Joey Echeverria 2013-07-26, 15:02
Eric Newton 2013-07-26, 15:25
Josh Elser 2013-07-26, 15:36
Keith Turner 2013-07-26, 15:45
Joey Echeverria 2013-07-26, 16:24
Keith Turner 2013-07-26, 17:20
Joey Echeverria 2013-07-26, 18:33
Billie Rinaldi 2013-07-26, 19:02
dlmarion@... 2013-07-26, 19:34
Joey Echeverria 2013-07-29, 17:23
Dave Marion 2013-08-01, 23:33
Joey Echeverria 2013-08-02, 18:22
Christopher 2013-08-02, 18:31
Joey Echeverria 2013-08-02, 18:37
Mike Drob 2013-08-02, 19:58
Joey Echeverria 2013-08-02, 20:03
On Aug 2, 2013 2:22 PM, "Joey Echeverria" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry for the delay, it's been one of those weeks.
> The current version would probably not be backwards compatible to
> 0.20.2 just based on changes in dependencies. We're looking right now
> to see how hard it is to have three way compatibility (0.20, 1.0,
It may not help much, but I believe the minimum dependency for 1.4 was
bumped up to 0.20.205.0.
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 7:33 PM, Dave Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Any update?
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Joey Echeverria [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 1:24 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Hadoop 2.0 Support for Accumulo 1.4 Branch
> > We're testing this today. I'll report back what we find.
> > -Joey
> > —
> > Sent from Mailbox for iPhone
> > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 3:34 PM, null <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> "Will 1.4 still work with 0.20 with these patches?"
> >> Great point Billie.
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Billie Rinaldi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Sent: Friday, July 26, 2013 3:02:41 PM
> >> Subject: Re: Hadoop 2.0 Support for Accumulo 1.4 Branch On Fri, Jul
> >> 26, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Joey Echeverria <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> > If these patches are going to be included with 1.4.4 or 1.4.5, I
> >>> > would
> >>> like
> >>> > to see the following test run using CDH4 on at least a 5 node
> >>> > More nodes would be better.
> >>> >
> >>> > * unit test
> >>> > * Functional test
> >>> > * 24 hr Continuous ingest + verification
> >>> > * 24 hr Continuous ingest + verification + agitation
> >>> > * 24 hr Random walk
> >>> > * 24 hr Random walk + agitation
> >>> >
> >>> > I may be able to assist with this, but I can not make any promises.
> >>> Sure thing. Is there already a write-up on running this full battery
> >>> of tests? I have a 10 node cluster that I can use for this.
> >>> > Great. I think this would be a good patch for 1.4. I assume that
> >>> > if a user stays with Hadoop 1 there are no dependency changes?
> >>> Yup. It works the same way as 1.5 where all of the dependency changes
> >>> are in a Hadoop 2.0 profile.
> >> In 1.5.0, we gave up on compatibility with 0.20 (and early versions of
> >> 1.0) to make the compatibility requirements simpler; we ended up
> >> without dependency changes in the hadoop version profiles. Will 1.4
> >> still work with 0.20 with these patches? If there are dependency
> >> changes in the profiles, 1.4 would have to be compiled against a
> >> hadoop version compatible with the running version of hadoop, correct?
> >> We had some trouble in the
> >> 1.5 release process with figuring out how to provide multiple binary
> >> artifacts (each compiled against a different version of hadoop) for
> >> the same release. Just something we should consider before we are in
> >> the midst of releasing 1.4.4.
> >> Billie
> >>> -Joey
> Joey Echeverria
> Director, Federal FTS
> Cloudera, Inc.
Keith Turner 2013-07-26, 19:30
Sean Busbey 2013-10-14, 16:55