hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Enis Söztutar <enis....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Hadoop1 support in 0.98/1.0
Date Thu, 06 Mar 2014 01:16:06 GMT
Ok, the consensus seems to be to drop the support. I am all in favor of
less overhead, but was initially concerned about leaving some of the users
behind. If we are ok with that, lets pull the trigger.

Opened an issue for doc and tasks :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10690. Marked as critical for
0.99.

Enis


On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:

> bq. Maybe a new hadoop-compat module for 2.3.0 +?
>
> +1
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 3:39 AM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
> >
> > > But if we instead allow that our versioning currently is of-kilter --
> > Lars
> > > Hofhansl has argued off-line that 0.96.0 should have been 1.0
> > >
> >
> > Related, is Hadoop 2.3.0 more like 3.0 ?
> >
> > If, for example, we wanted to pin the HFiles of IN_MEMORY tables in
> HDFS's
> > centralized cache, as HDFS-4949 suggests, then how different will our
> view
> > of the HDFS interfaces be between 2.0.0 and 2.3.0+? Would the (I'm
> > guessing) necessary reflection be a perf issue? Maybe a new hadoop-compat
> > module for 2.3.0 +? Or drop support for Hadoop < 2.3.0 ?
> >
> > Point is - after we finish this discussion about Hadoop 1 or not (seems
> > not), then what to do about the different flavors of Hadoop 2.
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >
> >    - Andy
> >
> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> > (via Tom White)
> >
>

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