hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stack <st...@duboce.net>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] hbase-2.0.0 compatibility expectations
Date Mon, 14 Aug 2017 18:05:43 GMT
On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Esteban Gutierrez <esteban@cloudera.com>
wrote:

> Should we add additional details around replication as well? for instance,
> shall we consider a hbase-1.x cluster as a client for a hbase-2.x cluster?
>
>
Yes. I'd say this should be a blocker Esteban. Filed HBASE-18596.
Thanks,
S





> Thanks for starting this discussion Stack,
>
> esteban.
>
> --
> Cloudera, Inc.
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 1:05 AM, stack <saint.ack@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Zach for clarification. Let me work up a list and then come back
> to
> > this thread.  Jira needs an edit pass to.
> >
> > S
> >
> > On Aug 3, 2017 23:54, "Zach York" <zyork.contribution@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > This kinda helps, but these seem more like expectations. I was going more
> > for things like HFile format changed, meta table structure changed,
> > coprocessor implementations changed (these are just examples, I don't
> know
> > if any of these actually changed).
> >
> > More technical differences between branch-1 and branch-2 which then can
> > help us get the right expectations for compatibility.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 5:25 PM, Zach York <
> zyork.contribution@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Do we know what the major pain points for migration are? Can we
> discuss
> > > > that/get a list going?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Here's a few in outline:
> > >
> > > + There is issue of formats, of hbase-2.x being able to read hbase-1.x
> > data
> > > whether from HDFS or ZooKeeper or off the wire.
> > > + An hbase-1.x client should be able to Get/Put and Scan an hbase-2.x
> > > cluster; no holes in the API or unintelligible serializations.
> > > + There is then the little dance that has us rolling restart from an
> > > hbase-1.x cluster to hbase-2.x; i.e. upgrade master first and then it
> > will
> > > assign regions to the new hbase-2.x regionservers as they come on line.
> > > TBD.
> > >
> > > Is this what you mean sir?
> > >
> > > S
> > >
> > >
> > > > I think without that knowledge it is hard (for me at least :) ) to
> > > > determine where we should set our sights in terms of migration.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Zach
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > What are our expectations regards compatibility between hbase1 and
> > > > hbase2?
> > > > >
> > > > > Lets have a chat about it. Here are some goal posts.
> > > > >
> > > > > + You have to upgrade to hbase-1.x before you can migrate to
> hbase-2.
> > > No
> > > > > migration from < hbase-1 (Is this too onerous? Should we support
> 0.98
> > > =>
> > > > > 2.0?).
> > > > > + You do NOT have to upgrade to the latest release of hbase1 to
> > migrate
> > > > to
> > > > > hbase2; being up on hbase-1.0.0+ will be sufficient.
> > > > > + You'll have to update your hbase1 coprocessors to deploy them on
> > > > hbase2.
> > > > > A bunch of CP API has/will change by the time hbase2 comes out;
> e.g.
> > > > > watching for region split on RegionServer no longer makes sense
> given
> > > > > Master runs all splits now.
> > > > > + An hbase1 client can run against an hbase2 cluster but it will
> only
> > > be
> > > > > able to do DML (Get/Put/Scan, etc.). We do not allow being able to
> do
> > > > admin
> > > > > ops using an hbase1 Admin client against an hbase2 cluster. We have
> > > some
> > > > > egregious API violations in branch-1; e.g. we have protobuf in our
> > API
> > > > (See
> > > > > HBASE-15607). The notion is that we can't afford a deprecation
> cycle
> > > > > purging this stuff from our Admin API.
> > > > >
> > > > > What you all think?
> > > > >
> > > > > St.Ack
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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