yes, I forgot about the AINode which will also be developed in V2.0.0 On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 1:57 PM Jialin Qiao <qiaojia...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi, > > In previous years, we mainly focus on Data Management (Insertion & > Storage & Synchronization & Simple query on one series). > > If we summarize the ongoing works of IoTDB, we will find the Relation > module (Query across multi timeseries), AINode (Predict the trend of > timeseries) are all for enhancing the Data Analysis. > > So, a major version bump looks acceptable, indicating IoTDB enters a > new phase from Data Management to Data Analysis. > > Jialin Qiao > > Stefanie Zhao <zhaoxi...@apache.org> 于2024年8月26日周一 12:29写道： > > > > Hi Chris, > > > > I really appreciate that there is such a discussion on the version > number of IoTDB in the community, and here are some of my thoughts. > > > > I believe that upgrading the first version number requires consideration > of various impacts. The compatibility of interfaces between versions is one > aspect. At the same time, it is also necessary to consider whether the > improvements of the version will have a significant impact on other aspects > of the system, such as stability and maturity. These are also important > factors that users pay attention to, so we want to make our users perceive > this through the upgrade from 1.x to 2.0. > > > > Involving table model to IoTDB has the following specific changes: > > 1. Milestone changes in functionality: With the addition of the table > model, IoTDB will have two sets of metadata models. This is an important > large-scale update of a module, representing that IoTDB will be able to > support and connect with traditional developer habits in the future, which > will have a milestone impact on users. > > 2. Upgrade of code architecture: Due to the table model, IoTDB's data > file has been upgraded from TsFile v3 to v4, which involves adjustments to > the file structure. And also, we add a query engine for the table model. > These are all major upgrades to code architecture. > > 3. Extensive impact and changes to the code: Although we are still in > the development stage of the table model, just the first PR[13119], the > table model has affected 1266 files (out of a total of 5943 Java files), > involving 116973 lines+ and 13196 lines- of code. This scope of code impact > far exceeds the impact range of an ordinary feature. > > 4. Impact on system stability and maturity: Although we will strive to > reduce the impact of the above extensive functional changes and code > modifications on the performance and stability of the entire system, as > software developers, we all understand that achieving the above goals still > requires some time to mature, and the impact on stability is also part of > what users perceive. > > > > I have also looked at some requirments of the upgrade of the first > version number in Apache projects, but it seems that there is no clear > standard. The introduction of incompatibilities in features or interfaces > you mentioned is indeed an important consideration (Spark also explicitly > mentions it, Apache Spark Release 3.0.0), but more importantly, it is > whether developers want to convey to users "this is a major version change, > which may have a significant impact on users." So, like other Apache > projects (such as Apache Doris), they will also consider architectural > upgrades, changes in metadata, or underlying data formats as factors for > upgrading the first version number (Apache Doris Release Versioning). > > > > So we still hope that the table model version number will make its debut > to our users as version 2.0. > > > > --------- > > Best, Stefanie > > > > On 2024/08/25 07:40:50 Christofer Dutz wrote: > > > Usually major version upgrades introduce breaking changes. As far as I > understood it, it just adds features. That would qualify for a second digit > increase. > > > > > > If we do a major version bump we should also consider doing some other > refactoring, that we postponed till the next major release. > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > Gesendet von Outlook für Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg> > > > ________________________________ > > > From: Yuan Tian <jackietie...@gmail.com> > > > Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2024 7:37:21 AM > > > To: dev <dev@iotdb.apache.org> > > > Subject: Upgrading version from 1.4.0-SNAPSHOT to 2.0.0-SNAOSHOT for > master branch > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Given the significant changes that the table model introduces to IoTDB > and > > > the associated upgrade from TsFile version V3 to V4, it is reasonable > to > > > consider updating the version on the master branch to 2.0.0-SNAPSHOT. > This > > > approach aligns with the intention to release the table model with the > > > version number 2.0.0, signifying a major update to the system. > > > > > > For the tree model, which will continue to evolve with bug fixes and > > > performance improvements on the 1.X.X series (such as the upcoming > 1.3.3 > > > version), it's important to maintain clear versioning to differentiate > > > between the stable, incremental updates and the more substantial > changes > > > introduced by the table model. What do you think? Best regards, > > > > > > ------------------------ > > > > > > Yuan Tian > > > >
