Nope :(Replication uses RPC and that was changed to protobufs. AFAIK snapshots can also not be exported from 0.94 and 0.98. We have a really shitty story here. From: Sean Busbey <bus...@cloudera.com> To: user <user@hbase.apache.org> Sent: Monday, December 15, 2014 5:04 PM Subject: Re: 0.94 going forward Does replication and snapshot export work from 0.94.6+ to a 0.96 or 0.98 cluster?
Presuming it does, shouldn't a site be able to use a multiple cluster set up to do a cut over of a client application? That doesn't help with needing downtime for to do the eventual upgrade, but it mitigates the impact on the downstream app. -- Sean On Dec 15, 2014 6:51 PM, "Jeremy Carroll" <phobos...@gmail.com> wrote: > Which is why I feel that a lot of customers are still on 0.94. Pretty much > trapped unless you want to take downtime for your site. Any type of > guidance would be helpful. We are currently in the process of designing our > own system to deal with this. > > On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > Zero downtime upgrade from 0.94 won't be possible. See > > http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#d0e5199 > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Jeremy Carroll <phobos...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > Looking for guidance on how to do a zero downtime upgrade from 0.94 -> > > 0.98 > > > (or 1.0 if it launches soon). As soon as we can figure this out, we > will > > > migrate over. > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 1:37 PM, Esteban Gutierrez < > este...@cloudera.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Lars, > > > > > > > > Thanks for bringing this for discussion. From my experience I can > tell > > > that > > > > 0.94 is very stable but that shouldn't be a blocker to consider to > > > EOL'ing. > > > > Are you considering any specific timeframe for that? > > > > > > > > thanks, > > > > esteban. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Cloudera, Inc. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Koert Kuipers <ko...@tresata.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > given that CDH4 is hbase 0.94 i dont believe nobody is using it. > for > > > our > > > > > clients the majority is on 0.94 (versus 0.96 and up). > > > > > > > > > > so i am going with 1), its very stable! > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 1:53 PM, lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Over the past few months the rate of the change into 0.94 has > > slowed > > > > > > significantly. > > > > > > 0.94.25 was released on Nov 15th, and since then we had only 4 > > > changes. > > > > > > > > > > > > This could mean two things: (1) 0.94 is very stable now or (2) > > nobody > > > > is > > > > > > using it (at least nobody is contributing to it anymore). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If anybody out there is still using 0.94 and is not planning to > > > upgrade > > > > > to > > > > > > 0.98 or later soon (which will required downtime), please speak > up. > > > > > > Otherwise it might be time to think about EOL'ing 0.94. > > > > > > > > > > > > It's not actually much work to do these releases, especially when > > > they > > > > > are > > > > > > so small, but I'd like to continue only if they are actually > used. > > > > > > In any case, I am going to spin 0.94.26 with the current 4 fixes > > > today > > > > or > > > > > > tomorrow. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Lars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > > > - Andy > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > > (via Tom White) > > >
