Mailing-List: contact dev-help@orc.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@orc.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <14E5721E-AD09-4365-8D59-EE817C2F28C5@iq80.com>
References: <CAHfHakFUQOrQ0fqRA-CnAWYQixBrrzzQ9N00jMW92FAKccytpg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANQiJeWP4GubBfZTw4LR0A18Wgfj=Dp1g=NhYmCg2Uu8MWubNw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHfHakEw6BOZzWLCSw6cQzqgkCuvGHQSdq-xU=9bTb08dk-Edw@mail.gmail.com> <14E5721E-AD09-4365-8D59-EE817C2F28C5@iq80.com>
From: Alan Gates <alanfgates@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2017 15:54:58 -0700
Message-ID: <CANQiJeUw73+FU2sOO_1j7O+-3nze50xk8nwQM3tUBpyasYwDwA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] ORC 2.0
To: dev@orc.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1146ee50f4444f0555f56283"
archived-at: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 22:55:05 -0000

--001a1146ee50f4444f0555f56283
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

It seems ok to change them in a source and binary compatible way.  +1 to
making upgrades as easy as switching out the jars at runtime.

Alan.

On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Dain Sundstrom <dain@iq80.com> wrote:

>
> > On Aug 4, 2017, at 2:51 PM, Owen O'Malley <owen.omalley@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Alan Gates <alanfgates@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Let me make sure I have the backwards compatibility straight.  If a user
> >> switches to ORC 2.0, he could choose to continue writing in older
> formats
> >> so that his old tools could read it.  Then once all his tools are
> upgraded
> >> he could throw a config switch and new data would be written in the new
> >> format.  Once that switch was thrown, any pre-ORC 2.0 tools would be
> >> unusable.  Before throwing that switch, he would get none of the
> benefits
> >> of ORC 2.0.  Is this summary correct?
> >>
> >
> > Yes, exactly.
>
> I think the important part is not to change the APIs so tools can be
> updated by just upgrading the dep.
>
> -dain

--001a1146ee50f4444f0555f56283--