You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to common-dev@hadoop.apache.org by Akira Ajisaka <aa...@apache.org> on 2019/05/17 06:31:01 UTC
[DISCUSS] Release 3.0.4 or branch-3.0 EOL
Hi folks,
In branch-3.0, it is almost a year since 3.0.3 was released. Is there
any committer who wants to be a release manager of 3.0.4?
If there are no users running Apache Hadoop 3.0.x in production, I'm
thinking we can stop maintaining branch-3.0. Please let me know there
are any users running Apache Hadoop 3.0.x.
Any thoughts?
-Akira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.0.4 or branch-3.0 EOL
Posted by Erik Krogen <ek...@linkedin.com>.
I'd like to revive this discussion. Today I see committers variously skipping backports to branch-3.0 and/or branch-3.1 (when backporting to branch-2, for example) and I'm concerned that we will have divergence between what commits are present in which branches.
Wei-Chiu, is Cloudera still rebasing on top of branch-3.1? If so then it seems we should be continuing to actively maintain it and not skipping any backports here.
If HDFS-13596 is fixed in branch-3.1/3.2, will it be possible to
rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.1/3.2? If the answer is yes,
I'm thinking we can drop 3.0 and consider 3.1+ only.
I agree on this front. I don't see any reason that we can't encourage upgrades from 2.x to 3.1+.
Should we initiate a vote to officially EOL the 3.0 line?
Thanks
Erik
________________________________
From: Akira Ajisaka <aa...@apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 26, 2019 11:55 PM
To: Hadoop Common <co...@hadoop.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.0.4 or branch-3.0 EOL
Thank you for your feedback,
> IMHO, I'd love to see HDFS-13596 <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fissues.apache.org%2Fjira%2Fbrowse%2FHDFS-13596&data=02%7C01%7Cekrogen%40linkedin.com%7Ced0598246fcd4632c04908d6e2706c1c%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636945369809775515&sdata=I16mNOAXmsNUWEZ%2BBtjIR29NtknVc5bF5X2eZuh%2BvUY%3D&reserved=0> fixed to make it possible to rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.0
If HDFS-13596 is fixed in branch-3.1/3.2, will it be possible to
rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.1/3.2? If the answer is yes,
I'm thinking we can drop 3.0 and consider 3.1+ only.
Thanks,
Akira
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 4:39 AM Ajay Kumar <aj...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> +1 for keeping no of active branches low, specially when it is not used actively.
>
> On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 3:33 AM Steve Loughran <st...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> I've been intermittently backporting things to it, but like you say: not
>> getting much active use.
>>
>>
>> 1. I'd like to view the 3.1 branch as the main "ready to play with"
>> Hadoop 3.x release, with 3.2 some new features.
>> 2. I'm planning on backporting some of the hadoop 3.x ABFS and S3A work
>> to that 3.x release, and for S3A, some to 3.1.x (and indeed, maybe we
>> should do the abfs connector, After all: it's not going to cause any
>> regressions).
>> 3. The hadoop-aws changes will include HADOOP-16117, AWS SDK update -
>> Sean Mackrory has been advocating "keep all active branches current with
>> the AWS SDKs", and I've come to agree. The testing there didn't find any
>> regressions, which was a pleasant surprise.
>> 4. For S3A, a big patch has just gone in, HADOOP-16085, which adds etag
>> and version columns to the S3Guard DDB tables, and uses these at load time.
>> Even if we don't backport that patch to the 3.1 line, it makes sense for
>> all 3.1.x clients to be updating the DB with the relevant columns as they
>> write it, so that on a mixed-client deployment, everyone keeps the table up
>> to date
>>
>>
>> As usual, help welcome, especially with testing
>>
>> -steve
>>
>> On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 12:15 PM Wei-Chiu Chuang <we...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Thanks for initiating the discussion, Akira.
>> >
>> > I've given similar thoughts on the possible EOL of Hadoop branch-3.0 line.
