You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@pig.apache.org by Mi...@emc.com on 2011/09/29 23:10:55 UTC
Re: Hadoop 0.22/HBase 0.92 package repos are now available
[CC'ng Pig-dev].
In terms of interest, what is the community more interested in seeing work
with Hadoop 0.22 ? Pig 0.8.x or Pig.0.9.
I took a look at pig 0.9 added features:
New parser (still has corner cases)
UDFs in languages other than Java
Macros
Hcatalog support
As far as existing installations are concerned, my belief is that these
features do not make a very compelling case for pig 0.9 to be compatible
immediately with Hadoop 0.22, and pig 0.8.x makes more sense.
What do people think ?
- Milind
---
Milind Bhandarkar
Greenplum Labs, EMC
(Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author, and
do not necessarily represent the views of any organization, past or
present, the author might be affiliated with.)
On 9/29/11 1:53 PM, "Konstantin Boudnik" <co...@apache.org> wrote:
>Alos, if Pig 0.8.2 or 0.9 is getting released soon it'd critical to have
>deploy patch from PIG-1799 getting committed because at the moment Pid
>doesn't
>deploy correct test artifacts to maven.
>
>Cos
>
>P.S. I think this becomes too specific of a discussion and it might find a
>better place on one (or more) of the development lists.
>
>On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 10:45AM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 9:55 PM, J. Rottinghuis
>><jr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Will have to give BigTop a try...
>>
>> Let me know if you have any feedback.
>>
>> > With the patch for ��https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-2277
>>applied
>> > Pig (0.8 for now, and 0.9 in the works) will compile and run against
>>0.22 as
>> > well.
>>
>> I'm a little bit puzzled by the situation with Pig. It sounds like you
>>need both
>> Pig 0.8.X and Pig 0.9.X be compilable and usable against .22. Bigtop
>>currently
>> targets Pig 0.9.0 (since we had troubles compiling Pig 0.8 cleanly)
>> but if there's
>> a plan to have a release of Pig 0.8.X that would work with .22 I'd love
>>to
>> jump on that bandwagon. Any plans on releasing 0.8.2 ?
>>
>> As for Pig 9 -- will you be pursuing the shims strategy with your patch?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Roman.
>
Re: Hadoop 0.22/HBase 0.92 package repos are now available
Posted by Mi...@emc.com.
Excellent. 0.9.2 it is, then ! Thanks @squarecog.
- milind
On 9/30/11 11:26 AM, "Dmitriy Ryaboy" <dv...@gmail.com> wrote:
>9.1 just went up for vote, and holding up a release to add 0.22
>compatibility seems ill-advised.
>I would be willing to help get 9.2 out in short order to provide
>compatibility with 22, and I think Joep already did a bunch of work to
>make
>this happen.
>
>D
>
>On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 4:54 PM, <Mi...@emc.com> wrote:
>
>> Dmitry,
>>
>> So, your suggestion would be to try and get 0.9.1 compatible with Hadoop
>> 0.22 ? Would there be an interest from pig committers to see that
>>through,
>> as a 0.9.2 perhaps ?
>>
>> - Milind
>>
>> ---
>> Milind Bhandarkar
>> Greenplum Labs, EMC
>> (Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author,
>>and
>> do not necessarily represent the views of any organization, past or
>> present, the author might be affiliated with.)
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9/29/11 4:30 PM, "Dmitriy Ryaboy" <dv...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Pig 8.2 is likely not going to happen (0 interest from any of the
>> >committers).
>> >
>> >0.9 has already been released, 9.1 is in the works, as is 10.
>> >
>> >Not sure how Milind compiled that list of features in 0.9 but it's
>>kind of
>> >an odd grab-bag of 0.8 and 0.9 features.
>> >
>> >The MASSIVE improvement 0.9 introduced is macros. There are other
>>things;
>> >one unheralded in the 3 blog posts below is that handling of nested
>> >structures is cleaned up a lot (in a subtly non-backwards-compatible
>>way).
>> >
>> >http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-features-part-1-macro/
>> >http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-features-part-2-embedding/
>> >(note:
>> >not udfs in other languages, that was already in 8).
