It's safe to say that all 1.x releases should be rolling upgradable from 0.98. Thanks for clarifying.
On Saturday, May 2, 2015, lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org> wrote: > A belated and perhaps unhelpful "I agree" from me. > Supporting rolling upgrades is in our own interest.If we want phase out > older releases of HBase (and reduce _our_ work supporting all those > branches) we should give our users some no-downtime, and hopefully painless > way to upgrade. > 0.94 is now 3 years old, and had 28 releases. In part that's because we do > not have a good upgrade path to later releases (and maybe also because it > just worked well).I had fun doing 0.94, but I don't think we want to do > that again. :) > > -- Lars > > From: Enis Söztutar <e...@apache.org <javascript:;>> > To: "dev@hbase.apache.org <javascript:;>" <dev@hbase.apache.org > <javascript:;>> > Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2015 7:17 PM > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Rolling Upgrade 0.98 -> 1.1 > > Yeah, we need rolling upgrade from 0.98 to 1.1 I think. One issue related > to DLR was that, it needs a fix HBASE-11094 which is 0.98.4+ only otherwise > it is data loss. We have turned it off in 1.0, because explaining rolling > upgrades from 0.98.4- and 0.98.4+ was hard and there is no easy way to > enforce it. > > See > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-12577 > > Enis > > > > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > +1 for rolling upgrade from 0.98 to any 1.x for as long as we can manage > > it. Will make life easier for adopters of the 1.x line who come in later. > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimi...@apache.org > <javascript:;>> > > wrote: > > > > > We're pretty late in the game to bring this up, but I want to make sure > > > we're all on the same page. I believe we want to support rolling > upgrades > > > as there have been blocker tickets opened against the release to this > > > effect. The two things I'm aware of that cause problems here are table > > > state in meta (HBASE-13017) and distributed log replay (HBASE-12577). > Are > > > there any others we should be aware of? When I search for "Hadoop > Flags: > > > Incompatible change" [0] I do get a couple hits, but I don't think this > > > flag is well socialized. > > > > > > Given the resolution outlined for table states, I'm prone to punt this > > one > > > to 1.2. > > > > > > For DLR, we have HBASE-12743 opened without clear progress. Devaraj > also > > > mentioned to me that he's been tracking troubles around this feature > his > > > test runs. Unless someone wants to crack this nut today or tomorrow, I > > > think we should toggle it off. HBASE-13584. > > > > > > Other items? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Nick > > > > > > [0]: > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HBASE%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%201.1.0%20AND%20%22Hadoop%20Flags%22%20%3D%20%22Incompatible%20change%22 > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > > > - Andy > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > > (via Tom White) > > > > >