>> > IMHO, I'd love to see HDFS-13596
>> > <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fissues.apache.org%2Fjira%2Fbrowse%2FHDFS-13596&data=02%7C01%7Cekrogen%40linkedin.com%7Ced0598246fcd4632c04908d6e2706c1c%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636945369809785518&sdata=Sx2X18h%2FXmuW%2BWTiWdlg3he4LYDNcoW0jY665GPgT3k%3D&reserved=0> fixed to make it
>> > possible to rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.0, and then roll
>> > another maint. release before we declare EOL.
>> >
>> > But in all seriousness, with my Cloudera hat on, CDH will soon rebase onto
>> > branch-3.1 so it's unlikely Cloudera can sponsor another 3.0 maint release.
>> > With my Apache hat on, Apache is an all-volunteer organization and we all
>> > act individually, but I am just being realistic that there would not be
>> > much motivation to roll another release in the future.
>> >
>> > Thoughts?
>> >
>> > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 8:31 AM Akira Ajisaka <aa...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi folks,
>> > >
>> > > In branch-3.0, it is almost a year since 3.0.3 was released. Is there
>> > > any committer who wants to be a release manager of 3.0.4?
>> > >
>> > > If there are no users running Apache Hadoop 3.0.x in production, I'm
>> > > thinking we can stop maintaining branch-3.0. Please let me know there
>> > > are any users running Apache Hadoop 3.0.x.
>> > >
>> > > Any thoughts?
>> > >
>> > > -Akira
>> > >
>> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
>> > > For additional commands, e-mail: common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.0.4 or branch-3.0 EOL
Posted by Konstantin Shvachko <sh...@gmail.com>.
Hey Wei-Chiu,
Thanks for sharing your plans on Hadoop 3. Good to know.
1. So I understand people don't care about Hadoop 3.0 any more.
I see we don't even list this line on the Releases page:
https://hadoop.apache.org/releases.html
I think it is fair to EOL 3.0 and stop making changes to it.
2. Sounds like there are still plans for Hadoop 3.1. So let's try to be
more consistent with backporting fixes into branch-3.1 along with
branch-3.2.
Do we have a Wiki or a page reflecting active and EOL releases?
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 4:06 PM Wei-Chiu Chuang <we...@apache.org> wrote:
> Erik,
> I've just got this message now. Something funky is going on with my
> workplace mailbox.
>
> With my Apache's hat on, I find it too costly to maintain a 3.0.x release
> line: my personal time to try to backport commits, resolving conflicts.
> Additionally, we would be forced to make additional 3.0.x releases if a new
> CVE is discovered.
>
> With my Cloudera's hat on, the last downtream release, CDH6.3.0 is the last
> release on Apache Hadoop 3.0.x. The next release, CDP 1.0 is on 3.1.x, and
> at some point, may rebase onto 3.2.x. The timeline to rebase onto 3.2 is
> unclear (at least 6 months out), and so I am still actively maintaining
> this branch as much as possible.
>
> That is to say, assuming Cloudera's the only corporate sponsor for
> branch-3.0, this branch is all but dead.
>
> On another note, I recently learned that Apache Spark 3 will only support
> Hadoop 3.2, skipping Hadoop 3.0/3.1. I don't know how you guys think, but I
> feel like that'd expedite the death of branch-3.1, which is why we are
> thinking about a 3.2 rebase in CDP.
>
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 3:31 PM Erik Krogen <xk...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I'd like to revive this discussion. Today I see committers variously
> > skipping backports to branch-3.0 and/or branch-3.1 (when backporting to
> > branch-2, for example) and I'm concerned that we will have divergence
> > between what commits are present in which branches.
> >
> > Wei-Chiu, is Cloudera still rebasing on top of branch-3.1? If so then it
> > seems we should be continuing to actively maintain it and not skipping
> any
> > backports here.