>> >
>>
>>http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-0-9-features-part-3-additional-
>>f
>> >eatures/
>> >
>> >
>> >On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@cloudera.com>
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> 2011/9/29 <Mi...@emc.com>:
>> >> > [CC'ng Pig-dev].
>> >> >
>> >> > In terms of interest, what is the community more interested in
>>seeing
>> >> work
>> >> > with Hadoop 0.22 ? Pig 0.8.x or Pig.0.9.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > I took a look at pig 0.9 added features:
>> >> >
>> >> > New parser (still has corner cases)
>> >> > UDFs in languages other than Java
>> >> > Macros
>> >> > Hcatalog support
>> >> >
>> >> > As far as existing installations are concerned, my belief is that
>> >>these
>> >> > features do not make a very compelling case for pig 0.9 to be
>> >>compatible
>> >> > immediately with Hadoop 0.22, and pig 0.8.x makes more sense.
>> >> >
>> >> > What do people think ?
>> >>
>> >> Personally, I'd like to see both of these code lines to have a
>> >> compatibility
>> >> releases to address 0.22/0.23 issues. Also, I'd be totally happy with
>> >> 0.9 NOT addressing this issues if there's 0.10 planned soon enough.
>> >>
>> >> As for 0.8 I really, really, really would like to see a compatibility
>> >> release.
>> >> From the Bigtop side, I can help with build and testing, but I guess
>>we
>> >> need somebody from the Pig community to chime in on how feasible
>> >> 0.8.2 will be.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Roman.
>> >>
>>
>>
Re: Hadoop 0.22/HBase 0.92 package repos are now available
Posted by Mi...@emc.com.
Excellent. 0.9.2 it is, then ! Thanks @squarecog.
- milind
On 9/30/11 11:26 AM, "Dmitriy Ryaboy" <dv...@gmail.com> wrote:
>9.1 just went up for vote, and holding up a release to add 0.22
>compatibility seems ill-advised.
>I would be willing to help get 9.2 out in short order to provide
>compatibility with 22, and I think Joep already did a bunch of work to
>make
>this happen.
>
>D
>
>On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 4:54 PM, <Mi...@emc.com> wrote:
>
>> Dmitry,
>>
>> So, your suggestion would be to try and get 0.9.1 compatible with Hadoop
>> 0.22 ? Would there be an interest from pig committers to see that
>>through,
>> as a 0.9.2 perhaps ?
>>
>> - Milind
>>
>> ---
>> Milind Bhandarkar
>> Greenplum Labs, EMC
>> (Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author,
>>and
>> do not necessarily represent the views of any organization, past or
>> present, the author might be affiliated with.)
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9/29/11 4:30 PM, "Dmitriy Ryaboy" <dv...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Pig 8.2 is likely not going to happen (0 interest from any of the
>> >committers).
>> >
>> >0.9 has already been released, 9.1 is in the works, as is 10.
>> >
>> >Not sure how Milind compiled that list of features in 0.9 but it's
>>kind of
>> >an odd grab-bag of 0.8 and 0.9 features.
>> >
>> >The MASSIVE improvement 0.9 introduced is macros. There are other
>>things;
>> >one unheralded in the 3 blog posts below is that handling of nested
>> >structures is cleaned up a lot (in a subtly non-backwards-compatible
>>way).
>> >
>> >http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-features-part-1-macro/
>> >http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-features-part-2-embedding/
>> >(note:
>> >not udfs in other languages, that was already in 8).
>> >
>>
>>http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-0-9-features-part-3-additional-
>>f
>> >eatures/
>> >
>> >
>> >On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@cloudera.com>
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> 2011/9/29 <Mi...@emc.com>:
>> >> > [CC'ng Pig-dev].
>> >> >
>> >> > In terms of interest, what is the community more interested in
>>seeing
>> >> work
>> >> > with Hadoop 0.22 ? Pig 0.8.x or Pig.0.9.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > I took a look at pig 0.9 added features:
>> >> >
>> >> > New parser (still has corner cases)
>> >> > UDFs in languages other than Java
>> >> > Macros
>> >> > Hcatalog support
>> >> >
>> >> > As far as existing installations are concerned, my belief is that
>> >>these
>> >> > features do not make a very compelling case for pig 0.9 to be
>> >>compatible
>> >> > immediately with Hadoop 0.22, and pig 0.8.x makes more sense.
