You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@phoenix.apache.org by Xinyi Yan <ya...@apache.org> on 2021/01/29 00:35:27 UTC
[Discuss] Dropping support for older HBase version
Hi,
I'm thinking to drop the number of supported HBase versions for future
releases. For example, the HBase 1.3 was EOM'd in August 2020, do we still
consider support it for 4.17.0? Similarly, our current master branch also
supports EOM'd HBase version. If phoenix users already upgraded their
HBase, we should not spend time supporting these old versions IMO.
I think we should do it after 4.16.0 and 5.1.0, thoughts?
Thanks,
Xinyi
Re: [Discuss] Dropping support for older HBase version
Posted by Istvan Toth <st...@cloudera.com.INVALID>.
Having a formal policy on maintaining HBase support would provide a peace
of mind to users.
* When do we drop support for minor HBase releases ?
* As soon as they are EOL ?
* Do we want to declare a grace period ?
* What happens if a new HBase patch release is incompatible ?
* We may want to keep the old compatibility module in the code if we have
already released a version where it is supported
* Do we drop support for HBase releases in Phoenix patch versions ?
(provided we plan to release them in the future)
* So far we didn't make an issue of dropping support for older HBase
patch releases in master, as we didn't have a release that supports
them anyway.
Dropping Hbase 1.3 support would allow for a major simplification in the
compat code.
Dropping the rest of the versions wouldn't buy us much (apart from CI
resource usage)
Istvan
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 5:57 AM Viraj Jasani <vj...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1(non-binding) to EOLing the support for HBase 1.3 and 2.1 at least since
> both were EOLed last year (1.4 and 2.2 can also be dropped).
>
> Moreover, b/ 2.4.0 and 2.4.1 we have some compat issue in IA.Private class
> (we need some utility from HStore which is refactored in 2.4.1), hence we
> will need new compat module to support 2.4.1+ releases in Phoenix 5.2.0+
> releases mostly.
>
>
> On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 6:54 AM, Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > +1. Following 4.16 and 5.1's releases I'd suggest EOLing support for
> HBase
> > 1.3, 1.4, 2.1 and 2.2, I believe all of which have been EOLed by the
> HBase
> > community. All of those versions also require special compatibility lib
> > support currently.
> >
> > Geoffrey
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 6:35 PM Xinyi Yan <ya...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm thinking to drop the number of supported HBase versions for future
> > > releases. For example, the HBase 1.3 was EOM'd in August 2020, do we
> > still
> > > consider support it for 4.17.0? Similarly, our current master branch
> also
> > > supports EOM'd HBase version. If phoenix users already upgraded their
> > > HBase, we should not spend time supporting these old versions IMO.
> > >
> > > I think we should do it after 4.16.0 and 5.1.0, thoughts?
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Xinyi
> > >
> >
>
--
*István Tóth* | Staff Software Engineer
stoty@cloudera.com <https://www.cloudera.com>
[image: Cloudera] <https://www.cloudera.com/>
[image: Cloudera on Twitter] <https://twitter.com/cloudera> [image:
Cloudera on Facebook] <https://www.facebook.com/cloudera> [image: Cloudera
on LinkedIn] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/cloudera>
<https://www.cloudera.com/>
------------------------------
Re: [Discuss] Dropping support for older HBase version
Posted by Istvan Toth <st...@cloudera.com.INVALID>.
I agree that having such a policy does place a burden on us, and we need to
balance the commitments we make and the workload it generates
versus the greater user confidence and possible increased adoption that it
could result in.
I feel that publishing such guidelines, and sticking to them ( as well as
actually making timely-ish releases)
would go a long way towards addressing the image / confidence deficit that
Phoenix (especially and deservedly Phoenix on HBase 2) anecdotally has.
Also, I feel that we already have a pretty good mechanism to handle the
differences in HBase capabilities via the compatibility modules, and
specifically the
HbaseCompatCapabilities mechanism.
Of course this policy would be a guideline, not a guarantee and worded as
such.
Even if we do not publish it, reaching a consensus on the mailing list
would be useful internally.
regards
Istvan
On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 8:02 AM Ankit Singhal <an...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> +user@phoenix.apache.org
>
> I wouldn't suggest making any strict policies for ourselves and
> doing any promise to the user on the support of EOL HBase versions.
