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
Pig >> mail # dev >> pig 0.11 candidate 2 feedback: Several problems


Copy link to this message
-
Re: pig 0.11 candidate 2 feedback: Several problems
Agreed, that makes sense. Probably supporting older hadoop version for a 1
or 2 pig releases before moving to a newer/stable version?

Having said that, should we use 0.11 period to communicate the same to the
community and start moving on 0.12 onwards? I know we are way past 6-12
months (1-2 release) time frame with 0.20.2, but we also need to make sure
users are aware and plan accordingly.

I'd also be interested to hear how other projects (Hive, Oozie) are
handling this.

-Prashant

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Olga Natkovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> It seems that for each Pig release we need to agree and clearly state
> which Hadoop versions it will support. I guess the main question is how we
> decide on this. Perhaps we should say that Pig no longer supports older
> Hadoop versions once the newer one is out for at least 6-12 month to make
> sure it is stable. I don't think we can support old versions indefinitely.
> It is in everybody's interest to keep moving forward.
>
> Olga
>
>
> ________________________________
>  From: Prashant Kommireddi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 10:57 AM
> Subject: Re: pig 0.11 candidate 2 feedback: Several problems
>
> What do you guys feel about the JIRA to do with 0.20.2 compatibility
> (PIG-3194)? I am interested in discussing the strategy around backward
> compatibility as this is something that would haunt us each time we move to
> the next hadoop version. For eg, we might be in a similar situation while
> moving to Hadoop 2.0, when some of the stuff might break for 1.0.
>
> I feel it would be good to get this JIRA fix in for 0.11, as 0.20.2 users
> might be caught unaware. Of course, I must admit there is selfish interest
> here and it's probably easier for us to have a workaround on Pig rather
> than upgrade hadoop in all our production DCs.
>
> -Prashant
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Russell Jurney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >wrote:
>
> > I think someone should step up and fix the easy ones, if possible.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Bill Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks Kai for reporting these.
> > >
> > > What do people think about the severity of these issues w.r.t. Pig 11?
> I
> > > see a few possible options:
> > >
> > > 1. We include some or all of these patches in a new Pig 11 rc. We'd
> want
> > to
> > > make sure that they don't destabilize the current branch. This approach
> > > makes sense if we think Pig 11 wouldn't be a good release without one
> or
> > > more of these included.
> > >
> > > 2. We continue with the Pig 11 release without these, but then include
> > one
> > > or more in a 0.11.1 release.
> > >
> > > 3. We continue with the Pig 11 release without these, but then include
> > them
> > > in a 0.12 release.
> > >
> > > Jon has a patch for the MAP issue
> > > (PIG-3144<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3144>)
> > > ready, which seems like the most pressing of the three to me.
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > > Bill
> > >
> > > On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 2:27 AM, Kai Londenberg <
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I just subscribed to the dev mailing list in order to give you some
> > > > feedback on pig 0.11 candidate 2.
> > > >
> > > > The following three issues are currently present in 0.11 candidate 2:
> > > >
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3144 - 'Erroneous map
> entry
> > > > alias resolution leading to "Duplicate schema alias" errors'
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3194 - Changes to
> > > > ObjectSerializer.java break compatibility with Hadoop 0.20.2
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3195 - Race Condition in
> > > > PhysicalOperator leads to ExecException "Error while trying to get
> > > > next result in POStream"
> > > >
> > > > The last two of these are easily solveable (see the tickets for
> > > > details on that). The first one is a bit trickier I think, but at
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