On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 5:05 PM Sean Busbey wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Christopher wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 11:20 AM Sean Busbey wrote:
> >> Would we be bumping the Hadoop version while incrementing our minor
Sean Busbey wrote:
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Christopher wrote:
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 11:20 AM Sean Busbey wrote:
Would we be bumping the Hadoop version while incrementing our minor
version number or our major version number?
Minor only,
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Christopher wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 11:20 AM Sean Busbey wrote:
>> Would we be bumping the Hadoop version while incrementing our minor
>> version number or our major version number?
>>
>>
>>
> Minor only, because
I'm sure I know some people trying to use Accumulo+HDFS tracing, and it's
going to cause a problem no matter what, because Hadoop and Accumulo aren't
always upgraded at the same time. I just want to make sure it gets better
at some point, if both are sufficiently up-to-date.
Backporting patches
Ah, my mistake. I thought it was 2.7 and later. Well, then I guess the
question is whether we should bump to 2.8, then. I'm not a fan of the shim
layer. I'd rather provide support for downstream packagers trying to
backport for HTrace3, if anybody ends up requiring that, than provide a
shim to
I'm in favor of bumping our Hadoop version to 2.7. We are already on the
same htrace version as Hadoop 2.7. (The discussion in ACCUMULO-4171 is
relevant to Hadoop 2.8 and later.)
Billie
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Christopher wrote:
> Thinking about
Thinking about https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4171, I'm of
the opinion that we should probably bump our Hadoop version to 2.7 and
HTrace version to what Hadoop is using, to keep them in sync.
Does anybody disagree?