+1 on reverting PIG-3419 and applying it to tez branch if its blocking
pig-0.12 release.

On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Cheolsoo Park <piaozhe...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I am waiting for +1 from Twitter.
>
> Like Alan suggested, let's revert PIG-3419 et al in 0.12 first. Then, we
> can decide what to do in trunk. I volunteer to do grunt work since I am the
> one who committed them.
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Rohini Palaniswamy <
> rohini.adi...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> > +1. I was already asking for keeping the new API changes only in Tez
> branch
> > till it evolves and is finalized, so I have no objections to reverting
> it.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Rohini
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Alan Gates <ga...@hortonworks.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > We should separate out two separate concerns.  If I understand
> correctly
> > > we don't need any of these changes in 0.12.  So we should revert these
> > > patches from the 12 branch so that we can get it released quickly in a
> > > backwards compatible way.
> > >
> > > We will then have plenty of time to discuss the separate question of
> how
> > > we proceed going forward (deprecated APIs or new APIs).
> > >
> > > Alan.
> > >
> > > On Sep 30, 2013, at 11:45 AM, Cheolsoo Park wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Jeremy,
> > > >
> > > > What you're saying makes sense, and patch is welcome. ;-) But
> > complexity
> > > > comes from that there are many classes that are associated with one
> > > > another, and it seems necessary to bring back all of them together in
> > > order
> > > > to provide full backward compatibility.
> > > >
> > > > After spending many hours on the weekend, I concluded that adding
> more
> > > > workarounds (classes, methods, packages, etc) to the current code
> makes
> > > it
> > > > only less maintainable and readable. So I prefer a simpler approach.
> > > >
> > > > For eg, we can just publish two jars - pig.jar w/ old API and
> > pig-new.jar
> > > > w/ new API - maybe not in 0.12 but in 0.13. Since we already have a
> > > > tez-branch, we can use it to manage the new version of classes. Then,
> > > users
> > > > can switch to pig-new.jar gradually in 0.13 and 0.14. When we finally
> > > merge
> > > > tez-branch into trunk, we can publish a single jar again.
> > > >
> > > > Of course, this is not trivial either because we have to maintain two
> > > > branches. But I feel that managing two branches independently is
> easier
> > > > than maintaining all sorts of workarounds for backward compatibility
> in
> > > the
> > > > source code. In addition, we will have more flexibility in terms of
> > > > designing new API because we will be completely free from backward
> > > > compatibility. No?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Cheolsoo
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Jeremy Karn <jk...@mortardata.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> What about the option of leaving all of the MR specific logic in the
> > > >> original classes but marking those methods as deprecated and telling
> > > people
> > > >> to switch to using a MR specific object that extends the original
> > class.
> > > >> So for example:
> > > >>
> > > >> JobStats - Reverted to being as it was before PIG-3419 but with all
> MR
> > > >> specific logic deprecated.
> > > >> MRJobStats - Would just extend JobStats.
> > > >>
> > > >> If we did this, external software could switch their code from using
> > > >> JobStats to MRJobStats at their own pace and without breaking
> against
> > > any
> > > >> specific version of Pig.  After a few versions the MR specific logic
> > > could
> > > >> be removed from JobStats and pushed into MRJobStats and it shouldn't
> > > break
> > > >> anything for people that had made that change.
> > > >>
> > > >> I'm not familiar with all of the changes in PIG-3419 so this might
> not
> > > work
> > > >> everywhere.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Cheolsoo Park <
> piaozhe...@gmail.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> To be specific, we will need to revert all the following commits in
> > > >> order:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> commit ad1b87d4ba073680ad0a7fc8c76baeb8b611c982
> > > >>> Author: Cheolsoo Park <cheol...@apache.org>
> > > >>> Date:   Fri Sep 20 22:47:29 2013 +0000
> > > >>>
> > > >>>    PIG-3471: Add a base abstract class for ExecutionEngine
> (cheolsoo)
> > > >>>
> > > >>>    git-svn-id:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/pig/trunk@152516513f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
> > > >>>
> > > >>> commit 4305a6f4737d07396ae13fd95d7c1da7933b38a1
> > > >>> Author: Jianyong Dai <da...@apache.org>
> > > >>> Date:   Wed Sep 18 19:09:49 2013 +0000
> > > >>>
> > > >>>    PIG-3457: Provide backward compatibility for PigStatsUtil and