> As it may become a burden down the line for us and then sometimes require
> an exemption
> if we can't make a feature work with a certain release.
>
> IMHO, it can be on the basis of consensus on a mailing list and
> willingness to support
> the development and release of the respective version a user/s is
> interested in. Though,
> I can agree that it is good to remain pro-active for these consensuses to
> avoid last-minute
> surprise for the user who has been waiting for a long on the release.
>
> Regards,
> Ankit Singhal
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 10:59 PM Istvan Toth <st...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure I understand, let me rephrase
>>
>> So we drop support right after we release a Phoenix minor version,
>> if the Phoenix release date is more than a year after the HBase EOL date ?
>>
>> That sounds fine to me.
>>
>> How about patch releases ?
>> I feel that we should not drop Hbase release support in a patch release.
>> i.e if we release 5.1.2, 5.1.2, etc those should keep support for all
>> HBase
>> versions that 5.1.0 supported.
>>
>> regards
>> Istvan
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 3:23 AM Xinyi Yan <ya...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > IMO, we should consider one year grace period plus one minor release?
>> For
>> > example, if we have a new 4.17.0 release in September 2021, we should
>> not
>> > support HBase 1.3(was EOL in Aug 2020) since it passes one year grace
>> > period and one more release support. This means we will include HBase
>> 1.4
>> > and 2.2 support for the next releases(4.17.0 and 5.2.0). As Istvan
>> > mentioned above, dropping HBase 1.3 support would make simplification,
>> at
>> > least I feel we should drop the support for HBase 1.3 for the next minor
>> > release.
>> >
>> > What do people think about this? One minor release plus one year grace
>> > period?
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 7:26 AM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > > I'd request that we keep hbase-2.2 support around for a while longer.
>> If
>> > > we drop that, it's going to cause us some major headache whereas I'd
>> > > rather see us able to keep pushing our dayjob efforts directly into
>> > > upstream.
>> > >
>> > > On 1/28/21 11:56 PM, Viraj Jasani wrote:
>> > > > +1(non-binding) to EOLing the support for HBase 1.3 and 2.1 at least
>> > > since
>> > > > both were EOLed last year (1.4 and 2.2 can also be dropped).
>> > > >
>> > > > Moreover, b/ 2.4.0 and 2.4.1 we have some compat issue in IA.Private
>> > > class
>> > > > (we need some utility from HStore which is refactored in 2.4.1),
>> hence
>> > we
>> > > > will need new compat module to support 2.4.1+ releases in Phoenix
>> > 5.2.0+
>> > > > releases mostly.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 6:54 AM, Geoffrey Jacoby <gjacoby@apache.org
>> >
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> +1. Following 4.16 and 5.1's releases I'd suggest EOLing support
>> for
>> > > HBase
>> > > >> 1.3, 1.4, 2.1 and 2.2, I believe all of which have been EOLed by
>> the
>> > > HBase
>> > > >> community. All of those versions also require special compatibility
>> > lib
>> > > >> support currently.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Geoffrey
>> > > >>
>> > > >> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 6:35 PM Xinyi Yan <ya...@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >>> Hi,
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> I'm thinking to drop the number of supported HBase versions for
>> > future
>> > > >>> releases. For example, the HBase 1.3 was EOM'd in August 2020, do
>> we
>> > > >> still
>> > > >>> consider support it for 4.17.0? Similarly, our current master
>> branch
>> > > also
>> > > >>> supports EOM'd HBase version. If phoenix users already upgraded
>> their
>> > > >>> HBase, we should not spend time supporting these old versions IMO.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> I think we should do it after 4.16.0 and 5.1.0, thoughts?
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Thanks,
>> > > >>> Xinyi
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
--
*István Tóth* | Staff Software Engineer
stoty@cloudera.com <https://www.cloudera.com>
[image: Cloudera] <https://www.cloudera.com/>
[image: Cloudera on Twitter] <https://twitter.com/cloudera> [image:
Cloudera on Facebook] <https://www.facebook.com/cloudera> [image: Cloudera
on LinkedIn] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/cloudera>
<https://www.cloudera.com/>
------------------------------
Re: [Discuss] Dropping support for older HBase version
Posted by Istvan Toth <st...@cloudera.com>.
