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

Switch to Threaded View
Hadoop, mail # general - DISCUSSION: Cut a hadoop-0.20.0-append release from the tip of branch-0.20-append branch?


Copy link to this message
-
Re: DISCUSSION: Cut a hadoop-0.20.0-append release from the tip of branch-0.20-append branch?
Andrew Purtell 2010-12-24, 00:36
I hope that 22 will be an answer. I think I would be more comfortable with that answer if Hadoop Core were not so obviously internally conflicted and sclerotic. Potential HBase/Hadoop adopters have confidence in 20 seeing the production deployments of it. 21 was to all indications I have seen a dud. There is no reasonable basis as of yet to presume 22 will be "kick ass".

I, at least, was hoping that promoting 0.20-append from its de-facto status to something official could be a fig leaf for HBase while Hadoop Core gets its house in order.

Best regards,

    - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back.
  - Piet Hein (via Tom White)
--- On Thu, 12/23/10, Ryan Rawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> From: Ryan Rawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: DISCUSSION: Cut a hadoop-0.20.0-append release from the tip of branch-0.20-append branch?
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Thursday, December 23, 2010, 2:39 PM
> How does stack volunteering his time
> to release an existing branch
> divert resources?
>
> Without an ASF release of 0.20-append I will keep having to
> recommend an external vendor's release of Hadoop.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 2:18 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > I also think building 0.20-append will be a major
> distraction from moving
> > 0.22 forward with all the great new features,
> including the new append
> > implementation, sitting on the bench because we are
> delaying the release.
> > It seems to be beneficial for the entire community to
> focus on 0.22 rather
> > than chasing both birds.
> >
> > I hear a concern that 0.22 will lack large scale
> testing as was the case
> > with 0.21.
> > I'd like to volunteer to put as many large scale
> resources, as I can grasp,
> > into stabilizing of 0.22. Under Nigel's management of
> course.
> > This should get us to production quality in 3-6 months
> rather than
> > "another 12-15". I also hope it can go even
> faster/better if others
> > could join the effort. I see > 100 companies
> claiming they are powered by
> > Apache Hadoop.
> >
> > I also hope with this effort HBase will be able to
> start moving to the new
> > append implementation in the next 2-3 months, which in
> turn will help 0.22
> > HDFS
> > rather than divert resources from it as it would have
> be with 0.20-append.
> >
> > Stack, will this plan will work for HBase survival?
> >
> > One other thought. Apache Hadoop community is not in
> control of external
> > releases and distributions, but we should not fork our
> own releases by
> > introducing
> > competing apis. If we can keep the dev line relatively
> straight the external
> > releases
> > will follow.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --Konstantin
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Ryan Rawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> The append solution in 0.22 that you are referring
> to was supposed to
> >> be out 13-15 months ago.  Pardon if I look for
> solutions that deploy 4
> >> months ago (as the 0.20 append branch did).
> >>
> >> Another 12-15 months of delay is not exactly
> helping HDFS either.
> >>
> >> -ryan
> >>
> >> On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 9:38 AM, Jakob Homan
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >> > It's difficult to support this proposal
> knowing how much time would be
> >> > spent preparing an official release,
> continuing to support it and
> >> > continuing to two support two separate
> implementations of append.  I
> >> > believe that effort would be better spent
> getting out a kick-ass 22
> >> > (or, barring that, a *really* kick-ass 23).
> >> >
> >> > The Promised Land that we say we're all
> trying to get to is regular,
> >> > timely, feature-complete, tested, innovative
> but stable releases of
> >> > new versions of Apache Hadoop.  Missing out
> any one of those criteria
> >> > discovered will continue (and has continued)
> the current situation
> >> > where quasi-official branches and outside
> distributions fill the void
> >> > such a release should.  The effort to