hive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bill Busch <Bill.Bu...@perficient.com>
Subject RE: Apache Hive 1.0 ?
Date Thu, 04 Dec 2014 00:52:14 GMT
Hi,

From more of an end user perspective, if we were to move to a 1.0 release then it should be
a complete offering.  Have we defined what this would include?   What is our definition of
complete documentation?  
In general, I would expect a 1.0 release to include:

1. A stable code base that is reasonable current (eg. Implemented on YARN).
2. A complete set of functionality that would enable a company to use Hive as an analytical
/BI database.    This would include a rather complete implementation of SQL (minus transaction
processing).
3. A reliable install program/kit.
4. Documentation including:
	a. API specification
	b. User guide - to include deviations from ANSI standard SQL and any extensions
	c.  Administration guidance including how to install, configure and administer Hive.
	d.  Release Notes clearly detailing release inclusions and known issues (open Jiras), and
capability with other Apache projects.  



Thank You,
Follow me on   @BigData73
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Busch | SSA | Enterprise Information Solutions CWP
m: 704.806.2485 |  NASDAQ: PRFT  |  Perficient.com




BI/DW | Advanced Analytics | Big Data |  ECI|  EPM | MDM

-----Original Message-----
From: Enis Söztutar [mailto:enis@apache.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2014 5:27 PM
To: dev@hive.apache.org
Subject: Re: Apache Hive 1.0 ?

Hi,

I am the RM for HBase-1.0 coming in a a couple of weeks (hopefully). I think both HBase and
Hive are past due for doing 1.0 releases. So I am a major +1 for Hive-1.0 (non-binding of
course).

The important thing for calling something 1.0 I think is the focus on user level API and compatibility
issues. But still, you should think about future releases and for example when you can do
a 1.x release versus 2.x release. We have started thinking about that some time ago, and we
are adopting a semantic versioning proposal (
https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201411.mbox/%3C53115341.900549.1416100552603.JavaMail.yahoo@jws106116.mail.bf1.yahoo.com%3E)
for this exact same reason. In Hive, things may be a bit different than HBase or Hadoop (since
the major interface is SQL) but still I think you should consider the implications for all
the APIs that Hive surfaces and for deployment, etc for a 1.0 discussion.

For HBase, the official "theme" of the 1.0 release is (from my RC mail):
> The theme of (eventual) 1.0 release is to become a stable base for 
> future 1.x series of releases. 1.0 release will aim to achieve at 
> least the same level of stability of 0.98 releases without introducing 
> too many new features.

What I am getting at is that, in HBase, we opted for not introducing a lot of major features
and branched relatively early to give more time to stabilize the branch. In the end what you
want to deliver and market as 1.0 should be relatively stable in my opinion. Just my 2 cents
from an outsider perspective.

