longer than we were
>> planning on.  Lets adapt.
>> We should have a 0.20.4 soon that includes hbase-2180 and, IMO, it
>> would include a one-time breakage of the RPC interface requiring a
>> cluster shutdown to upgrade so we can get in "HBASE-2219  stop using
>> code mapping for method names in the RPC".  We'd do this to set
>> ourselves up for being more elastic going forward.  With it in place,
>> we can add in interface changes -- e.g. add something like the
>> multiput, multiget, etc. -- without breaking ability to do a rolling
>> restart as we move through 0.20.5, 0.20.6 etc.  Then we should do
>> aggressive roll out of new hbase 0.20.x versions, etc. with fixes that
>> in particular can accomodate the evolving state of sync/flush on
>> hadoop 0.20 branch (hdfs-200+, etc.).
>> In hbase 0.21 we keep on with replication and master rewrite.  We also
>> take on the notion that when hbase TRUNK is baked, we'll make it run
>> on hadoop 0.20/0.21/0.22.
>> I'm against an hbase 1.0.0 just now.
>> St.Ack
>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans
>> <jdcryans@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Hi devs,
>>> Yesterday Stack, Ryan, Todd (from cloudera) and me had a meeting with the FB
>>> team about the course of action we should take with regard to Hadoop 0.21.
>>> Since Y! doesn't seem committed to release it anytime soon (or even use it),
>>> most users will probably stick with Hadoop 0.20.
>>> What it means for us is no HDFS-265 until months and this is not a situation
>>> our users should/will tolerate. Dhruba agreed to work on HDFS-200 (and some
>>> others) to make sure we can have an equivalent support for sync (at least
>>> from the HBase point of view). This work is targeted at Hadoop 0.20 although
>>> it won't probably ever be in an Apache release.
>>> This means that the current HBase trunk should ideally support both
>>> 0.20+HDFS-200 and 0.21 at the same time. I opened HBASE-2233 for that. Todd
>>> was mentioning that if HDFS-200 isn't making the rest of Hadoop unstable,
>>> they could even package it in some sort of release of theirs and make our
>>> users' life easier. Could be a win-win.
>>> Should we still name the next major HBase release as 0.21? If it becomes
>>> common for HBase to support multiple Hadoop releases, should we still follow
>>> their version number? Could it be time for HBase 1.0?
>>> Let's hear everyone's opinion.
>>> J-D

View raw message