On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <r...@apache.org> wrote: > * I am sure with the name like Phoenix there's tons of clashes, > but perhaps Apache Phoenix should be fine We'd be fine with "Apache Phoenix".
> * How tightly coupled is it with HBase? IOW, do you anticipate > needing to be constantly in lock-step with HBase implementation > or are you using more of public APIs that shouldn't change that much? We don't anticipate needing to stay in lock-step with an HBase implementation. We try to just surface the excellent lower level features of HBase through the higher level abstraction of SQL. For example, our current release of Phoenix supports 0.94.4 and above (10 releases). However, with the next major release of HBase 0.96, we'll likely need a different version of Phoenix, as it's not backward compatible (though we'll investigate a "shim layer" as 0.94 will likely be around for a while). We have been bitten in the past by changes in the HBase methods, but we've since created Jenkins builds of Phoenix against the head of the HBase 0.94 branch to catch these before they make it into a release. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
