Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Plain View
Pig >> mail # dev >> pig 0.11 candidate 2 feedback: Several problems


+
Kai Londenberg 2013-02-18, 10:27
+
Bill Graham 2013-02-19, 17:51
+
Russell Jurney 2013-02-19, 17:54
+
Prashant Kommireddi 2013-02-19, 18:57
+
Olga Natkovich 2013-02-19, 23:22
+
Prashant Kommireddi 2013-02-19, 23:38
+
Jonathan Coveney 2013-02-20, 09:00
+
Kai Londenberg 2013-02-20, 09:51
+
Olga Natkovich 2013-02-20, 17:24
+
Bill Graham 2013-02-20, 19:31
+
Russell Jurney 2013-02-20, 19:33
+
Alan Gates 2013-02-20, 19:52
+
Dmitriy Ryaboy 2013-02-20, 20:04
Copy link to this message
-
Re: pig 0.11 candidate 2 feedback: Several problems
Just a unrelated note: The CDH3 is more closer to Hadoop 1.x than to 0.20.

Jarcec

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 12:04:51PM -0800, Dmitriy Ryaboy wrote:
> I agree -- this is a good release. The bugs Kai pointed out should be
> fixed, but as they are not critical regressions, we can fix them in 0.11.1
> (if someone wants to roll 0.11.1 the minute these fixes are committed, I
> won't mind and will dutifully vote for the release).
>
> I think the Hadoop 20.2 incompatibility is unfortunate but iirc this is
> fixable by setting HADOOP_USER_CLASSPATH_FIRST=true (was that in 20.2?)
>
> FWIW Twitter's running CDH3 and this release works in our environment.
>
> At this point things that block a release are critical regressions in
> performance or correctness.
>
> D
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Alan Gates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > No.  Bugs like these are supposed to be found and fixed after we branch
> > from trunk (which happened several months ago in the case of 0.11).  The
> > point of RCs are to check that it's a good build, licenses are right, etc.
> >  Any bugs found this late in the game have to be seen as failures of
> > earlier testing.
> >
> > Alan.
> >
> > On Feb 20, 2013, at 11:33 AM, Russell Jurney wrote:
> >
> > > Isn't the point of an RC to find and fix bugs like these>
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Bill Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Regarding Pig 11 rc2, I propose we continue with the current vote as is
> > >> (which closes today EOD). Patches for 0.20.2 issues can be rolled into a
> > >> Pig 0.11.1 release whenever they're available and tested.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 9:24 AM, Olga Natkovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> I agree that supporting as much as we can is a good goal. The issue is
> > >> who
> > >>> is going to be testing against all these versions? We found the issues
> > >>> under discussion because of a customer report, not because we
> > >> consistently
> > >>> test against all versions. Perhaps when we decide which versions to
> > >> support
> > >>> for next release we need also to agree who is going to be testing and
> > >>> maintaining compatibility with a particular version.
> > >>>
> > >>> For instance since Hadoop 23 compatibility is important for us at Yahoo
> > >> we
> > >>> have been maintaining compatibility with this version for 0.9, 0.10 and
> > >>> will do the same for 0.11 and going forward. I think we would need
> > others
> > >>> to step in and claim the versions of their interest.
> > >>>
> > >>> Olga
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> ________________________________
> > >>> From: Kai Londenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 1:51 AM
> > >>> Subject: Re: pig 0.11 candidate 2 feedback: Several problems
> > >>>
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>>
> > >>> I stronly agree with Jonathan here. If there are good reasons why you
> > >>> can't support an older version of Hadoop any more, that's one thing.
> > >>> But having to change 2 lines of code doesn't really qualify as such in
> > >>> my point of view ;)
> > >>>
> > >>> At least for me, pig support for 0.20.2 is essential - without it, I
> > >>> can't use it. If it doesn't support it, I'll have to branch pig and
> > >>> hack it myself, or stop using it.
> > >>>
> > >>> I guess, there are a lot of people still running 0.20.2 Clusters. If
> > >>> you really have lots of data stored on HDFS and a continuously busy
> > >>> cluster, an upgrade is nothing you do "just because".
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> 2013/2/20 Jonathan Coveney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > >>>> I agree that we shouldn't have to support old versions forever. That
> > >>> said,
> > >>>> I also don't think we should be too blase about supporting older
> > >> versions
> > >>>> where it is not odious to do so. We have a lot of competition in the
> > >>>> language space and the broader the versions we can support, the better
+
Russell Jurney 2013-02-20, 23:34
+
Prashant Kommireddi 2013-03-01, 19:25
+
Bill Graham 2013-03-01, 19:33
+
Dmitriy Ryaboy 2013-03-02, 03:00
+
Prashant Kommireddi 2013-03-02, 19:16
+
Prashant Kommireddi 2013-03-06, 20:57
+
Dmitriy Ryaboy 2013-03-08, 23:51
+
Prashant Kommireddi 2013-03-16, 00:12
+
Julien Le Dem 2013-03-01, 23:15
+
Julien Le Dem 2013-03-01, 23:14
+
Julien Le Dem 2013-02-20, 17:21
+
Alan Gates 2013-02-20, 16:15