How are things looking with the 5.0.0 alpha/beta on HBase 2.x? On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 10:57 AM, Josh Elser <els...@apache.org> wrote:
> Good point. Perhaps "alpha" would be a better label? > > IIUC, the issue is that we need the HBase release, and then a Tephra > release, and then we can get Tephra fixed for Phoenix5. Perhaps Ankit can > provide some more color to the situation. > > > On 1/4/18 12:07 PM, Nick Dimiduk wrote: > >> Isn't Tephra integration mandatory for transaction support? What happens >> to >> a user who has TRANSACTIONAL=true tables when they upgrade? This can't >> really fail gracefully. I guess transaction support is still marked >> 'beta', >> but still, this would be a regression of functionality in "base Phoenix". >> >> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 8:34 AM Josh Elser <els...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> Talked to Rajeshbabu and Ankit offline this morning. >>> >>> Sounds like there are a few integration points which are still lacking: >>> >>> * phoenix-hive: PHOENIX-4423 >>> * phoenix-spark: untested (probably broken against newest Spark) >>> * phoenix-kafka: untested (probably broken against newest Kafka -- see >>> PHOENIX-4515 PHOENIX-4516) >>> * Tephra integration: Needs a new release of Tephra with some fixes >>> Ankit helped with. >>> >>> I plan to not consider these 5.0.0-alpha/beta release blockers, we'll >>> just call those out which we don't get tested/fixed. >>> >>> On 1/2/18 1:08 PM, Josh Elser wrote: >>> >>>> Happy New Year folks! >>>> >>>> I'd like to test the waters: what do people think about trying to get a >>>> 5.0.0 "beta" release out to the community before the end of January? >>>> >>>> HBase is doing the same right now with 2.0.0. My thinking is that if >>>> things are stable "enough", getting a base for people to use a 5.0 >>>> Phoenix release more easily, we can catch more bugs and get a better >>>> product out the door. >>>> >>>> Thoughts/concerns? I'm happy to RM. >>>> >>>> - Josh >>>> >>> >>> >>