> >
> > > If HDFS-13596 is fixed in branch-3.1/3.2, will it be possible to
> > > rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.1/3.2? If the answer is yes,
> > > I'm thinking we can drop 3.0 and consider 3.1+ only.
> >
> >
> > I agree on this front. I don't see any reason that we can't encourage
> > upgrades from 2.x to 3.1+.
> >
> > Should we initiate a vote to officially EOL the 3.0 line?
> >
> > Thanks
> > Erik
> >
> > P.S.: Sorry if you received this email twice, I was informed by members
> of
> > this team that my original email was not received by most folks.
> >
> > On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 11:56 PM Akira Ajisaka <aa...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thank you for your feedback,
> > >
> > > > IMHO, I'd love to see HDFS-13596 <
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-13596> fixed to make it
> > > possible to rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.0
> > >
> > > If HDFS-13596 is fixed in branch-3.1/3.2, will it be possible to
> > > rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.1/3.2? If the answer is yes,
> > > I'm thinking we can drop 3.0 and consider 3.1+ only.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Akira
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 4:39 AM Ajay Kumar <aj...@cloudera.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > +1 for keeping no of active branches low, specially when it is not
> used
> > > actively.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 3:33 AM Steve Loughran
> > > <st...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> I've been intermittently backporting things to it, but like you say:
> > not
> > > >> getting much active use.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> 1. I'd like to view the 3.1 branch as the main "ready to play
> with"
> > > >> Hadoop 3.x release, with 3.2 some new features.
> > > >> 2. I'm planning on backporting some of the hadoop 3.x ABFS and
> S3A
> > > work
> > > >> to that 3.x release, and for S3A, some to 3.1.x (and indeed,
> maybe
> > we
> > > >> should do the abfs connector, After all: it's not going to cause
> > any
> > > >> regressions).
> > > >> 3. The hadoop-aws changes will include HADOOP-16117, AWS SDK
> > update -
> > > >> Sean Mackrory has been advocating "keep all active branches
> current
> > > with
> > > >> the AWS SDKs", and I've come to agree. The testing there didn't
> > find
> > > any
> > > >> regressions, which was a pleasant surprise.
> > > >> 4. For S3A, a big patch has just gone in, HADOOP-16085, which
> adds
> > > etag
> > > >> and version columns to the S3Guard DDB tables, and uses these at
> > > load time.
> > > >> Even if we don't backport that patch to the 3.1 line, it makes
> > sense
> > > for
> > > >> all 3.1.x clients to be updating the DB with the relevant columns
> > as
> > > they
> > > >> write it, so that on a mixed-client deployment, everyone keeps
> the
> > > table up
> > > >> to date
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> As usual, help welcome, especially with testing
> > > >>
> > > >> -steve
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 12:15 PM Wei-Chiu Chuang <
> weichiu@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Thanks for initiating the discussion, Akira.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I've given similar thoughts on the possible EOL of Hadoop
> branch-3.0
> > > line.
> > > >> > IMHO, I'd love to see HDFS-13596
> > > >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-13596> fixed to make
> it
> > > >> > possible to rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.0, and then
> > roll
> > > >> > another maint. release before we declare EOL.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > But in all seriousness, with my Cloudera hat on, CDH will soon
> > rebase
> > > onto
> > > >> > branch-3.1 so it's unlikely Cloudera can sponsor another 3.0 maint
> > > release.
> > > >> > With my Apache hat on, Apache is an all-volunteer organization and
> > we
> > > all
> > > >> > act individually, but I am just being realistic that there would
> not
> > > be
> > > >> > much motivation to roll another release in the future.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Thoughts?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 8:31 AM Akira Ajisaka <
> aajisaka@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Hi folks,
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > In branch-3.0, it is almost a year since 3.0.3 was released. Is
> > > there
> > > >> > > any committer who wants to be a release manager of 3.0.4?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > If there are no users running Apache Hadoop 3.0.x in production,
> > I'm
> > > >> > > thinking we can stop maintaining branch-3.0. Please let me know
> > > there
> > > >> > > are any users running Apache Hadoop 3.0.x.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Any thoughts?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > -Akira
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> common-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
> > > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.0.4 or branch-3.0 EOL
Posted by Wei-Chiu Chuang <we...@apache.org>.
