If you can work around it to support both 0.9.0 and 0.9.1, I personally
wouldn't have any objections to seeing that change done in 1.6.1.
I don't want to see it slow down 1.6.0 more though, either.
On 1/14/14, 8:06 PM, Christopher wrote:
Personally, I'd like to see this done... because I'd like to, at some
point, get Accumulo packaged into Fedora, and Thrift 0.9.1 is packaged
for Fedora 20 (as well as Hadoop 2.2 and ZooKeeper 3.4). If this isn't
done, a downstream patch will have to be made to package it for
Fedora, or I'd have to wait until some version after 1.6.0. It's not a
priority, certainly... but it would be quite useful to support either
0.9.0 or 0.9.1.
--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 7:04 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote:
Ah, thanks, Keith. I apologize for my ignorance.
I thought it was odd that we weren't using it already.
On 1/13/14, 6:26 PM, Keith Turner wrote:
This was looked into and a problem was encountered ACCUMULO-1691
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote:
Should we be updating to Thrift-0.9.1 before 1.6.0?
Looks like https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-1869 has the
potential to affect us, although it is possible for us to bypass the
issue
by providing our own ExecutorService.
