Hi Namit, I opened a ticket (HIVE-1709) for the postgres metastore upgrade script supplied by Yuanjun Li. Can you please commit this and then build a release candidate? Let me know if you need me to do anything else.
Thanks. Carl On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Carl Steinbach <c...@cloudera.com> wrote: > Hi Namit, > > Sounds like a good plan to me. > > Carl > > > On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Namit Jain <nj...@facebook.com> wrote: > >> Carl, >> >> Now that all the blocking jiras for 0.6 have been committed, can we >> release 0.6, say end of the week ? >> We can give some notice to people if they want to file a blocker in the >> next 2-3 days. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> -namit >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: Namit Jain [nj...@facebook.com] >> Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 9:44 AM >> To: Carl Steinbach >> Cc: hive-...@hadoop.apache.org >> Subject: RE: release 0.6 >> >> I am not sure what kind of downtime would it involve for us (facebook). >> >> We will have to make a copy of the production metastore, and then perform >> the changes. >> If that takes a long time, we will have to come up with some quicker >> upgrade solutions - >> We will try to do that today, and get back to you. >> >> >> Thanks, >> -namit >> >> >> From: Carl Steinbach [mailto:c...@cloudera.com] >> Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 11:23 PM >> To: Namit Jain >> Cc: hive-...@hadoop.apache.org >> Subject: Re: release 0.6 >> >> Hi Namit, >> It used to be much higher in the beginning but quite a few users reported >> problems on some mysql dbs. 767 seemed to work most dbs. before committing >> this can someone test this on some different dbs (with and without UTF >> encoding)? >> >> Copying my response to Prasad from HIVE-1364: >> "It's possible that people who ran into problems before were using a >> version of MySQL older than 5.0.3. These versions supported a 255 byte max >> length for VARCHARs. It's also possible that older versions of the >> package.jdo mapping contained more indexes, in which case the 767 byte limit >> holds. Also, UTF encoding should not make a difference since these are byte >> lengths, not character lengths." >> >> Another point is that HIVE-675 added two 4000 byte VARCHARs to the >> mapping, and this patch is present in both trunk and the 0.6.0 branch. I >> haven't heard that anyone is experiencing problems because of this. >> >> Do we really need it for 0.6, or should we test it properly/take our time >> and then commit it if needed. >> >> Yes, I think we really need these changes. Several people have already >> commented on the list about hitting the 767 byte limit while using the HBase >> storage handler. >> >> What kind of testing regimen do think is necessary for this change? >> >> Thanks. >> >> Carl >> >> >