Erik,
I've just got this message now. Something funky is going on with my
workplace mailbox.
With my Apache's hat on, I find it too costly to maintain a 3.0.x release
line: my personal time to try to backport commits, resolving conflicts.
Additionally, we would be forced to make additional 3.0.x releases if a new
CVE is discovered.
With my Cloudera's hat on, the last downtream release, CDH6.3.0 is the last
release on Apache Hadoop 3.0.x. The next release, CDP 1.0 is on 3.1.x, and
at some point, may rebase onto 3.2.x. The timeline to rebase onto 3.2 is
unclear (at least 6 months out), and so I am still actively maintaining
this branch as much as possible.
That is to say, assuming Cloudera's the only corporate sponsor for
branch-3.0, this branch is all but dead.
On another note, I recently learned that Apache Spark 3 will only support
Hadoop 3.2, skipping Hadoop 3.0/3.1. I don't know how you guys think, but I
feel like that'd expedite the death of branch-3.1, which is why we are
thinking about a 3.2 rebase in CDP.
On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 3:31 PM Erik Krogen <xk...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'd like to revive this discussion. Today I see committers variously
> skipping backports to branch-3.0 and/or branch-3.1 (when backporting to
> branch-2, for example) and I'm concerned that we will have divergence
> between what commits are present in which branches.
>
> Wei-Chiu, is Cloudera still rebasing on top of branch-3.1? If so then it
> seems we should be continuing to actively maintain it and not skipping any
> backports here.
>
> > If HDFS-13596 is fixed in branch-3.1/3.2, will it be possible to
> > rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.1/3.2? If the answer is yes,
> > I'm thinking we can drop 3.0 and consider 3.1+ only.
>
>
> I agree on this front. I don't see any reason that we can't encourage
> upgrades from 2.x to 3.1+.
>
> Should we initiate a vote to officially EOL the 3.0 line?
>
> Thanks
> Erik
>
> P.S.: Sorry if you received this email twice, I was informed by members of
> this team that my original email was not received by most folks.
>
> On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 11:56 PM Akira Ajisaka <aa...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Thank you for your feedback,
> >
> > > IMHO, I'd love to see HDFS-13596 <
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-13596> fixed to make it
> > possible to rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.0
> >
> > If HDFS-13596 is fixed in branch-3.1/3.2, will it be possible to
> > rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.1/3.2? If the answer is yes,
> > I'm thinking we can drop 3.0 and consider 3.1+ only.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Akira
> >
> > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 4:39 AM Ajay Kumar <aj...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > +1 for keeping no of active branches low, specially when it is not used
> > actively.
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 3:33 AM Steve Loughran
> > <st...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I've been intermittently backporting things to it, but like you say:
> not
> > >> getting much active use.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 1. I'd like to view the 3.1 branch as the main "ready to play with"
> > >> Hadoop 3.x release, with 3.2 some new features.
> > >> 2. I'm planning on backporting some of the hadoop 3.x ABFS and S3A
> > work
> > >> to that 3.x release, and for S3A, some to 3.1.x (and indeed, maybe
> we
> > >> should do the abfs connector, After all: it's not going to cause
> any
> > >> regressions).
> > >> 3. The hadoop-aws changes will include HADOOP-16117, AWS SDK
> update -
> > >> Sean Mackrory has been advocating "keep all active branches current
> > with
> > >> the AWS SDKs", and I've come to agree. The testing there didn't
> find
> > any
> > >> regressions, which was a pleasant surprise.
> > >> 4. For S3A, a big patch has just gone in, HADOOP-16085, which adds
> > etag
> > >> and version columns to the S3Guard DDB tables, and uses these at
> > load time.