Enis

On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 11:07 PM, Lefty Leverenz <leftyleverenz@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Would everyone just laugh if I suggested that a 1.0 release ought to 
> include complete documentation?
>
>
> -- Lefty
>
> On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Thejas Nair <thejas@hortonworks.com>
> wrote:
>
> > The reasons for confusion in the Hadoop case were different. There 
> > were many branches, and new features were added in minor version 
> > releases, eg kerberos security was not there in "0.20.2", but it was 
> > added in "0.20.20x".  Then you had other versions like "0.21", but 
> > the older "0.20.20x" version was the one that was converted as 1.x.
> >
> > This confusion isn't there in hive. In case of hive, every "0.x"
> > release has been adding new features, and releases have been 
> > sequential. "0.x.y" releases have been maintenance releases. 1.0 is 
> > a sequential release after 0.14, and it is a newer release than 
> > 0.14. I agree that the version in Hadoop created lot of confusion, 
> > but I don't see this as being the same. We could check in the user 
> > mailing list to see if they are going to be HUGELY confused by this.
> >
> > If it makes things better, we can also include the change to delete
> > HiveServer1 in the new release. That is a safer change, which was 
> > mainly just deleting that old code. That would be a major difference 
> > from 0.14. (The docs have already been updated to say that 0.14 does 
> > not support 0.20, so I don't think we need that in 1.0).
> >
> > Looks like we have agreement that 1.0 versioning scheme is a great 
> > thing for hive. I don't think there is a strong reason to delay a 
> > 1.0 release by several months to the detriment of hive.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 8:05 PM, Xuefu Zhang <xzhang@cloudera.com> wrote:
> > > Major release means more functionality, while minor releases 
> > > provides stability. Therefore, I'd think, 1.0, as a major release, 
> > > should bring
> in
> > > something new to the user. If it's desirable to provide more 
> > > stable release, then 0.14.1, 0.14.2, and so on are the right ones. 
> > > In my
> > opinion,
> > > we should avoid doing anti-pattern by introducing major release 
> > > like a maintenance release and creating confusions among users.
> > >
> > > In one word, major release is NOT equal to major confusion.
> > >
> > > --Xuefu
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Sergey Shelukhin <
> sergey@hortonworks.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I think it's better to do 1.0 release off a maintenance release, 
> > >> since
> > that
> > >> is more stable. Trunk is moving fast.
> > >> HBase uses odd release numbers for this purpose, where 0.95, 97, 
> > >> 99
> etc.
> > >> are dev releases and 0.96, 0.98, 1.0 etc. are public; that works 
> > >> well
> > for
> > >> baking, but since we don't have that seems like 14.0 would be a 
> > >> good
> > place
> > >> to bake. 15.0 with bunch of new bugs that we are busy introducing 
> > >> may
> > not
> > >> be as good for 1.0 IMHO...
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 7:21 PM, Brock Noland <brock@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hi Thejas,
> > >> >
> > >> > Thank you very much for your proposal!
> > >> >
> > >> > Hadoop did something similar renaming branches to branch-1 and 
> > >> > branch-2. At the time, although I was very much in favor of the 
> > >> > new release numbers, I thought it could have been handled better.
> Renaming
> > >> > release branches ended up being very confusing for users and I 
> > >> > had a ton of conversations with users about how releases were related.
> > >> >
> > >> > In this situation, I feel the situation is similar, we'll 
> > >> > release
> 1.0
> > >> > which is really just the second maintainence release of the 
> > >> > 0.14 branch. Thus it's 1.0 but really it's just 0.14 + some 
> > >> > fixes. I feel this will again be confusing for users. For this 
> > >> > important change, I think we should use a new release vehicle.
> > >> >
> > >> > Thus, I'd suggest we do the rename in trunk, soon, and then the 
> > >> > next release of Hive will be 1.0.
> > >> >
> > >> > Cheers,
> > >> > Brock
> > >> >
> > >> > On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Thejas Nair <
> thejas@hortonworks.com>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > > Apache Hive is the de facto SQL query engine in the hadoop
> > ecosystem.
> > >> > > I believe it is also the most widely used one as well. Hive 
> > >> > > is
> used
> > in
> > >> > > production in large number of enterprises.
> > >> > > However, this 0.x.y versioning that we have been using for 
> > >> > > Hive obscures this status of Hive.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > I propose creating a 1.0 release out of the 0.14 branch of Hive.
> We
> > >> > > already have some bug fixes for 0.14 release that have been 
> > >> > > added
> to
> > >> > > the branch and a maintenance release is due. Having it out of

> > >> > > this maintenance branch would create a better first 1.0 
> > >> > > version, and we would be able to do it soon. What would have

> > >> > > been 0.15 version
> would
> > >> > > then become 1.1 version .
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Thoughts ?
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Thanks,
> > >> > > Thejas
> > >> > >
> > >> > > --
> > >> > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > >> > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the 
> > >> > > individual or
> > >> entity
> > >> > to
> > >> > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > confidential,
> > >> > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. 
> > >> > > If the
> > >> reader
> > >> > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > notified
> > >> > that
> > >> > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, 
> > >> > > disclosure or forwarding of this communication is strictly 
> > >> > > prohibited. If you
> have
> > >> > > received this communication in error, please contact the 
> > >> > > sender
> > >> > immediately
> > >> > > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> > entity to
> > >> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> confidential,
> > >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If 
> > >> the
> > reader
> > >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby 
> > >> notified
> > that
> > >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or 
> > >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you 
> > >> have received this communication in error, please contact the 
> > >> sender
> > immediately
> > >> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > >>
> >
> > --
> > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or 
> > entity
> to
> > which it is addressed and may contain information that is 
> > confidential, privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable 
> > law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, 
> > you are hereby notified
> that
> > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or 
> > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have 
> > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately
> > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> >
>
Mime
View raw message