>> >> >
>> >> > What do people think ?
>> >>
>> >> Personally, I'd like to see both of these code lines to have a
>> >> compatibility
>> >> releases to address 0.22/0.23 issues. Also, I'd be totally happy with
>> >> 0.9 NOT addressing this issues if there's 0.10 planned soon enough.
>> >>
>> >> As for 0.8 I really, really, really would like to see a compatibility
>> >> release.
>> >> From the Bigtop side, I can help with build and testing, but I guess
>>we
>> >> need somebody from the Pig community to chime in on how feasible
>> >> 0.8.2 will be.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Roman.
>> >>
>>
>>
Re: Hadoop 0.22/HBase 0.92 package repos are now available
Posted by Dmitriy Ryaboy <dv...@gmail.com>.
9.1 just went up for vote, and holding up a release to add 0.22
compatibility seems ill-advised.
I would be willing to help get 9.2 out in short order to provide
compatibility with 22, and I think Joep already did a bunch of work to make
this happen.
D
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 4:54 PM, <Mi...@emc.com> wrote:
> Dmitry,
>
> So, your suggestion would be to try and get 0.9.1 compatible with Hadoop
> 0.22 ? Would there be an interest from pig committers to see that through,
> as a 0.9.2 perhaps ?
>
> - Milind
>
> ---
> Milind Bhandarkar
> Greenplum Labs, EMC
> (Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author, and
> do not necessarily represent the views of any organization, past or
> present, the author might be affiliated with.)
>
>
>
> On 9/29/11 4:30 PM, "Dmitriy Ryaboy" <dv...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Pig 8.2 is likely not going to happen (0 interest from any of the
> >committers).
> >
> >0.9 has already been released, 9.1 is in the works, as is 10.
> >
> >Not sure how Milind compiled that list of features in 0.9 but it's kind of
> >an odd grab-bag of 0.8 and 0.9 features.
> >
> >The MASSIVE improvement 0.9 introduced is macros. There are other things;
> >one unheralded in the 3 blog posts below is that handling of nested
> >structures is cleaned up a lot (in a subtly non-backwards-compatible way).
> >
> >http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-features-part-1-macro/
> >http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-features-part-2-embedding/
> >(note:
> >not udfs in other languages, that was already in 8).
> >
> http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-0-9-features-part-3-additional-f
> >eatures/
> >
> >
> >On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@cloudera.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> 2011/9/29 <Mi...@emc.com>:
> >> > [CC'ng Pig-dev].
> >> >
> >> > In terms of interest, what is the community more interested in seeing
> >> work
> >> > with Hadoop 0.22 ? Pig 0.8.x or Pig.0.9.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I took a look at pig 0.9 added features:
> >> >
> >> > New parser (still has corner cases)
> >> > UDFs in languages other than Java
> >> > Macros
> >> > Hcatalog support
> >> >
> >> > As far as existing installations are concerned, my belief is that
> >>these
> >> > features do not make a very compelling case for pig 0.9 to be
> >>compatible
> >> > immediately with Hadoop 0.22, and pig 0.8.x makes more sense.
> >> >
> >> > What do people think ?
> >>
> >> Personally, I'd like to see both of these code lines to have a
> >> compatibility
> >> releases to address 0.22/0.23 issues. Also, I'd be totally happy with
> >> 0.9 NOT addressing this issues if there's 0.10 planned soon enough.
> >>
> >> As for 0.8 I really, really, really would like to see a compatibility
> >> release.
> >> From the Bigtop side, I can help with build and testing, but I guess we
> >> need somebody from the Pig community to chime in on how feasible
> >> 0.8.2 will be.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Roman.
> >>
>
>
Re: Hadoop 0.22/HBase 0.92 package repos are now available
Posted by Dmitriy Ryaboy <dv...@gmail.com>.
9.1 just went up for vote, and holding up a release to add 0.22
compatibility seems ill-advised.
I would be willing to help get 9.2 out in short order to provide
compatibility with 22, and I think Joep already did a bunch of work to make
this happen.