> > >> Even if we don't backport that patch to the 3.1 line, it makes
> sense
> > for
> > >> all 3.1.x clients to be updating the DB with the relevant columns
> as
> > they
> > >> write it, so that on a mixed-client deployment, everyone keeps the
> > table up
> > >> to date
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> As usual, help welcome, especially with testing
> > >>
> > >> -steve
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 12:15 PM Wei-Chiu Chuang <we...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Thanks for initiating the discussion, Akira.
> > >> >
> > >> > I've given similar thoughts on the possible EOL of Hadoop branch-3.0
> > line.
> > >> > IMHO, I'd love to see HDFS-13596
> > >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-13596> fixed to make it
> > >> > possible to rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.0, and then
> roll
> > >> > another maint. release before we declare EOL.
> > >> >
> > >> > But in all seriousness, with my Cloudera hat on, CDH will soon
> rebase
> > onto
> > >> > branch-3.1 so it's unlikely Cloudera can sponsor another 3.0 maint
> > release.
> > >> > With my Apache hat on, Apache is an all-volunteer organization and
> we
> > all
> > >> > act individually, but I am just being realistic that there would not
> > be
> > >> > much motivation to roll another release in the future.
> > >> >
> > >> > Thoughts?
> > >> >
> > >> > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 8:31 AM Akira Ajisaka <aa...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Hi folks,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > In branch-3.0, it is almost a year since 3.0.3 was released. Is
> > there
> > >> > > any committer who wants to be a release manager of 3.0.4?
> > >> > >
> > >> > > If there are no users running Apache Hadoop 3.0.x in production,
> I'm
> > >> > > thinking we can stop maintaining branch-3.0. Please let me know
> > there
> > >> > > are any users running Apache Hadoop 3.0.x.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Any thoughts?
> > >> > >
> > >> > > -Akira
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
> > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.0.4 or branch-3.0 EOL
Posted by Erik Krogen <xk...@apache.org>.
I'd like to revive this discussion. Today I see committers variously
skipping backports to branch-3.0 and/or branch-3.1 (when backporting to
branch-2, for example) and I'm concerned that we will have divergence
between what commits are present in which branches.
Wei-Chiu, is Cloudera still rebasing on top of branch-3.1? If so then it
seems we should be continuing to actively maintain it and not skipping any
backports here.
> If HDFS-13596 is fixed in branch-3.1/3.2, will it be possible to
> rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.1/3.2? If the answer is yes,
> I'm thinking we can drop 3.0 and consider 3.1+ only.
I agree on this front. I don't see any reason that we can't encourage
upgrades from 2.x to 3.1+.
Should we initiate a vote to officially EOL the 3.0 line?
Thanks
Erik
P.S.: Sorry if you received this email twice, I was informed by members of
this team that my original email was not received by most folks.
On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 11:56 PM Akira Ajisaka <aa...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thank you for your feedback,
>
> > IMHO, I'd love to see HDFS-13596 <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-13596> fixed to make it
> possible to rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.0
>
> If HDFS-13596 is fixed in branch-3.1/3.2, will it be possible to
> rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.1/3.2? If the answer is yes,
> I'm thinking we can drop 3.0 and consider 3.1+ only.
>
> Thanks,
> Akira
>
> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 4:39 AM Ajay Kumar <aj...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > +1 for keeping no of active branches low, specially when it is not used
> actively.
> >
> > On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 3:33 AM Steve Loughran
> <st...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> I've been intermittently backporting things to it, but like you say: not
> >> getting much active use.
> >>
> >>
> >> 1. I'd like to view the 3.1 branch as the main "ready to play with"
> >> Hadoop 3.x release, with 3.2 some new features.
> >> 2. I'm planning on backporting some of the hadoop 3.x ABFS and S3A
> work
> >> to that 3.x release, and for S3A, some to 3.1.x (and indeed, maybe we
> >> should do the abfs connector, After all: it's not going to cause any
> >> regressions).