I agree that having such a policy does place a burden on us, and we need to
balance the commitments we make and the workload it generates
versus the greater user confidence and possible increased adoption that it
could result in.
I feel that publishing such guidelines, and sticking to them ( as well as
actually making timely-ish releases)
would go a long way towards addressing the image / confidence deficit that
Phoenix (especially and deservedly Phoenix on HBase 2) anecdotally has.
Also, I feel that we already have a pretty good mechanism to handle the
differences in HBase capabilities via the compatibility modules, and
specifically the
HbaseCompatCapabilities mechanism.
Of course this policy would be a guideline, not a guarantee and worded as
such.
Even if we do not publish it, reaching a consensus on the mailing list
would be useful internally.
regards
Istvan
On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 8:02 AM Ankit Singhal <an...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> +user@phoenix.apache.org
>
> I wouldn't suggest making any strict policies for ourselves and
> doing any promise to the user on the support of EOL HBase versions.
> As it may become a burden down the line for us and then sometimes require
> an exemption
> if we can't make a feature work with a certain release.
>
> IMHO, it can be on the basis of consensus on a mailing list and
> willingness to support
> the development and release of the respective version a user/s is
> interested in. Though,
> I can agree that it is good to remain pro-active for these consensuses to
> avoid last-minute
> surprise for the user who has been waiting for a long on the release.
>
> Regards,
> Ankit Singhal
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 10:59 PM Istvan Toth <st...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure I understand, let me rephrase
>>
>> So we drop support right after we release a Phoenix minor version,
>> if the Phoenix release date is more than a year after the HBase EOL date ?
>>
>> That sounds fine to me.
>>
>> How about patch releases ?
>> I feel that we should not drop Hbase release support in a patch release.
>> i.e if we release 5.1.2, 5.1.2, etc those should keep support for all
>> HBase
>> versions that 5.1.0 supported.
>>
>> regards
>> Istvan
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 3:23 AM Xinyi Yan <ya...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > IMO, we should consider one year grace period plus one minor release?
>> For
>> > example, if we have a new 4.17.0 release in September 2021, we should
>> not
>> > support HBase 1.3(was EOL in Aug 2020) since it passes one year grace
>> > period and one more release support. This means we will include HBase
>> 1.4
>> > and 2.2 support for the next releases(4.17.0 and 5.2.0). As Istvan
>> > mentioned above, dropping HBase 1.3 support would make simplification,
>> at
>> > least I feel we should drop the support for HBase 1.3 for the next minor
>> > release.
>> >
>> > What do people think about this? One minor release plus one year grace
>> > period?
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 7:26 AM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > > I'd request that we keep hbase-2.2 support around for a while longer.
>> If
>> > > we drop that, it's going to cause us some major headache whereas I'd
>> > > rather see us able to keep pushing our dayjob efforts directly into
>> > > upstream.
>> > >
>> > > On 1/28/21 11:56 PM, Viraj Jasani wrote:
>> > > > +1(non-binding) to EOLing the support for HBase 1.3 and 2.1 at least
>> > > since
>> > > > both were EOLed last year (1.4 and 2.2 can also be dropped).
>> > > >
>> > > > Moreover, b/ 2.4.0 and 2.4.1 we have some compat issue in IA.Private
>> > > class
>> > > > (we need some utility from HStore which is refactored in 2.4.1),
>> hence
>> > we
>> > > > will need new compat module to support 2.4.1+ releases in Phoenix
>> > 5.2.0+
>> > > > releases mostly.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 6:54 AM, Geoffrey Jacoby <gjacoby@apache.org
>> >
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> +1. Following 4.16 and 5.1's releases I'd suggest EOLing support
>> for
>> > > HBase
>> > > >> 1.3, 1.4, 2.1 and 2.2, I believe all of which have been EOLed by
>> the
>> > > HBase
>> > > >> community. All of those versions also require special compatibility
>> > lib
>> > > >> support currently.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Geoffrey
>> > > >>
>> > > >> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 6:35 PM Xinyi Yan <ya...@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >>> Hi,
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> I'm thinking to drop the number of supported HBase versions for
>> > future
>> > > >>> releases. For example, the HBase 1.3 was EOM'd in August 2020, do
>> we
>> > > >> still
>> > > >>> consider support it for 4.17.0? Similarly, our current master
>> branch
>> > > also
>> > > >>> supports EOM'd HBase version. If phoenix users already upgraded
>> their
>> > > >>> HBase, we should not spend time supporting these old versions IMO.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> I think we should do it after 4.16.0 and 5.1.0, thoughts?
