sorry to say I don't good at Ruby . HBase Shell may should upgrade :) 2015-05-14 1:06 GMT+08:00 Michael Segel <michael_se...@hotmail.com>:
> So… > Silly question… > Do you really need to worry about backward’s compatibility? > > How many people have customized HBaseShell ? > > What are the common customizations and if you port HBase shell, how much > work would filter through to the custom code? > > > > On May 13, 2015, at 11:22 AM, Sean Busbey <bus...@cloudera.com> wrote: > > > > Hi folks! > > > > If you weren't aware, our current shell relies on Ruby, specifically the > > REPL program IRB from JRuby. When we launched 1.0 we were on JRuby 1.6 > with > > defaults, which means we're stuck on Ruby 1.8. > > > > For those that don't already know, Ruby 1.8 is super old and has been > > walking off into the sunset for a few years now. Most (but not all!) > formal > > support systems for running Ruby have EOLed 1.8 and there are numerous > > known issues with it. > > > > Right now there's an open ticket to get us on JRuby 1.7 so that our shell > > can work on PPC systems[1]. That version of JRuby defaults to Ruby 1.9 > but > > can be run in Ruby 1.8 mode. There are some implementation details > > outstanding, but I'm hoping that ticket can work out such that it can > land > > in branch-1. > > > > For HBase 2.0, I'd like us to plan for a little farther out in the future > > than just updating to Ruby 1.9 (though that would be a fine incremental > > step with some non-trivial work attached). The "current" version of Ruby > is > > 2.2. Much like the move from 1.8 -> 1.9 it is not backwards compatible. > > > > JRuby's next major maintenance release line is "version 9000"[2] and it > > will start out *only* supporting Ruby 2.2. Right now JRuby 9000 is in its > > second "preview" release. They still have a few feature complete items to > > address before they hit their first GA release. > > > > I'd like us to move to Ruby 2.2 via JRuby 9000 for HBase 2.0. This will > > cause operator pain to folks with advanced scripts based on Ruby 1.8, but > > it should allow us to update versions to avoid e.g. perf, correctness, > and > > security issues much more easily over the lifetime of 2.0. > > > > What do folks think? Would JRuby 9000 need to hit a GA release prior to > > HBase 2.0 getting released for us to adopt it? Or would it only need > enough > > of Ruby 2.2 to run our current shell? > > > > > > [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-13338 > > [2]: http://www.slideshare.net/CharlesNutter/over-9000-jruby-in-2015 > > > > -- > > Sean > > -- long is the way and hard that out of Hell leads up to light
