>
> though I appreciate there's a counterbalancing tension here (i.e. folks
> that want more confidence
> around Kudu's Hive 3 support in this release).
Yes this is the main motivation for doing some of the work before the
release. Given we don't expect new Sentry changes in this release, I
thoug
I agree with the broad strokes of the plan, but since the Ranger
support is still quite new, I'd prefer if we did one release
supporting both Sentry and Ranger, and then removed Sentry in the next
release, at which point we'd expect the Ranger support to be more
robust. To me, that means deferring
The plan looks good to me, thanks a lot Grant for the proposal!
Best,
Hao
On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 9:00 AM Grant Henke
wrote:
> Hello Kudu developers,
>
> With a large majority of the Apache Ranger integration work landing, I
> wanted to revisit this plan and potentially move forward removing Se
Hello Kudu developers,
With a large majority of the Apache Ranger integration work landing, I
wanted to revisit this plan and potentially move forward removing Sentry
and upgrading Hive.
Steps 1 through 3 from the plan have been completed. Below are some related
commits:
1. commit the Hive 3
+1, thanks for all of the details.
On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 3:21 PM Grant Henke wrote:
>
> Hello Kudu developers,
>
> Recently I have started work on upgrading Kudu to use Apache Hive 3.x.
> Given this is a major upgrade it does come with some challenges. As of Kudu
> 1.10.0 we use Hive in the HMS
Hello Kudu developers,
Recently I have started work on upgrading Kudu to use Apache Hive 3.x.
Given this is a major upgrade it does come with some challenges. As of Kudu
1.10.0 we use Hive in the HMS synchronization feature. This feature
includes a Kudu server side notification listener and HMS cl
