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

Switch to Plain View
HBase >> mail # dev >> RE: 0.92/0.94 compatibility and HBASE-5206


+
Lars H 2012-09-03, 18:20
+
Gregory Chanan 2012-08-31, 22:13
+
lars hofhansl 2012-08-31, 22:55
+
Ted Yu 2012-08-31, 23:03
+
Gregory Chanan 2012-08-31, 23:06
+
lars hofhansl 2012-08-31, 23:24
+
lars hofhansl 2012-08-31, 23:41
+
Jonathan Hsieh 2012-09-01, 00:55
+
Gregory Chanan 2012-09-01, 00:54
+
lars hofhansl 2012-09-01, 01:34
+
lars hofhansl 2012-09-01, 02:02
+
Gregory Chanan 2012-09-01, 02:42
+
lars hofhansl 2012-09-01, 03:21
Copy link to this message
-
Re: 0.92/0.94 compatibility and HBASE-5206
I filed HBASE-6710.

Greg

On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 8:21 PM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I see. Makes sense. I made a trivial 0.94 patch for HBASE-6268.
> Can you file a jira for the other changes you describe below?
>
> -- Lars
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>  From: Gregory Chanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2012 7:42 PM
> Subject: Re: 0.92/0.94 compatibility and HBASE-5206
>
> @Lars: agreed on your point of leaving the name for the 92 znode the same.
>
> On upgrading a 0.94.0 or 0.94.1 cluster out of sync, I think it would work.
> The 0.94.2 client should work against all 0.94.2, 0.94.1, and 0.94.0
> versions (and all 0.92.x versions as well).  We just need to apply
> HBASE-6268 to 0.94.2.  So you would first upgrade the client, then the
> server(s).  The reason this works is because the client, with HBASE-6268
> applied, can handle the znode being in either the 0.92 or 0.94 format, it
> doesn't need to know which is which.  I'll of course test all this :).
>
> Greg
>
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 7:02 PM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > Also, if understand this correctly this would not help if somebody had
> > deployed an 0.94.0 or 0.94.1 cluster and want to upgrade the client and
> > server out of sync.
> > In one configuration the client would work against 0.94.0 and 0.94.1 but
> > not against 0.94.2. In the other configuration the client would work
> > against 0.94.2 but not against 0.94.0 or 0.94.1.
> >
> >
> > There is however and clean upgrade path to 0.92.2 and from there to
> 0.94.2
> > if we just fix this in 0.92.2.
> >
> >
> > -- Lars
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >  From: lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: Gregory Chanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Friday, August 31, 2012 6:34 PM
> > Subject: Re: 0.92/0.94 compatibility and HBASE-5206
> >
> > Sounds complicated. But since you are the folks with customers that'll
> > upgrade to from 0.92 to 0.94, let's do this.
> >
> > The only input I'd have is that format we'll use going forward will not
> > have a version attached to it.
> >
> > So maybe the 92 version would still be called
> > "zookeeper.znode.tableEnableDisable" and the new node could have a
> > different name "zookeeper.znode.tableEnableDisableNew" (or something).
> >
> > -- Lars
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Gregory Chanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Friday, August 31, 2012 5:54 PM
> > Subject: Re: 0.92/0.94 compatibility and HBASE-5206
> >
> >
> > Actually, I think we can make 0.94.2 compatible with both {0.94.0,0.94.1}
> > and {0.92.0,0.92.1}, although one of those sets will require
> configuration
> > changes.
> >
> > The basic problem is that there is a znode for each table
> > "zookeeper.znode.tableEnableDisable" that is handled differently.
> >
> > On 0.92.0 and 0.92.1 the states for this table are:
> > [ disabled, disabling, enabling ] or deleted if the table is enabled
> >
> > On 0.94.1 and 0.94.2 the states for this table are:
> > [ disabled, disabling, enabling, enabled ]
> >
> > What saves us is that the location of this znode is configurable.  So the
> > basic idea is to have the 0.94.2 master write two different znodes,
> > "zookeeper.znode.tableEnableDisabled92" and
> > "zookeeper.znode.tableEnableDisabled94" where the 92 node is in 92
> format,
> > the 94 node is in 94 format.  And internally, the master would only use
> the
> > 94 format in order to solve the original bug HBASE-5155 solves.
> > We can of course make one of these the same default as exists now, so we
> > don't need to make config changes for one of 0.92 or 0.94 clients.  I
> argue
> > that 0.92 clients shouldn't have to make config changes for the same
> reason
> > I argued above.  But that is debatable.
> >
> > Then, I think the only question left is Stack's question of how to bring
+
Ramkrishna.S.Vasudevan 2012-09-03, 04:44
+
Stack 2012-08-31, 23:21