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Thanks,
>> > > >>> Xinyi
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
--
*István Tóth* | Staff Software Engineer
stoty@cloudera.com <https://www.cloudera.com>
[image: Cloudera] <https://www.cloudera.com/>
[image: Cloudera on Twitter] <https://twitter.com/cloudera> [image:
Cloudera on Facebook] <https://www.facebook.com/cloudera> [image: Cloudera
on LinkedIn] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/cloudera>
<https://www.cloudera.com/>
------------------------------
Re: [Discuss] Dropping support for older HBase version
Posted by Ankit Singhal <an...@gmail.com>.
+user@phoenix.apache.org
I wouldn't suggest making any strict policies for ourselves and
doing any promise to the user on the support of EOL HBase versions.
As it may become a burden down the line for us and then sometimes require
an exemption
if we can't make a feature work with a certain release.
IMHO, it can be on the basis of consensus on a mailing list and willingness
to support
the development and release of the respective version a user/s is
interested in. Though,
I can agree that it is good to remain pro-active for these consensuses to
avoid last-minute
surprise for the user who has been waiting for a long on the release.
Regards,
Ankit Singhal
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 10:59 PM Istvan Toth <st...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand, let me rephrase
>
> So we drop support right after we release a Phoenix minor version,
> if the Phoenix release date is more than a year after the HBase EOL date ?
>
> That sounds fine to me.
>
> How about patch releases ?
> I feel that we should not drop Hbase release support in a patch release.
> i.e if we release 5.1.2, 5.1.2, etc those should keep support for all HBase
> versions that 5.1.0 supported.
>
> regards
> Istvan
>
> On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 3:23 AM Xinyi Yan <ya...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > IMO, we should consider one year grace period plus one minor release? For
> > example, if we have a new 4.17.0 release in September 2021, we should not
> > support HBase 1.3(was EOL in Aug 2020) since it passes one year grace
> > period and one more release support. This means we will include HBase 1.4
> > and 2.2 support for the next releases(4.17.0 and 5.2.0). As Istvan
> > mentioned above, dropping HBase 1.3 support would make simplification, at
> > least I feel we should drop the support for HBase 1.3 for the next minor
> > release.
> >
> > What do people think about this? One minor release plus one year grace
> > period?
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 7:26 AM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I'd request that we keep hbase-2.2 support around for a while longer.
> If
> > > we drop that, it's going to cause us some major headache whereas I'd
> > > rather see us able to keep pushing our dayjob efforts directly into
> > > upstream.
> > >
> > > On 1/28/21 11:56 PM, Viraj Jasani wrote:
> > > > +1(non-binding) to EOLing the support for HBase 1.3 and 2.1 at least
> > > since
> > > > both were EOLed last year (1.4 and 2.2 can also be dropped).
> > > >
> > > > Moreover, b/ 2.4.0 and 2.4.1 we have some compat issue in IA.Private
> > > class
> > > > (we need some utility from HStore which is refactored in 2.4.1),
> hence
> > we
> > > > will need new compat module to support 2.4.1+ releases in Phoenix
> > 5.2.0+
> > > > releases mostly.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 6:54 AM, Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> +1. Following 4.16 and 5.1's releases I'd suggest EOLing support for
> > > HBase
> > > >> 1.3, 1.4, 2.1 and 2.2, I believe all of which have been EOLed by the
> > > HBase
> > > >> community. All of those versions also require special compatibility
> > lib
> > > >> support currently.
> > > >>
> > > >> Geoffrey
> > > >>
> > > >> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 6:35 PM Xinyi Yan <ya...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Hi,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I'm thinking to drop the number of supported HBase versions for
> > future
> > > >>> releases. For example, the HBase 1.3 was EOM'd in August 2020, do
> we
> > > >> still
> > > >>> consider support it for 4.17.0? Similarly, our current master
> branch
> > > also
> > > >>> supports EOM'd HBase version. If phoenix users already upgraded
> their
> > > >>> HBase, we should not spend time supporting these old versions IMO.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I think we should do it after 4.16.0 and 5.1.0, thoughts?
