hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: proper pace for JIRA integration
Date Wed, 02 Nov 2011 07:34:16 GMT
Roman, thanks for including me in this discussion.

Indeed we have been testing extensively Hadoop-0.22 branch for the
last two months and beyond. Latest tests on a relatively large dev
cluster were going well. I reported this recently on general@hadoop.

HBase is the main focus for us and was one of the primary motivations
for choosing the branch. We also run Hive and Pig. Oozie is in the
pipeline. And it all is coming together nicely on top of .22 so far.

0.22 branch has a pretty long history. And has been tested at
different times by different groups of contributors. Stack et.al. were
the first to test the new implementation of append, thanks for that.
Now I see .22 as (the only ?) alternative (to the 0.20-append branch
variations) for HBase community to move forward with your development.
You have been asking for it afair.

Not sure when 0.23 will be ready/stable. We have seen a push to 0.21
then to 0.22 only to return back to the 0.20 series afterwards. I am
very glad the .23 effort went all the way to alpha release. As I
previously said it takes time to stabilize a new file systems, which
essentially what you have in .23. HDFS .22 has been around for more
than a year.

Roman just created first hadoop 0.22 assemble build. Check the
artifact out, see for yourself if it's DoA or AaR, or may be WfM.
There isn't much buzz about .22 because nobody is commercializing it.
It's the community work. And it's up to us (you) to make it happen.

Thanks,
--Konstantin

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <cos@apache.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 02:57PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
>> Roman,
>>
>> > Personally, I think it is extremely unfair to refer to .22 as
>> > DoA/ignored. Unless,═of course, such statement can be backed up with facts.
>>
>>
>> Yeah, DoA is harsh, when I meant more like "abandoned at release". Similar to 0.21.
>>
>> Well that is my question, really. Is it?
>>
>> We've heard that CDH4 is going to be start from something a lot closer to
>> 0.23 than 0.22, that Hortonworks is committed to 0.23. It seems 0.23 is the
>> future, and a RC may be happening as early as the end of this year, i.e. in
>> the next month or so.
>
> Hadoop contributions are coming from many places, so I don't see why this is
> so important to know how close a particular distro will be to this a that ASF
> release. Just the other day we had this long thread about contributions on
> Hadoop general@ - it might be interesting to re-read it.
>
>> Given recent history and the above described═commitments, I think there is
>> confusion about where/if 0.22 fits in. People will work on what inspires
>> them, but it seems the center of gravity has already moved beyond 0.22. Is
>> that a fair statement?
>
> Perhaps I am missing the point of this discussion, but according to Hadoop
> bylaws (available to anyone from https://hadoop.apache.org/bylaws.html):
> <quote>
> Product Release
>
> When a release of one of the project's products is ready, a vote is required
> to accept the release as an official release of the project.
>
> Lazy Majority of active PMC members
>
> </quote>
>
> What anything in this thread has to do with the quote above? Hadoop is
> released when it is ready and a release is official by the lazy majority.
>
> If downstream projects decide not to participate in support a release - well,
> this is sad, but this happens. And this means that a particular release will
> have a somewhat smaller stack available to our users.
>
> --
>  Take care,
> Konstantin (Cos) Boudnik
> 2CAC 8312 4870 D885 8616  6115 220F 6980 1F27 E622
>
> Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author, and do
> not necessarily represent the views of any company the author might be
> affiliated with at the moment of writing.
>
>> > The facts that I have are such that there will be a reasonably large
>> > deployment of═Hadoop 0.22 and HBase at EBay makes me believe that such
>> > a combination═should be of interest to HBase community.
>>
>>
>> Then I'm sure the eBay guys will have that interest. :-)
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>> ═ - Andy
>>
>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom
White)
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: Roman Shaposhnik <rvs@apache.org>
>> > To: dev@hbase.apache.org; Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>; Konstantin
Shvachko <shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
>> > Cc: Konstantin Boudnik <cos@apache.org>
>> > Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2011 2:16 PM
>> > Subject: Re: proper pace for JIRA integration
>> >
>> > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >>> ═There will be some deployment of .22 in big shops as far as I know.
>> >>
>> >>  Who are these "big shops"?
>> >
>> > EBay is a good example here I'm CCing Konstantin if you want to find
>> > out more details.
>> >
>> >>  AFAIK, compared to 0.20.x or 0.23, 0.22 has a number of regressions.
>> >
>> > I'm NOT sure I agree as far as 0.23 goes. The state of 0.23 is an
>> > early alpha. There's
>> > lots of work that still need to go into it before it graduates from an
>> > alpha stage. As such
>> > it is premature to talk about its quality. Now, the question of how
>> > long it takes .23
>> > to get to the same point of HDFS stability that .22 has -- is an open
>> > one. And I'd
>> > rather hear what Konstantin has to say about it.
>> >
>> >>  We need to assess how healthy 0.22 is.
>> >
>> > It is pretty healthy.═ If anybody is looking for a stable and up-to-date
>> > HDFS feature set -- it is the one I'd recommend taking a look at. It is
>> > assumed that MR is slower in .22 compared to 20.205, but frankly,
>> > I haven't seen the numbers yet, so I can't speculate.
>> >
>> > I've run a reasonable # of integration tests on that combo and I liked
>> > the results.
>> >
>> >>  How much time/attention should the HBase community pay to what might be
a
>> > DoA/ignored release?
>> >>  Or is that in fact the case (that it is DoA...)?
>> >
>> > Personally, I think it is extremely unfair to refer to .22 as
>> > DoA/ignored. Unless,
>> > of course, such statement can be backed up with facts.
>> >
>> > The facts that I have are such that there will be a reasonably large
>> > deployment of
>> > Hadoop 0.22 and HBase at EBay makes me believe that such a combination
>> > should be of interest to HBase community.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Roman.
>> >
>

Mime
View raw message