Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
HBase >> mail # dev >> Thinking about 0.98


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Thinking about 0.98
A few questions:
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > My suggestion is that we limit the number of major features targeting
> this version.
>
> +1
>
> > Can we say Tags the only Major feature that must get in and then all
> major features are not blockers?
>
> Core changes, you mean? One or perhaps two significant core changes could
> be doable in the available time. Is there another besides tags/HFile V3?
>
>
Something will likely show up -- I'm working on some API clean up currently
which oddly will also affect the HFile format.

> What I would consider a blocker would be a usability problem, a performance
> regression, or an API, wire, or data compatibility regression.
>
> In my opinion, a new feature should be implemented within a well defined
> space for that purpose: as a coprocessor, plugin, or as a feature of HFile
> V3 (which I would like to make more pluggable, therefore extensible and
> maintainable). I propose HFile V3 be included, marked as experimental
> through the 0.98 cycle, with a feature freeze at the .0 release.
>
> Sounds reasonable.
> > What do you think our planned 0.96 compat story is wrt 0.98?
>
> 0.96 and 0.98 should be able to run in a mixed server side environment
> while a rolling upgrade is in progress, without limits imposed on how long
> that might take. Perhaps 0.98 is deployed only to one table placement group
> as a trial. With the caveat that new features might introduce
> complications, continuing the example, a new HFile feature is enabled for a
> table and placement group so the table can't be placed elsewhere. Clients
> should be able to run in a mixed version environment indefinitely.
>
> I'd also like to do some API culling and simplification -- where would
this go?

Would 0.98 be branched off of trunk or 0.96 then?
>
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > On the thread '[UPDATE] Finishing up 0.96 --> WAS Re: 0.95 and 0.96
> > > remaining issues', Stack, our RM for 0.95/0.96 has drawn the line on a
> > > feature freeze and set a course for an 0.96 release to happen soon.
> > Toward
> > > the end of that thread there is a bit on beyond 0.96 that I have
> included
> > > below for your reference. To summarize the discussion points:
> > >
> > > - This is a call for an 0.98 major release in early October. Let's
> > discuss
> > > first if that timeframe is reasonable, and then what can and should go
> > into
> > > a new major release in this timeframe.
> > >
> > > +1
> >
> > My suggestion is that we limit the number of major features targeting
> this
> > version.  Can we say Tags the only Major feature that must get in and
> then
> > all major features are not blockers?
> >
> > What do you think our planned 0.96 compat story is wrt 0.98?  This would
> be
> > a great opportunity to try see if the protobuf evolution path is what we
> > hope it is.
> >
> >
> >
> > > - I have volunteered to manage this release. Let's discuss if there are
> > > concerns or objections to that.
> > >
> > > +1
> >
> >
> > > Assuming there are no objections, in a few days I will adjust target
> > > versions for 0.98 in JIRA, file any new issues as needed, and then
> post a
> > > summary here. I suggest looking at 0.98 through the lens of being the
> > last
> > > release before the big 1.0 event. Therefore, what should go in are
> things
> > > that almost made the 0.96 cut, and "1.0 necessary" features that,
> first,
> > > should be in a 1.0 product, and, second, could benefit from one release
> > > cycle to bake. Once there is an 0.98 major release, I also suggest a
> > > regular train of minor releases like what Lars has done for 0.94.
> Also, I
> > > don't think it necessary to decide today if a 0.98 release should
> become
> > > the 1.0 release directly, we will always have that option. I suggest
> > > waiting to make that call until 0.98 releases are under test and

// Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
// Software Engineer, Cloudera
// [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB