This is my feeling too, but I think we should accomplish this by deprecating it first. I don't expect anything will change after the deprecation period.
Kind Regards, Brandon On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 11:09 AM Jacek Lewandowski <lewandowski.ja...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I vote for removing it entirely. > > thanks > - - -- --- ----- -------- ------------- > Jacek Lewandowski > > > czw., 9 mar 2023 o 18:07 Miklosovic, Stefan <stefan.mikloso...@netapp.com> > napisał(a): >> >> Derek, >> >> I have couple more points ... I do not think that extracting it to a >> separate repository is "win". That code is on Hadoop 1.0.3. We would be >> spending a lot of work on extracting it just to extract 10 years old code >> with occasional updates (in my humble opinion just to make it compilable >> again if the code around changes). What good is in that? We would have one >> more place to take care of ... Now we at least have it all in one place. >> >> I believe we have four options: >> >> 1) leave it there so it will be like this is for next years with >> questionable and diminishing usage >> 2) update it to Hadoop 3.3 (I wonder who is going to do that) >> 3) 2) and extract it to a separate repository but if we do 2) we can just >> leave it there >> 4) remove it >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: Derek Chen-Becker <de...@chen-becker.org> >> Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2023 15:55 >> To: dev@cassandra.apache.org >> Subject: Re: Role of Hadoop code in Cassandra 5.0 >> >> NetApp Security WARNING: This is an external email. Do not click links or >> open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is >> safe. >> >> >> >> I think the question isn't "Who ... is still using that?" but more "are we >> actually going to support it?" If we're on a version that old it would >> appear that we've basically abandoned it, although there do appear to have >> been refactoring (for other things) commits in the last couple of years. I >> would be in favor of removal from 5.0, but at the very least, could it be >> moved into a separate repo/package so that it's not pulling a relatively >> large dependency subtree from Hadoop into our main codebase? >> >> Cheers, >> >> Derek >> >> On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 6:44 AM Miklosovic, Stefan >> <stefan.mikloso...@netapp.com<mailto:stefan.mikloso...@netapp.com>> wrote: >> Hi list, >> >> I stumbled upon Hadoop package again. I think there was some discussion >> about the relevancy of Hadoop code some time ago but I would like to ask >> this again. >> >> Do you think Hadoop code (1) is still relevant in 5.0? Who in the industry >> is still using that? >> >> We might drop a lot of code and some Hadoop dependencies too (3) (even their >> scope is "provided"). The version of Hadoop we build upon is 1.0.3 which was >> released 10 years ago. This code does not have any tests nor documentation >> on the website. >> >> There seems to be issues like this (2) and it seems like the solution is to, >> basically, use Spark Cassandra connector instead which I would say is quite >> reasonable. >> >> Regards >> >> (1) >> https://github.com/apache/cassandra/tree/trunk/src/java/org/apache/cassandra/hadoop >> (2) https://lists.apache.org/thread/jdy5hdc2l7l29h04dqol5ylroqos1y2p >> (3) >> https://github.com/apache/cassandra/blob/trunk/.build/parent-pom-template.xml#L507-L589 >> >> >> -- >> +---------------------------------------------------------------+ >> | Derek Chen-Becker | >> | GPG Key available at https://keybase.io/dchenbecker and | >> | https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?search=derek%40chen-becker.org | >> | Fngrprnt: EB8A 6480 F0A3 C8EB C1E7 7F42 AFC5 AFEE 96E4 6ACC | >> +---------------------------------------------------------------+ >>