> >> 3. The hadoop-aws changes will include HADOOP-16117, AWS SDK update -
> >> Sean Mackrory has been advocating "keep all active branches current
> with
> >> the AWS SDKs", and I've come to agree. The testing there didn't find
> any
> >> regressions, which was a pleasant surprise.
> >> 4. For S3A, a big patch has just gone in, HADOOP-16085, which adds
> etag
> >> and version columns to the S3Guard DDB tables, and uses these at
> load time.
> >> Even if we don't backport that patch to the 3.1 line, it makes sense
> for
> >> all 3.1.x clients to be updating the DB with the relevant columns as
> they
> >> write it, so that on a mixed-client deployment, everyone keeps the
> table up
> >> to date
> >>
> >>
> >> As usual, help welcome, especially with testing
> >>
> >> -steve
> >>
> >> On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 12:15 PM Wei-Chiu Chuang <we...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Thanks for initiating the discussion, Akira.
> >> >
> >> > I've given similar thoughts on the possible EOL of Hadoop branch-3.0
> line.
> >> > IMHO, I'd love to see HDFS-13596
> >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-13596> fixed to make it
> >> > possible to rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.0, and then roll
> >> > another maint. release before we declare EOL.
> >> >
> >> > But in all seriousness, with my Cloudera hat on, CDH will soon rebase
> onto
> >> > branch-3.1 so it's unlikely Cloudera can sponsor another 3.0 maint
> release.
> >> > With my Apache hat on, Apache is an all-volunteer organization and we
> all
> >> > act individually, but I am just being realistic that there would not
> be
> >> > much motivation to roll another release in the future.
> >> >
> >> > Thoughts?
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 8:31 AM Akira Ajisaka <aa...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Hi folks,
> >> > >
> >> > > In branch-3.0, it is almost a year since 3.0.3 was released. Is
> there
> >> > > any committer who wants to be a release manager of 3.0.4?
> >> > >
> >> > > If there are no users running Apache Hadoop 3.0.x in production, I'm
> >> > > thinking we can stop maintaining branch-3.0. Please let me know
> there
> >> > > are any users running Apache Hadoop 3.0.x.
> >> > >
> >> > > Any thoughts?
> >> > >
> >> > > -Akira
> >> > >
> >> > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
> >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.0.4 or branch-3.0 EOL
Posted by Akira Ajisaka <aa...@apache.org>.
Thank you for your feedback,
> IMHO, I'd love to see HDFS-13596 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-13596> fixed to make it possible to rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.0
If HDFS-13596 is fixed in branch-3.1/3.2, will it be possible to
rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.1/3.2? If the answer is yes,
I'm thinking we can drop 3.0 and consider 3.1+ only.
Thanks,
Akira
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 4:39 AM Ajay Kumar <aj...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> +1 for keeping no of active branches low, specially when it is not used actively.
>
> On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 3:33 AM Steve Loughran <st...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> I've been intermittently backporting things to it, but like you say: not
>> getting much active use.
>>
>>
>> 1. I'd like to view the 3.1 branch as the main "ready to play with"
>> Hadoop 3.x release, with 3.2 some new features.
>> 2. I'm planning on backporting some of the hadoop 3.x ABFS and S3A work
>> to that 3.x release, and for S3A, some to 3.1.x (and indeed, maybe we
>> should do the abfs connector, After all: it's not going to cause any
>> regressions).
>> 3. The hadoop-aws changes will include HADOOP-16117, AWS SDK update -
>> Sean Mackrory has been advocating "keep all active branches current with
>> the AWS SDKs", and I've come to agree. The testing there didn't find any
>> regressions, which was a pleasant surprise.
>> 4. For S3A, a big patch has just gone in, HADOOP-16085, which adds etag
>> and version columns to the S3Guard DDB tables, and uses these at load time.
