Not removing code for upgrade is fine. Todd, is Cloudera signing up for testing this path (0.90 to 0.94)?
Stack, what's your feeling w.r.t. to HBASE-2600, will keeping the 0.90 -> 0.92 migration path make the migration code for HBASE-2600 (much) more complicated in 0.94? -- Lars ----- Original Message ----- From: Stack <st...@duboce.net> To: dev@hbase.apache.org Cc: Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 9:02 AM Subject: Re: hbase 0.94.0 On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 8:42 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > In this particular case, there was no explicit migration step needed > going 0.90 to 0.92. Upgrading from 0.90 to 0.94 should just be > running the 0.92 to 0.94 migration script (if there is one). > Thinking more, the above only really holds if we keep the .META. migration code that runs in 0.92 on startup on into 0.94 (I have a patch here where I'm removing it... I should put this bit of code back). I see Todd that you vote against removing hfile v1 in 0.94. To make going from CDH3 to CDH4, we should not purge any migrating code or old version support. I'd be fine w/ that. We'll need to work hard to ensure it taking it on as a principal for 0.94. Ok w/ you "Iron Hand" Lars? St.Ack
