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

Switch to Threaded View
HBase >> mail # user >> HBase - stable versions


Copy link to this message
-
Re: HBase - stable versions

It's a very good point.  Most people will go to 0.96 when CDH and
Hortonworks support it.
On 9/4/13 2:55 PM, "Shahab Yunus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>This maybe a newbie or dumb question but I believe, this does not affect
>or
>apply to HBase distributions by other vendors like HortonWorks or
>Cloudera.
>If someone is using one of the versions of distributions provided by them
>then it is up to them (and not people and community here) what and till
>when they are going to support it.
>
>Regards,
>Shahab
>
>
>On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 1:33 PM, James Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>> +1 to what Nicolas said.
>>
>> That goes for Phoenix as well. It's open source too. We do plan to port
>>to
>> 0.96 when our user community (Salesforce.com, of course, being one of
>>them)
>> demands it.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> James
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Nicolas Liochon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > It's open source. My personal point of view is that if someone is
>>willing
>> > to spend time on the backport, there should be no issue, if the
>> regression
>> > risk is clearly acceptable & the rolling restart possible. If it's
>> > necessary (i.e. there is no agreement of the risk level), then we
>>could
>> as
>> > well go for a 94.12.1 solution. I don't think we need to create this
>> branch
>> > now: this branch should be created on when and if we cannot find an
>> > agreement on a specific jira.
>> >
>> > Nicolas
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 6:53 PM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>wrote:
>> >
>> > > I should also explicitly state that we (Salesforce) will stay with
>>0.94
>> > > for the foreseeable future.
>> > >
>> > > We will continue backport fixes that we need. If those are not
>> acceptable
>> > > or accepted into the open source 0.94 branch, they will have to go
>>into
>> > an
>> > > Salesforce internal repository.
>> > > I would really like to avoid that (essentially a fork), so I would
>> offer
>> > > to start having stable tags, i.e. we keep making changes in 0.94.x,
>>and
>> > > declare (say) 0.94.12 stable and have 0.94.12.1, etc, releases (much
>> like
>> > > what is done in Linux)
>> > >
>> > > We also currently have no resources to port Phoenix over to 0.96
>>(but
>> if
>> > > somebody wanted to step up, that would be greatly appreciated, of
>> > course).
>> > >
>> > > Thoughts? Comments? Concerns?
>> > >
>> > > -- Lars
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > From: lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > > To: hbase-dev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; hbase-user <
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > > Cc:
>> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 3, 2013 5:30 PM
>> > > Subject: HBase - stable versions
>> > >
>> > > With 0.96 being imminent we should start a discussion about
>>continuing
>> > > support for 0.94.
>> > >
>> > > 0.92 became stale pretty soon after 0.94 was released.
>> > > The relationship between 0.94 and 0.96 is slightly different,
>>though:
>> > >
>> > > 1. 0.92.x could be upgraded to 0.94.x without downtime
>> > > 2. 0.92 clients and servers are mutually compatible with 0.94
>>clients
>> and
>> > > servers
>> > > 3. the user facing API stayed backward compatible
>> > >
>> > > None of the above is true when moving from 0.94 to 0.96+.
>> > > Upgrade from 0.94 to 0.96 will require a one-way upgrade process
>> > including
>> > > downtime, and client and server need to be upgraded in lockstep.
>> > >
>> > > I would like to have an informal poll about who's using 0.94 and is
>> > > planning to continue to use it; and who is planning to upgrade from
>> 0.94
>> > to
>> > > 0.96.
>> > > Should we officially continue support for 0.94? How long?
>> > >
>> > > Thanks.
>> > >
>> > > -- Lars
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>