Would it be reasonable to consider a version of 1.4 that breaks compatibility with 0.20? I'm not really a fan of this, personally, but am curious what others think.
-- Christopher L Tubbs II http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Joey Echeverria <j...@cloudera.com> 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, > 2.0). > > -Joey > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 7:33 PM, Dave Marion <dlmar...@comcast.net> wrote: >> Any update? >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Joey Echeverria [mailto:j...@cloudera.com] >> Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 1:24 PM >> To: dev@accumulo.apache.org >> 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 <dlmar...@comcast.net> wrote: >> >>> "Will 1.4 still work with 0.20 with these patches?" >>> Great point Billie. >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Billie Rinaldi" <billie.rina...@gmail.com> >>> To: dev@accumulo.apache.org >>> 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 <j...@cloudera.com> 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 cluster. >>>> > 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.