> > > >> JobStats
> > > >>>
> > > >>>    git-svn-id:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/pig/trunk@152453213f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
> > > >>>
> > > >>> commit e85cf34c92713aa697a1cda7a9c2b3db139350f7
> > > >>> Author: Cheolsoo Park <cheol...@apache.org>
> > > >>> Date:   Wed Sep 18 15:37:58 2013 +0000
> > > >>>
> > > >>>    PIG-3464: Mark ExecType and ExecutionEngine interfaces as
> evolving
> > > >>> (cheolsoo)
> > > >>>
> > > >>> commit fd8b7cdf9292b305f02386d560c25298ab492a0b
> > > >>> Author: Cheolsoo Park <cheol...@apache.org>
> > > >>> Date:   Fri Aug 30 20:04:29 2013 +0000
> > > >>>
> > > >>>    PIG-3419: Pluggable Execution Engine (achalsoni81 via cheolsoo)
> > > >>>
> > > >>>    git-svn-id:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/pig/trunk@151906213f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Daniel Dai <
> da...@hortonworks.com>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Thanks Cheolsoo! My opinion is provide backward compatibility for
> > > >>> PigStats
> > > >>>> is a must, otherwise it could be a havoc. I imagine PigStats is
> > widely
> > > >>> used
> > > >>>> by Pig users via PigRunner and PPNL interface. People use PigStats
> > to
> > > >>>> collect MR job details of the Pig job. Though PigStats is marked
> for
> > > >>>> Evolving, this is mostly for extending PigStats, not limiting
> > PigStats
> > > >> as
> > > >>>> PIG-3419 did. Even if we really need to change, we need to very
> well
> > > >>>> communicate with users over time, Pig 0.12 is not an option.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> PIG-3457 is trying to provide a backward compatibility way for
> > > >> PigStats,
> > > >>>> but just like Cheolsoo said, it is far from ideal. I now tend to
> > agree
> > > >>>> Rohini's suggestion on PIG-3419, rollback PIG-3419, until we find
> a
> > > >>> better
> > > >>>> way. Seems PIG-3419 is a little premature. Besides the above
> > mentioned
> > > >>>> PigStats issue, I've already found 2 additional issues:
> > > >>>> 1. "explain" shows unoptimized logical plan instead of optimized
> one
> > > >>>> 2. HangingJobKiller is removed
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> How does others think?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Thanks,
> > > >>>> Daniel
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Cheolsoo Park <
> > piaozhe...@gmail.com>
> > > >>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> Hi devs,
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> PIG-3419 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3419> broke
> > > >>> backward
> > > >>>>> compatibility for downstream applications such as Oozie, and
> > > >>>>> PIG-3457<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3457> is
> > > >>>>> trying to fix it.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> In summary, we need to keep the old MR-specific JobStats and
> > PigStats
> > > >>> for
> > > >>>>> backward compatibility sadly because they're currently exposed in
> > > >>> several
> > > >>>>> user-facing API including PigRunner, PigServer, etc. However,
> this
> > > >>>> defeats
> > > >>>>> the purpose of PIG-3419
> > > >>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3419> because
> > > >>>>> we cannot implement non-MR execution engines in the back-end if
> the
> > > >>>>> front-end API is tied to MR.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Daniel and I were having a discussion in the jira, but it seems
> > more
> > > >>>>> complicated than I thought. I am wondering whether anyone has a
> > good
> > > >>>>> suggestion on how to solve it. This is blocking the 0.12 release.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Thanks,
> > > >>>>> Cheolsoo
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> --
> > > >>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > >>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> > > >> entity
> > > >>> to
> > > >>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > confidential,
> > > >>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> > > >> reader
> > > >>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > notified
> > > >>> that
> > > >>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > > >>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
> have
> > > >>>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > > >>> immediately
> > > >>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >>
> > > >> Jeremy Karn / Lead Developer
> > > >> MORTAR DATA / 519 277 4391 / www.mortardata.com
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> entity
> > to
> > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> reader
> > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> > that
> > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> > > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > immediately
> > > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > >
> >
>



-- 
"...:::Aniket:::... Quetzalco@tl"

Reply via email to