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Thanks,
> > > >>> Xinyi
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [Discuss] Dropping support for older HBase version
Posted by Ankit Singhal <an...@gmail.com>.
+user@phoenix.apache.org
I wouldn't suggest making any strict policies for ourselves and
doing any promise to the user on the support of EOL HBase versions.
As it may become a burden down the line for us and then sometimes require
an exemption
if we can't make a feature work with a certain release.
IMHO, it can be on the basis of consensus on a mailing list and willingness
to support
the development and release of the respective version a user/s is
interested in. Though,
I can agree that it is good to remain pro-active for these consensuses to
avoid last-minute
surprise for the user who has been waiting for a long on the release.
Regards,
Ankit Singhal
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 10:59 PM Istvan Toth <st...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand, let me rephrase
>
> So we drop support right after we release a Phoenix minor version,
> if the Phoenix release date is more than a year after the HBase EOL date ?
>
> That sounds fine to me.
>
> How about patch releases ?
> I feel that we should not drop Hbase release support in a patch release.
> i.e if we release 5.1.2, 5.1.2, etc those should keep support for all HBase
> versions that 5.1.0 supported.
>
> regards
> Istvan
>
> On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 3:23 AM Xinyi Yan <ya...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > IMO, we should consider one year grace period plus one minor release? For
> > example, if we have a new 4.17.0 release in September 2021, we should not
> > support HBase 1.3(was EOL in Aug 2020) since it passes one year grace
> > period and one more release support. This means we will include HBase 1.4
> > and 2.2 support for the next releases(4.17.0 and 5.2.0). As Istvan
> > mentioned above, dropping HBase 1.3 support would make simplification, at
> > least I feel we should drop the support for HBase 1.3 for the next minor
> > release.
> >
> > What do people think about this? One minor release plus one year grace
> > period?
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 7:26 AM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I'd request that we keep hbase-2.2 support around for a while longer.
> If
> > > we drop that, it's going to cause us some major headache whereas I'd
> > > rather see us able to keep pushing our dayjob efforts directly into
> > > upstream.
> > >
> > > On 1/28/21 11:56 PM, Viraj Jasani wrote:
> > > > +1(non-binding) to EOLing the support for HBase 1.3 and 2.1 at least
> > > since
> > > > both were EOLed last year (1.4 and 2.2 can also be dropped).
> > > >
> > > > Moreover, b/ 2.4.0 and 2.4.1 we have some compat issue in IA.Private
> > > class
> > > > (we need some utility from HStore which is refactored in 2.4.1),
> hence
> > we
> > > > will need new compat module to support 2.4.1+ releases in Phoenix
> > 5.2.0+
> > > > releases mostly.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 6:54 AM, Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> +1. Following 4.16 and 5.1's releases I'd suggest EOLing support for
> > > HBase
> > > >> 1.3, 1.4, 2.1 and 2.2, I believe all of which have been EOLed by the
> > > HBase
> > > >> community. All of those versions also require special compatibility
> > lib
> > > >> support currently.
> > > >>
> > > >> Geoffrey
> > > >>
> > > >> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 6:35 PM Xinyi Yan <ya...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Hi,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I'm thinking to drop the number of supported HBase versions for
> > future
> > > >>> releases. For example, the HBase 1.3 was EOM'd in August 2020, do
> we
> > > >> still
> > > >>> consider support it for 4.17.0? Similarly, our current master
> branch
> > > also
> > > >>> supports EOM'd HBase version. If phoenix users already upgraded
> their
> > > >>> HBase, we should not spend time supporting these old versions IMO.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I think we should do it after 4.16.0 and 5.1.0, thoughts?
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Thanks,
> > > >>> Xinyi
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [Discuss] Dropping support for older HBase version
Posted by Istvan Toth <st...@apache.org>.
I'm not sure I understand, let me rephrase
So we drop support right after we release a Phoenix minor version,
if the Phoenix release date is more than a year after the HBase EOL date ?
That sounds fine to me.
How about patch releases ?