D
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 4:54 PM, <Mi...@emc.com> wrote:
> Dmitry,
>
> So, your suggestion would be to try and get 0.9.1 compatible with Hadoop
> 0.22 ? Would there be an interest from pig committers to see that through,
> as a 0.9.2 perhaps ?
>
> - Milind
>
> ---
> Milind Bhandarkar
> Greenplum Labs, EMC
> (Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author, and
> do not necessarily represent the views of any organization, past or
> present, the author might be affiliated with.)
>
>
>
> On 9/29/11 4:30 PM, "Dmitriy Ryaboy" <dv...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Pig 8.2 is likely not going to happen (0 interest from any of the
> >committers).
> >
> >0.9 has already been released, 9.1 is in the works, as is 10.
> >
> >Not sure how Milind compiled that list of features in 0.9 but it's kind of
> >an odd grab-bag of 0.8 and 0.9 features.
> >
> >The MASSIVE improvement 0.9 introduced is macros. There are other things;
> >one unheralded in the 3 blog posts below is that handling of nested
> >structures is cleaned up a lot (in a subtly non-backwards-compatible way).
> >
> >http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-features-part-1-macro/
> >http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-features-part-2-embedding/
> >(note:
> >not udfs in other languages, that was already in 8).
> >
> http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-0-9-features-part-3-additional-f
> >eatures/
> >
> >
> >On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@cloudera.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> 2011/9/29 <Mi...@emc.com>:
> >> > [CC'ng Pig-dev].
> >> >
> >> > In terms of interest, what is the community more interested in seeing
> >> work
> >> > with Hadoop 0.22 ? Pig 0.8.x or Pig.0.9.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I took a look at pig 0.9 added features:
> >> >
> >> > New parser (still has corner cases)
> >> > UDFs in languages other than Java
> >> > Macros
> >> > Hcatalog support
> >> >
> >> > As far as existing installations are concerned, my belief is that
> >>these
> >> > features do not make a very compelling case for pig 0.9 to be
> >>compatible
> >> > immediately with Hadoop 0.22, and pig 0.8.x makes more sense.
> >> >
> >> > What do people think ?
> >>
> >> Personally, I'd like to see both of these code lines to have a
> >> compatibility
> >> releases to address 0.22/0.23 issues. Also, I'd be totally happy with
> >> 0.9 NOT addressing this issues if there's 0.10 planned soon enough.
> >>
> >> As for 0.8 I really, really, really would like to see a compatibility
> >> release.
> >> From the Bigtop side, I can help with build and testing, but I guess we
> >> need somebody from the Pig community to chime in on how feasible
> >> 0.8.2 will be.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Roman.
> >>
>
>
Re: Hadoop 0.22/HBase 0.92 package repos are now available
Posted by Mi...@emc.com.
Dmitry,
So, your suggestion would be to try and get 0.9.1 compatible with Hadoop
0.22 ? Would there be an interest from pig committers to see that through,
as a 0.9.2 perhaps ?
- Milind
---
Milind Bhandarkar
Greenplum Labs, EMC
(Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author, and
do not necessarily represent the views of any organization, past or
present, the author might be affiliated with.)
On 9/29/11 4:30 PM, "Dmitriy Ryaboy" <dv...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Pig 8.2 is likely not going to happen (0 interest from any of the
>committers).
>
>0.9 has already been released, 9.1 is in the works, as is 10.
>
>Not sure how Milind compiled that list of features in 0.9 but it's kind of
>an odd grab-bag of 0.8 and 0.9 features.
>
>The MASSIVE improvement 0.9 introduced is macros. There are other things;
>one unheralded in the 3 blog posts below is that handling of nested
>structures is cleaned up a lot (in a subtly non-backwards-compatible way).
>
>http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-features-part-1-macro/
>http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-features-part-2-embedding/
>(note:
>not udfs in other languages, that was already in 8).
>http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-0-9-features-part-3-additional-f
>eatures/
>
>
>On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@cloudera.com>
>wrote:
>
>> 2011/9/29 <Mi...@emc.com>:
>> > [CC'ng Pig-dev].
>> >
>> > In terms of interest, what is the community more interested in seeing
>> work
>> > with Hadoop 0.22 ? Pig 0.8.x or Pig.0.9.
