To make it easier, nearly all of our customers depend upon commercial
support.
Unless you get the major vendors to build patches for this feature,
supporting the older versions may be a mute point.



On 12/9/14 11:29 PM, "Johannes Zillmann" <[email protected]> wrote:

>We have a wide range of customersŠ so basically all of them ;)
>Anyhow would be good to have at least clear announcements like for 0.5
>there is 2.2 minimum, for 0.6 there isŠ etc..
>If the Hadoop UI integration could be delivered with 2.2 that would be
>awesome!
>
>best
>Johannes
>
>> On 08 Dec 2014, at 19:02, Hitesh Shah <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> Thanks for the info, Douglas. We will not be dropping support for 2.4
>>for sure at the moment.
>> 
>> Anyone else have any comments in this regard?
>> 
>> @Bikas/@Sid - what do we do about publishing jars for a release? We
>>would need to publish 2 or 3 sets?
>> 
>> thanks
>> ‹ Hitesh
>> 
>> On Dec 4, 2014, at 12:51 PM, Moore, Douglas
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> 2.4.x and beyond for the customers we have
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>>> On Dec 4, 2014, at 12:36 PM, Hitesh Shah <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hello folks 
>>>> 
>>>> Could folks who are following these mailing lists do a raise of hands
>>>>on which versions of Hadoop you are trying to run Tez on?
>>>> 
>>>> 1) 2.2.x
>>>> 2) 2.3.x
>>>> 3) 2.4.x
>>>> 4) 2.5.x
>>>> 5) 2.6.x
>>>> 
>>>> Given that we are building out the UI and for the large part, the
>>>>History UI ( i.e. the one which will display DAG details after an app
>>>>has disappeared ) will be dependent on YARN Timeline, the UI will not
>>>>be supported for Hadoop versions 2.2.x and 2.3.x given that they do
>>>>not support Timeline.
>>>> Likewise, ACLs support in Timeline was introduced in Hadoop 2.6.x -
>>>>this means ACLs will not be enforceable on Hadoop 2.4.x and 2.5.x
>>>> 
>>>> Also, as part of TEZ-1696, I also propose changing the default
>>>>version to 2.6.0 given that secure Timeline is only available as of
>>>>2.6.0.
>>>> 
>>>> Thoughts/concerns?
>>>> 
>>>> thanks
>>>> ‹ Hitesh 
>>>> 
>> 
>

Reply via email to