On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Esteban Gutierrez <este...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> Should we add additional details around replication as well? for instance, > shall we consider a hbase-1.x cluster as a client for a hbase-2.x cluster? > > Yes. I'd say this should be a blocker Esteban. Filed HBASE-18596. Thanks, S > Thanks for starting this discussion Stack, > > esteban. > > -- > Cloudera, Inc. > > > On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 1:05 AM, stack <saint....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Thanks Zach for clarification. Let me work up a list and then come back > to > > this thread. Jira needs an edit pass to. > > > > S > > > > On Aug 3, 2017 23:54, "Zach York" <zyork.contribut...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > This kinda helps, but these seem more like expectations. I was going more > > for things like HFile format changed, meta table structure changed, > > coprocessor implementations changed (these are just examples, I don't > know > > if any of these actually changed). > > > > More technical differences between branch-1 and branch-2 which then can > > help us get the right expectations for compatibility. > > > > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 5:25 PM, Zach York < > zyork.contribut...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Do we know what the major pain points for migration are? Can we > discuss > > > > that/get a list going? > > > > > > > > > > > Here's a few in outline: > > > > > > + There is issue of formats, of hbase-2.x being able to read hbase-1.x > > data > > > whether from HDFS or ZooKeeper or off the wire. > > > + An hbase-1.x client should be able to Get/Put and Scan an hbase-2.x > > > cluster; no holes in the API or unintelligible serializations. > > > + There is then the little dance that has us rolling restart from an > > > hbase-1.x cluster to hbase-2.x; i.e. upgrade master first and then it > > will > > > assign regions to the new hbase-2.x regionservers as they come on line. > > > TBD. > > > > > > Is this what you mean sir? > > > > > > S > > > > > > > > > > I think without that knowledge it is hard (for me at least :) ) to > > > > determine where we should set our sights in terms of migration. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Zach > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > What are our expectations regards compatibility between hbase1 and > > > > hbase2? > > > > > > > > > > Lets have a chat about it. Here are some goal posts. > > > > > > > > > > + You have to upgrade to hbase-1.x before you can migrate to > hbase-2. > > > No > > > > > migration from < hbase-1 (Is this too onerous? Should we support > 0.98 > > > => > > > > > 2.0?). > > > > > + You do NOT have to upgrade to the latest release of hbase1 to > > migrate > > > > to > > > > > hbase2; being up on hbase-1.0.0+ will be sufficient. > > > > > + You'll have to update your hbase1 coprocessors to deploy them on > > > > hbase2. > > > > > A bunch of CP API has/will change by the time hbase2 comes out; > e.g. > > > > > watching for region split on RegionServer no longer makes sense > given > > > > > Master runs all splits now. > > > > > + An hbase1 client can run against an hbase2 cluster but it will > only > > > be > > > > > able to do DML (Get/Put/Scan, etc.). We do not allow being able to > do > > > > admin > > > > > ops using an hbase1 Admin client against an hbase2 cluster. We have > > > some > > > > > egregious API violations in branch-1; e.g. we have protobuf in our > > API > > > > (See > > > > > HBASE-15607). The notion is that we can't afford a deprecation > cycle > > > > > purging this stuff from our Admin API. > > > > > > > > > > What you all think? > > > > > > > > > > St.Ack > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