I feel that we should not drop Hbase release support in a patch release.
i.e if we release 5.1.2, 5.1.2, etc those should keep support for all HBase
versions that 5.1.0 supported.
regards
Istvan
On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 3:23 AM Xinyi Yan <ya...@apache.org> wrote:
> IMO, we should consider one year grace period plus one minor release? For
> example, if we have a new 4.17.0 release in September 2021, we should not
> support HBase 1.3(was EOL in Aug 2020) since it passes one year grace
> period and one more release support. This means we will include HBase 1.4
> and 2.2 support for the next releases(4.17.0 and 5.2.0). As Istvan
> mentioned above, dropping HBase 1.3 support would make simplification, at
> least I feel we should drop the support for HBase 1.3 for the next minor
> release.
>
> What do people think about this? One minor release plus one year grace
> period?
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 7:26 AM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I'd request that we keep hbase-2.2 support around for a while longer. If
> > we drop that, it's going to cause us some major headache whereas I'd
> > rather see us able to keep pushing our dayjob efforts directly into
> > upstream.
> >
> > On 1/28/21 11:56 PM, Viraj Jasani wrote:
> > > +1(non-binding) to EOLing the support for HBase 1.3 and 2.1 at least
> > since
> > > both were EOLed last year (1.4 and 2.2 can also be dropped).
> > >
> > > Moreover, b/ 2.4.0 and 2.4.1 we have some compat issue in IA.Private
> > class
> > > (we need some utility from HStore which is refactored in 2.4.1), hence
> we
> > > will need new compat module to support 2.4.1+ releases in Phoenix
> 5.2.0+
> > > releases mostly.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 6:54 AM, Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> +1. Following 4.16 and 5.1's releases I'd suggest EOLing support for
> > HBase
> > >> 1.3, 1.4, 2.1 and 2.2, I believe all of which have been EOLed by the
> > HBase
> > >> community. All of those versions also require special compatibility
> lib
> > >> support currently.
> > >>
> > >> Geoffrey
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 6:35 PM Xinyi Yan <ya...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>>
> > >>> I'm thinking to drop the number of supported HBase versions for
> future
> > >>> releases. For example, the HBase 1.3 was EOM'd in August 2020, do we
> > >> still
> > >>> consider support it for 4.17.0? Similarly, our current master branch
> > also
> > >>> supports EOM'd HBase version. If phoenix users already upgraded their
> > >>> HBase, we should not spend time supporting these old versions IMO.
> > >>>
> > >>> I think we should do it after 4.16.0 and 5.1.0, thoughts?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>> Xinyi
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
Re: [Discuss] Dropping support for older HBase version
Posted by Xinyi Yan <ya...@apache.org>.
IMO, we should consider one year grace period plus one minor release? For
example, if we have a new 4.17.0 release in September 2021, we should not
support HBase 1.3(was EOL in Aug 2020) since it passes one year grace
period and one more release support. This means we will include HBase 1.4
and 2.2 support for the next releases(4.17.0 and 5.2.0). As Istvan
mentioned above, dropping HBase 1.3 support would make simplification, at
least I feel we should drop the support for HBase 1.3 for the next minor
release.
What do people think about this? One minor release plus one year grace
period?
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 7:26 AM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'd request that we keep hbase-2.2 support around for a while longer. If
> we drop that, it's going to cause us some major headache whereas I'd
> rather see us able to keep pushing our dayjob efforts directly into
> upstream.
>
> On 1/28/21 11:56 PM, Viraj Jasani wrote:
> > +1(non-binding) to EOLing the support for HBase 1.3 and 2.1 at least
> since
> > both were EOLed last year (1.4 and 2.2 can also be dropped).
> >
> > Moreover, b/ 2.4.0 and 2.4.1 we have some compat issue in IA.Private
> class
> > (we need some utility from HStore which is refactored in 2.4.1), hence we
> > will need new compat module to support 2.4.1+ releases in Phoenix 5.2.0+
> > releases mostly.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 6:54 AM, Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> +1. Following 4.16 and 5.1's releases I'd suggest EOLing support for
> HBase
> >> 1.3, 1.4, 2.1 and 2.2, I believe all of which have been EOLed by the
> HBase
> >> community. All of those versions also require special compatibility lib
> >> support currently.
