Re: Time to address the Guava version problem

[Steve Loughran <st...@hortonworks.com>]

I've a patch for HADOOP-11102 which rolls curator back to v 2.4.1, which
only pulls in Guava 14...hadoop should now be weakly consistent -at least
not "strongly inconsistent"- in its guava versions.

allowing hadoop to work on 16.x while still remaining compatible with 11.x
is still something to work on -there's some patches there already

On 24 September 2014 07:35, Billie Rinaldi <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The use of an unnecessarily old dependency encourages problems like
> HDFS-7040.  The current Guava dependency is a big problem for downstream
> apps and I'd really like to see it addressed.
>
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Steve Loughran <st...@hortonworks.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I'm using curator elsewhere, it does log a lot (as does the ZK client),
> but
> > it solves a lot of problem. It's being adopted more downstream too.
> >
> > I'm wondering if we can move the code to the extent we know it works with
> > Guava 16, with the hadoop core being 16-compatible, but not actually
> > migrated to 16.x only. Then hadoop ships with 16 for curator & downstream
> > apps, but we say "you can probably roll back to 11 provided you don't use
> > features x-y-z".
> >
> > On 23 September 2014 21:55, Robert Kanter <rk...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> >
> > > At the same time, not being able to use Curator will require a lot of
> > extra
> > > code, a lot of which we probably already have from the ZKRMStateStore,
> > but
> > > it's not available to use in hadoop-auth.  We'd need to create our own
> ZK
> > > libraries that Hadoop components can use, but (a) that's going to take
> a
> > > while, and (b) it seems silly to reinvent the wheel when Curator
> already
> > > does all this.
> > >
> > > I agree that upgrading Guava will be a compatibility problem though...
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 9:30 AM, Sandy Ryza <sa...@cloudera.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > If we've broken compatibility in branch-2, that's a bug that we need
> to
> > > > fix. HADOOP-10868 has not yet made it into a release; I don't see it
> > as a
> > > > justification for solidifying the breakage.
> > > >
> > > > -1 to upgrading Guava in branch-2.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 3:06 AM, Steve Loughran <
> > stevel@hortonworks.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 to upgrading guava. Irrespective of downstream apps, the hadoop
> > > source
> > > > > tree is now internally inconsistent
> > > > >
> > > > > On 22 September 2014 17:56, Sangjin Lee <sj...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I agree that a more robust solution is to have better
> classloading
> > > > > > isolation.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Still, IMHO guava (and possibly protobuf as well) sticks out
> like a
> > > > sore
> > > > > > thumb. There are just too many issues in trying to support both
> > guava
> > > > 11
> > > > > > and guava 16. Independent of what we may do with the classloading
> > > > > > isolation, we should still consider upgrading guava.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > My 2 cents.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Karthik Kambatla <
> > > kasha@cloudera.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Upgrading Guava version is tricky. While it helps in many
> cases,
> > it
> > > > can
> > > > > > > break existing applications/deployments. I understand we do not
> > > have
> > > > a
> > > > > > > policy for updating dependencies, but still we should be
> careful
> > > with
> > > > > > > Guava.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would be more inclined towards a more permanent solution to
> > this
> > > > > > problem
> > > > > > > - how about prioritizing classpath isolation so applications
> > aren't
> > > > > > > affected by Hadoop dependency updates at all? I understand that
> > > will
> > > > > also
> > > > > > > break user applications, but it might be the driving feature
> for
> > > > Hadoop
> > > > > > > 3.0?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Sangjin Lee <sjlee@apache.org
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I would also agree on upgrading guava. Yes I am aware of the
> > > > > potential
> > > > > > > > impact on customers who might rely on hadoop bringing in
> guava
> > > 11.
> > > > > > > However,
> > > > > > > > IMHO the balance tipped over to the other side a while ago;
> > i.e.
> > > I
> > > > > > think
> > > > > > > > there are far more people using guava 16 in their code and
> > > > scrambling
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > make things work than the other way around.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Steve Loughran <
> > > > > > stevel@hortonworks.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I know we've been ignoring the Guava version problem, but
> > > > > > HADOOP-10868
> > > > > > > > > added a transitive dependency on Guava 16 by way of Curator
> > > 2.6.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Maven currently forces the build to use Guava 11.0.2, but
> > this
> > > is
> > > > > > > hiding
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > > > compile timeall code paths from curator which may use
> > classes &
> > > > > > methods
> > > > > > > > > that aren't there.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I need curator for my own work (2.4.1 & Guava 14.0 was what
> > I'd
> > > > > been
> > > > > > > > > using), so don't think we can go back.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > HADOOP-11102 covers the problem -but doesn't propose a
> > specific
> > > > > > > solution.
> > > > > > > > > But to me the one that seems most likely to work is: update
> > > Guava
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -steve
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > > > > > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the
> > individual
> > > or
> > > > > > > entity
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > > > > confidential,
> > > > > > > > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
> > If
> > > > the
> > > > > > > reader
> > > > > > > > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
> hereby
> > > > > > notified
> > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution,
> > disclosure
> > > or
> > > > > > > > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> > you
> > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > received this communication in error, please contact the
> > sender
> > > > > > > > immediately
> > > > > > > > > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> > > entity
> > > > to
> > > > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > confidential,
> > > > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> > > reader
> > > > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > notified
> > > > that
> > > > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > > > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
> have
> > > > > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > > > immediately
> > > > > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity
> to
> > which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
> > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> that
> > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately
> > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> >
>

-- 
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to 
which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, 
privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader 
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that 
any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or 
forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately 
and delete it from your system. Thank You.