>> >
>> >
>> > I took a look at pig 0.9 added features:
>> >
>> > New parser (still has corner cases)
>> > UDFs in languages other than Java
>> > Macros
>> > Hcatalog support
>> >
>> > As far as existing installations are concerned, my belief is that
>>these
>> > features do not make a very compelling case for pig 0.9 to be
>>compatible
>> > immediately with Hadoop 0.22, and pig 0.8.x makes more sense.
>> >
>> > What do people think ?
>>
>> Personally, I'd like to see both of these code lines to have a
>> compatibility
>> releases to address 0.22/0.23 issues. Also, I'd be totally happy with
>> 0.9 NOT addressing this issues if there's 0.10 planned soon enough.
>>
>> As for 0.8 I really, really, really would like to see a compatibility
>> release.
>> From the Bigtop side, I can help with build and testing, but I guess we
>> need somebody from the Pig community to chime in on how feasible
>> 0.8.2 will be.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Roman.
>>
Re: Hadoop 0.22/HBase 0.92 package repos are now available
Posted by Mi...@emc.com.
Dmitry,
So, your suggestion would be to try and get 0.9.1 compatible with Hadoop
0.22 ? Would there be an interest from pig committers to see that through,
as a 0.9.2 perhaps ?
- Milind
---
Milind Bhandarkar
Greenplum Labs, EMC
(Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author, and
do not necessarily represent the views of any organization, past or
present, the author might be affiliated with.)
On 9/29/11 4:30 PM, "Dmitriy Ryaboy" <dv...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Pig 8.2 is likely not going to happen (0 interest from any of the
>committers).
>
>0.9 has already been released, 9.1 is in the works, as is 10.
>
>Not sure how Milind compiled that list of features in 0.9 but it's kind of
>an odd grab-bag of 0.8 and 0.9 features.
>
>The MASSIVE improvement 0.9 introduced is macros. There are other things;
>one unheralded in the 3 blog posts below is that handling of nested
>structures is cleaned up a lot (in a subtly non-backwards-compatible way).
>
>http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-features-part-1-macro/
>http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-features-part-2-embedding/
>(note:
>not udfs in other languages, that was already in 8).
>http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-0-9-features-part-3-additional-f
>eatures/
>
>
>On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@cloudera.com>
>wrote:
>
>> 2011/9/29 <Mi...@emc.com>:
>> > [CC'ng Pig-dev].
>> >
>> > In terms of interest, what is the community more interested in seeing
>> work
>> > with Hadoop 0.22 ? Pig 0.8.x or Pig.0.9.
>> >
>> >
>> > I took a look at pig 0.9 added features:
>> >
>> > New parser (still has corner cases)
>> > UDFs in languages other than Java
>> > Macros
>> > Hcatalog support
>> >
>> > As far as existing installations are concerned, my belief is that
>>these
>> > features do not make a very compelling case for pig 0.9 to be
>>compatible
>> > immediately with Hadoop 0.22, and pig 0.8.x makes more sense.
>> >
>> > What do people think ?
>>
>> Personally, I'd like to see both of these code lines to have a
>> compatibility
>> releases to address 0.22/0.23 issues. Also, I'd be totally happy with
>> 0.9 NOT addressing this issues if there's 0.10 planned soon enough.
>>
>> As for 0.8 I really, really, really would like to see a compatibility
>> release.
>> From the Bigtop side, I can help with build and testing, but I guess we
>> need somebody from the Pig community to chime in on how feasible
>> 0.8.2 will be.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Roman.
>>
Re: Hadoop 0.22/HBase 0.92 package repos are now available
Posted by Dmitriy Ryaboy <dv...@gmail.com>.
Pig 8.2 is likely not going to happen (0 interest from any of the
committers).
0.9 has already been released, 9.1 is in the works, as is 10.
Not sure how Milind compiled that list of features in 0.9 but it's kind of
an odd grab-bag of 0.8 and 0.9 features.
The MASSIVE improvement 0.9 introduced is macros. There are other things;
one unheralded in the 3 blog posts below is that handling of nested
structures is cleaned up a lot (in a subtly non-backwards-compatible way).
http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-features-part-1-macro/
http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-features-part-2-embedding/ (note:
not udfs in other languages, that was already in 8).
http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-0-9-features-part-3-additional-features/
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> 2011/9/29 <Mi...@emc.com>:
> > [CC'ng Pig-dev].