> >>
> >> Geoffrey
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 6:35 PM Xinyi Yan <ya...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I'm thinking to drop the number of supported HBase versions for future
> >>> releases. For example, the HBase 1.3 was EOM'd in August 2020, do we
> >> still
> >>> consider support it for 4.17.0? Similarly, our current master branch
> also
> >>> supports EOM'd HBase version. If phoenix users already upgraded their
> >>> HBase, we should not spend time supporting these old versions IMO.
> >>>
> >>> I think we should do it after 4.16.0 and 5.1.0, thoughts?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Xinyi
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
Re: [Discuss] Dropping support for older HBase version
Posted by Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>.
I'd request that we keep hbase-2.2 support around for a while longer. If
we drop that, it's going to cause us some major headache whereas I'd
rather see us able to keep pushing our dayjob efforts directly into
upstream.
On 1/28/21 11:56 PM, Viraj Jasani wrote:
> +1(non-binding) to EOLing the support for HBase 1.3 and 2.1 at least since
> both were EOLed last year (1.4 and 2.2 can also be dropped).
>
> Moreover, b/ 2.4.0 and 2.4.1 we have some compat issue in IA.Private class
> (we need some utility from HStore which is refactored in 2.4.1), hence we
> will need new compat module to support 2.4.1+ releases in Phoenix 5.2.0+
> releases mostly.
>
>
> On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 6:54 AM, Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> +1. Following 4.16 and 5.1's releases I'd suggest EOLing support for HBase
>> 1.3, 1.4, 2.1 and 2.2, I believe all of which have been EOLed by the HBase
>> community. All of those versions also require special compatibility lib
>> support currently.
>>
>> Geoffrey
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 6:35 PM Xinyi Yan <ya...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I'm thinking to drop the number of supported HBase versions for future
>>> releases. For example, the HBase 1.3 was EOM'd in August 2020, do we
>> still
>>> consider support it for 4.17.0? Similarly, our current master branch also
>>> supports EOM'd HBase version. If phoenix users already upgraded their
>>> HBase, we should not spend time supporting these old versions IMO.
>>>
>>> I think we should do it after 4.16.0 and 5.1.0, thoughts?
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Xinyi
>>>
>>
>
Re: [Discuss] Dropping support for older HBase version
Posted by Viraj Jasani <vj...@apache.org>.
+1(non-binding) to EOLing the support for HBase 1.3 and 2.1 at least since
both were EOLed last year (1.4 and 2.2 can also be dropped).
Moreover, b/ 2.4.0 and 2.4.1 we have some compat issue in IA.Private class
(we need some utility from HStore which is refactored in 2.4.1), hence we
will need new compat module to support 2.4.1+ releases in Phoenix 5.2.0+
releases mostly.
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 6:54 AM, Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1. Following 4.16 and 5.1's releases I'd suggest EOLing support for HBase
> 1.3, 1.4, 2.1 and 2.2, I believe all of which have been EOLed by the HBase
> community. All of those versions also require special compatibility lib
> support currently.
>
> Geoffrey
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 6:35 PM Xinyi Yan <ya...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm thinking to drop the number of supported HBase versions for future
> > releases. For example, the HBase 1.3 was EOM'd in August 2020, do we
> still
> > consider support it for 4.17.0? Similarly, our current master branch also
> > supports EOM'd HBase version. If phoenix users already upgraded their
> > HBase, we should not spend time supporting these old versions IMO.
> >
> > I think we should do it after 4.16.0 and 5.1.0, thoughts?
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Xinyi
> >
>
Re: [Discuss] Dropping support for older HBase version
Posted by Geoffrey Jacoby <gj...@apache.org>.
+1. Following 4.16 and 5.1's releases I'd suggest EOLing support for HBase
1.3, 1.4, 2.1 and 2.2, I believe all of which have been EOLed by the HBase
community. All of those versions also require special compatibility lib
support currently.
Geoffrey
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 6:35 PM Xinyi Yan <ya...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm thinking to drop the number of supported HBase versions for future
> releases. For example, the HBase 1.3 was EOM'd in August 2020, do we still
> consider support it for 4.17.0? Similarly, our current master branch also
> supports EOM'd HBase version. If phoenix users already upgraded their
> HBase, we should not spend time supporting these old versions IMO.
>
> I think we should do it after 4.16.0 and 5.1.0, thoughts?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Xinyi
>