Re: Suggestion for SPARK-1825

2014-07-25 Thread Patrick Wendell
Yeah I agree reflection is the best solution. Whenever we do reflection we should clearly document in the code which YARN API version corresponds to which code path. I'm guessing since YARN is adding new features... we'll just have to do this over time. - Patrick On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 3:35 PM,

Re: Suggestion for SPARK-1825

2014-07-25 Thread Reynold Xin
Actually reflection is probably a better, lighter weight process for this. An extra project brings more overhead for something simple. On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Colin McCabe wrote: > So, I'm leaning more towards using reflection for this. Maven profiles > could work, but it's tough s

Re: Suggestion for SPARK-1825

2014-07-25 Thread Colin McCabe
So, I'm leaning more towards using reflection for this. Maven profiles could work, but it's tough since we have new stuff coming in in 2.4, 2.5, etc. and the number of profiles will multiply quickly if we have to do it that way. Reflection is the approach HBase took in a similar situation. best

Re: Suggestion for SPARK-1825

2014-07-25 Thread Colin McCabe
I have a similar issue with SPARK-1767. There are basically three ways to resolve the issue: 1. Use reflection to access classes newer than 0.21 (or whatever the oldest version of Hadoop is that Spark supports) 2. Add a build variant (in Maven this would be a profile) that deals with this. 3. Aut