>> Even if we don't backport that patch to the 3.1 line, it makes sense for
>> all 3.1.x clients to be updating the DB with the relevant columns as they
>> write it, so that on a mixed-client deployment, everyone keeps the table up
>> to date
>>
>>
>> As usual, help welcome, especially with testing
>>
>> -steve
>>
>> On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 12:15 PM Wei-Chiu Chuang <we...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Thanks for initiating the discussion, Akira.
>> >
>> > I've given similar thoughts on the possible EOL of Hadoop branch-3.0 line.
>> > IMHO, I'd love to see HDFS-13596
>> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-13596> fixed to make it
>> > possible to rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.0, and then roll
>> > another maint. release before we declare EOL.
>> >
>> > But in all seriousness, with my Cloudera hat on, CDH will soon rebase onto
>> > branch-3.1 so it's unlikely Cloudera can sponsor another 3.0 maint release.
>> > With my Apache hat on, Apache is an all-volunteer organization and we all
>> > act individually, but I am just being realistic that there would not be
>> > much motivation to roll another release in the future.
>> >
>> > Thoughts?
>> >
>> > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 8:31 AM Akira Ajisaka <aa...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi folks,
>> > >
>> > > In branch-3.0, it is almost a year since 3.0.3 was released. Is there
>> > > any committer who wants to be a release manager of 3.0.4?
>> > >
>> > > If there are no users running Apache Hadoop 3.0.x in production, I'm
>> > > thinking we can stop maintaining branch-3.0. Please let me know there
>> > > are any users running Apache Hadoop 3.0.x.
>> > >
>> > > Any thoughts?
>> > >
>> > > -Akira
>> > >
>> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
>> > > For additional commands, e-mail: common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.0.4 or branch-3.0 EOL
Posted by Ajay Kumar <aj...@cloudera.com.INVALID>.
+1 for keeping no of active branches low, specially when it is not used
actively.
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 3:33 AM Steve Loughran <st...@cloudera.com.invalid>
wrote:
> I've been intermittently backporting things to it, but like you say: not
> getting much active use.
>
>
> 1. I'd like to view the 3.1 branch as the main "ready to play with"
> Hadoop 3.x release, with 3.2 some new features.
> 2. I'm planning on backporting some of the hadoop 3.x ABFS and S3A work
> to that 3.x release, and for S3A, some to 3.1.x (and indeed, maybe we
> should do the abfs connector, After all: it's not going to cause any
> regressions).
> 3. The hadoop-aws changes will include HADOOP-16117, AWS SDK update -
> Sean Mackrory has been advocating "keep all active branches current with
> the AWS SDKs", and I've come to agree. The testing there didn't find any
> regressions, which was a pleasant surprise.
> 4. For S3A, a big patch has just gone in, HADOOP-16085, which adds etag
> and version columns to the S3Guard DDB tables, and uses these at load
> time.
> Even if we don't backport that patch to the 3.1 line, it makes sense for
> all 3.1.x clients to be updating the DB with the relevant columns as
> they
> write it, so that on a mixed-client deployment, everyone keeps the
> table up
> to date
>
>
> As usual, help welcome, especially with testing
>
> -steve
>
> On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 12:15 PM Wei-Chiu Chuang <we...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for initiating the discussion, Akira.
> >
> > I've given similar thoughts on the possible EOL of Hadoop branch-3.0
> line.
> > IMHO, I'd love to see HDFS-13596
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-13596> fixed to make it
> > possible to rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.0, and then roll
> > another maint. release before we declare EOL.
> >
> > But in all seriousness, with my Cloudera hat on, CDH will soon rebase
> onto
> > branch-3.1 so it's unlikely Cloudera can sponsor another 3.0 maint
> release.
> > With my Apache hat on, Apache is an all-volunteer organization and we all
> > act individually, but I am just being realistic that there would not be
> > much motivation to roll another release in the future.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 8:31 AM Akira Ajisaka <aa...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> > > In branch-3.0, it is almost a year since 3.0.3 was released. Is there
> > > any committer who wants to be a release manager of 3.0.4?