> >
> > In terms of interest, what is the community more interested in seeing
> work
> > with Hadoop 0.22 ? Pig 0.8.x or Pig.0.9.
> >
> >
> > I took a look at pig 0.9 added features:
> >
> > New parser (still has corner cases)
> > UDFs in languages other than Java
> > Macros
> > Hcatalog support
> >
> > As far as existing installations are concerned, my belief is that these
> > features do not make a very compelling case for pig 0.9 to be compatible
> > immediately with Hadoop 0.22, and pig 0.8.x makes more sense.
> >
> > What do people think ?
>
> Personally, I'd like to see both of these code lines to have a
> compatibility
> releases to address 0.22/0.23 issues. Also, I'd be totally happy with
> 0.9 NOT addressing this issues if there's 0.10 planned soon enough.
>
> As for 0.8 I really, really, really would like to see a compatibility
> release.
> From the Bigtop side, I can help with build and testing, but I guess we
> need somebody from the Pig community to chime in on how feasible
> 0.8.2 will be.
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>
Re: Hadoop 0.22/HBase 0.92 package repos are now available
Posted by Dmitriy Ryaboy <dv...@gmail.com>.
Pig 8.2 is likely not going to happen (0 interest from any of the
committers).
0.9 has already been released, 9.1 is in the works, as is 10.
Not sure how Milind compiled that list of features in 0.9 but it's kind of
an odd grab-bag of 0.8 and 0.9 features.
The MASSIVE improvement 0.9 introduced is macros. There are other things;
one unheralded in the 3 blog posts below is that handling of nested
structures is cleaned up a lot (in a subtly non-backwards-compatible way).
http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-features-part-1-macro/
http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-features-part-2-embedding/ (note:
not udfs in other languages, that was already in 8).
http://www.hortonworks.com/new-apache-pig-0-9-features-part-3-additional-features/
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> 2011/9/29 <Mi...@emc.com>:
> > [CC'ng Pig-dev].
> >
> > In terms of interest, what is the community more interested in seeing
> work
> > with Hadoop 0.22 ? Pig 0.8.x or Pig.0.9.
> >
> >
> > I took a look at pig 0.9 added features:
> >
> > New parser (still has corner cases)
> > UDFs in languages other than Java
> > Macros
> > Hcatalog support
> >
> > As far as existing installations are concerned, my belief is that these
> > features do not make a very compelling case for pig 0.9 to be compatible
> > immediately with Hadoop 0.22, and pig 0.8.x makes more sense.
> >
> > What do people think ?
>
> Personally, I'd like to see both of these code lines to have a
> compatibility
> releases to address 0.22/0.23 issues. Also, I'd be totally happy with
> 0.9 NOT addressing this issues if there's 0.10 planned soon enough.
>
> As for 0.8 I really, really, really would like to see a compatibility
> release.
> From the Bigtop side, I can help with build and testing, but I guess we
> need somebody from the Pig community to chime in on how feasible
> 0.8.2 will be.
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>
Re: Hadoop 0.22/HBase 0.92 package repos are now available
Posted by Mi...@emc.com.
Roman,
What is your definition of pig 0.8.2 ? Is it 0.8.1 + Hadoop 0.22
compatibility ?
Joep has already made 0.8.1 work with Hadoop 0.22.
- milind
On 9/29/11 3:52 PM, "Roman Shaposhnik" <rv...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>2011/9/29 <Mi...@emc.com>:
>> [CC'ng Pig-dev].
>>
>> In terms of interest, what is the community more interested in seeing
>>work
>> with Hadoop 0.22 ? Pig 0.8.x or Pig.0.9.
>>
>>
>> I took a look at pig 0.9 added features:
>>
>> New parser (still has corner cases)
>> UDFs in languages other than Java
>> Macros
>> Hcatalog support
>>
>> As far as existing installations are concerned, my belief is that these
>> features do not make a very compelling case for pig 0.9 to be compatible
>> immediately with Hadoop 0.22, and pig 0.8.x makes more sense.
>>
>> What do people think ?
>
>Personally, I'd like to see both of these code lines to have a
>compatibility
>releases to address 0.22/0.23 issues. Also, I'd be totally happy with
>0.9 NOT addressing this issues if there's 0.10 planned soon enough.
