Hi, just pinging this thread in case someone missed it and has any opinion about the discussed actions.
Best, F ------- Original Message ------- On Tuesday, October 11th, 2022 at 23:29, Ferenc Csaky <ferenc.cs...@pm.me.INVALID> wrote: > > > Hi Martijn, > > Thank you for your comment. About HBase 2.x, correct, that is my thought > process, but it has to be tested and verified. > > +1 from my side about merging these updates with the connector > externalization. > > Best, > F > > > ------- Original Message ------- > On Tuesday, October 11th, 2022 at 16:30, Martijn Visser > martijnvis...@apache.org wrote: > > > > > Hi Ferenc, > > > > Thanks for opening the discussion on this topic! > > > > +1 for dropping HBase 1.x. > > > > Regarding HBase 2.x, if I understand correctly it should be possible to > > connect to any 2.x cluster if you're using the 2.x client. Wouldn't it make > > more sense to always support the latest available version, so basically 2.5 > > at the moment? We could always include a test to check that implementation > > against an older HBase version. > > > > I also have a follow-up question already: if there's an agreement on this > > topic, does it make sense to directly build a new HBase connector in its > > own external connector repo, since I believe the current connector uses the > > old source/sink interfaces. We could then directly drop the ones in the > > Flink repo and replace it with new implementations? > > > > Best regards, > > > > Martijn > > > > Op ma 10 okt. 2022 om 16:24 schreef Ferenc Csaky <ferenc.cs...@pm.me.invalid > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > Now that the connector externalization effort ig going on, I think it is > > > definitely work to revisit the currently supported HBase versions for the > > > Flink connector. Currently, ther is an HBase 1.4 and HBase 2.2 connector > > > versions, although both of those versions are kind of outdated. > > > > > > From the HBase point of view the following can be considered [1]: > > > > > > - HBase 1.x is dead, so on the way forward it should be safe to drop it. > > > - HBase 2.2 is EoL, but still used actively, we are also supporting it ins > > > some of our still active releases as Cloudera. > > > - HBase 2.4 is the main thing now and probably will be supported for a > > > while (by us, definitely). > > > - HBase 2.5 just came out, but 2.6 is expected pretty soon, so it is > > > possible it won't live long. > > > - HBase 3 is in alpha, but shooting for that probably would be early in > > > the near future. > > > > > > In addition, if we are only using the standard HBase 2.x client APIs, then > > > it should be possible to be compile it with any Hbase 2.x version. Also, > > > any HBase 2.x cluster should be backwards compatible with all earlier > > > HBase > > > 2.x client libraries. I did not check this part thorougly but I think this > > > should be true, so ideally it would be enough to have an HBase 2.4 > > > connector. [2] > > > > > > Looking forward to your opinions about this topic. > > > > > > Best, > > > F > > > > > > [1] https://hbase.apache.org/downloads.html > > > [2] https://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hbase.versioning.post10 (Client > > > API compatibility) > > > > -- > > Martijn > > https://twitter.com/MartijnVisser82 > > https://github.com/MartijnVisser