> > >
> > > If there are no users running Apache Hadoop 3.0.x in production, I'm
> > > thinking we can stop maintaining branch-3.0. Please let me know there
> > > are any users running Apache Hadoop 3.0.x.
> > >
> > > Any thoughts?
> > >
> > > -Akira
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.0.4 or branch-3.0 EOL
Posted by Steve Loughran <st...@cloudera.com.INVALID>.
I've been intermittently backporting things to it, but like you say: not
getting much active use.
1. I'd like to view the 3.1 branch as the main "ready to play with"
Hadoop 3.x release, with 3.2 some new features.
2. I'm planning on backporting some of the hadoop 3.x ABFS and S3A work
to that 3.x release, and for S3A, some to 3.1.x (and indeed, maybe we
should do the abfs connector, After all: it's not going to cause any
regressions).
3. The hadoop-aws changes will include HADOOP-16117, AWS SDK update -
Sean Mackrory has been advocating "keep all active branches current with
the AWS SDKs", and I've come to agree. The testing there didn't find any
regressions, which was a pleasant surprise.
4. For S3A, a big patch has just gone in, HADOOP-16085, which adds etag
and version columns to the S3Guard DDB tables, and uses these at load time.
Even if we don't backport that patch to the 3.1 line, it makes sense for
all 3.1.x clients to be updating the DB with the relevant columns as they
write it, so that on a mixed-client deployment, everyone keeps the table up
to date
As usual, help welcome, especially with testing
-steve
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 12:15 PM Wei-Chiu Chuang <we...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thanks for initiating the discussion, Akira.
>
> I've given similar thoughts on the possible EOL of Hadoop branch-3.0 line.
> IMHO, I'd love to see HDFS-13596
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-13596> fixed to make it
> possible to rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.0, and then roll
> another maint. release before we declare EOL.
>
> But in all seriousness, with my Cloudera hat on, CDH will soon rebase onto
> branch-3.1 so it's unlikely Cloudera can sponsor another 3.0 maint release.
> With my Apache hat on, Apache is an all-volunteer organization and we all
> act individually, but I am just being realistic that there would not be
> much motivation to roll another release in the future.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 8:31 AM Akira Ajisaka <aa...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > In branch-3.0, it is almost a year since 3.0.3 was released. Is there
> > any committer who wants to be a release manager of 3.0.4?
> >
> > If there are no users running Apache Hadoop 3.0.x in production, I'm
> > thinking we can stop maintaining branch-3.0. Please let me know there
> > are any users running Apache Hadoop 3.0.x.
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> > -Akira
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.0.4 or branch-3.0 EOL
Posted by Wei-Chiu Chuang <we...@apache.org>.
Thanks for initiating the discussion, Akira.
I've given similar thoughts on the possible EOL of Hadoop branch-3.0 line.
IMHO, I'd love to see HDFS-13596
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-13596> fixed to make it
possible to rolling upgrade from Hadoop 2 to Hadoop 3.0, and then roll
another maint. release before we declare EOL.
But in all seriousness, with my Cloudera hat on, CDH will soon rebase onto
branch-3.1 so it's unlikely Cloudera can sponsor another 3.0 maint release.
With my Apache hat on, Apache is an all-volunteer organization and we all
act individually, but I am just being realistic that there would not be
much motivation to roll another release in the future.
Thoughts?
On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 8:31 AM Akira Ajisaka <aa...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> In branch-3.0, it is almost a year since 3.0.3 was released. Is there
> any committer who wants to be a release manager of 3.0.4?
>
> If there are no users running Apache Hadoop 3.0.x in production, I'm
> thinking we can stop maintaining branch-3.0. Please let me know there
> are any users running Apache Hadoop 3.0.x.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> -Akira
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org
>
>