>
>As for 0.8 I really, really, really would like to see a compatibility
>release.
>From the Bigtop side, I can help with build and testing, but I guess we
>need somebody from the Pig community to chime in on how feasible
>0.8.2 will be.
>
>Thanks,
>Roman.
>
Re: Hadoop 0.22/HBase 0.92 package repos are now available
Posted by Mi...@emc.com.
Roman,
What is your definition of pig 0.8.2 ? Is it 0.8.1 + Hadoop 0.22
compatibility ?
Joep has already made 0.8.1 work with Hadoop 0.22.
- milind
On 9/29/11 3:52 PM, "Roman Shaposhnik" <rv...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>2011/9/29 <Mi...@emc.com>:
>> [CC'ng Pig-dev].
>>
>> In terms of interest, what is the community more interested in seeing
>>work
>> with Hadoop 0.22 ? Pig 0.8.x or Pig.0.9.
>>
>>
>> I took a look at pig 0.9 added features:
>>
>> New parser (still has corner cases)
>> UDFs in languages other than Java
>> Macros
>> Hcatalog support
>>
>> As far as existing installations are concerned, my belief is that these
>> features do not make a very compelling case for pig 0.9 to be compatible
>> immediately with Hadoop 0.22, and pig 0.8.x makes more sense.
>>
>> What do people think ?
>
>Personally, I'd like to see both of these code lines to have a
>compatibility
>releases to address 0.22/0.23 issues. Also, I'd be totally happy with
>0.9 NOT addressing this issues if there's 0.10 planned soon enough.
>
>As for 0.8 I really, really, really would like to see a compatibility
>release.
>From the Bigtop side, I can help with build and testing, but I guess we
>need somebody from the Pig community to chime in on how feasible
>0.8.2 will be.
>
>Thanks,
>Roman.
>
Re: Hadoop 0.22/HBase 0.92 package repos are now available
Posted by Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@cloudera.com>.
2011/9/29 <Mi...@emc.com>:
> [CC'ng Pig-dev].
>
> In terms of interest, what is the community more interested in seeing work
> with Hadoop 0.22 ? Pig 0.8.x or Pig.0.9.
>
>
> I took a look at pig 0.9 added features:
>
> New parser (still has corner cases)
> UDFs in languages other than Java
> Macros
> Hcatalog support
>
> As far as existing installations are concerned, my belief is that these
> features do not make a very compelling case for pig 0.9 to be compatible
> immediately with Hadoop 0.22, and pig 0.8.x makes more sense.
>
> What do people think ?
Personally, I'd like to see both of these code lines to have a compatibility
releases to address 0.22/0.23 issues. Also, I'd be totally happy with
0.9 NOT addressing this issues if there's 0.10 planned soon enough.
As for 0.8 I really, really, really would like to see a compatibility release.
>From the Bigtop side, I can help with build and testing, but I guess we
need somebody from the Pig community to chime in on how feasible
0.8.2 will be.
Thanks,
Roman.
Re: Hadoop 0.22/HBase 0.92 package repos are now available
Posted by Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@cloudera.com>.
2011/9/29 <Mi...@emc.com>:
> [CC'ng Pig-dev].
>
> In terms of interest, what is the community more interested in seeing work
> with Hadoop 0.22 ? Pig 0.8.x or Pig.0.9.
>
>
> I took a look at pig 0.9 added features:
>
> New parser (still has corner cases)
> UDFs in languages other than Java
> Macros
> Hcatalog support
>
> As far as existing installations are concerned, my belief is that these
> features do not make a very compelling case for pig 0.9 to be compatible
> immediately with Hadoop 0.22, and pig 0.8.x makes more sense.
>
> What do people think ?
Personally, I'd like to see both of these code lines to have a compatibility
releases to address 0.22/0.23 issues. Also, I'd be totally happy with
0.9 NOT addressing this issues if there's 0.10 planned soon enough.
As for 0.8 I really, really, really would like to see a compatibility release.
>From the Bigtop side, I can help with build and testing, but I guess we
need somebody from the Pig community to chime in on how feasible
0.8.2 will be.
Thanks,
Roman.