Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

"Same goes for stuff like MR; supporting it, esp. for perf work, becomes a burden, and it’s outdated with 2 alternatives, one of which has been around for 2 releases." I am not trying to pick on your words here but I want to acknowledge something. "Been around for 2 releases" means less to people

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 1:19 PM, Alan Gates wrote: > I see your point on saying the contributor may not understand where best > to put the patch, and thus the committer decides. However, it would be > very disappointing for a contributor who uses branch-1 to build a new > feature only to have th

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

I agree with *All* features with the exception that some features might be branch-1 specific (if it's a feature on something no longer supported in master, like hadoop-1). Without this we prevent new features for older technology, which doesn't strike me as reasonable. I see your point on say

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

+1 on the new proposal. Feedback below: > New features must be put into master. Whether to put them into branch-1 is at the discretion of the developer. How about we change this to "*All* features must be put into master. Whether to put them into branch-1 is at the discretion of the *committer*.

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

Alan, your email client is not compatible with gmail viewer. For some reason your reply contains the whole thread of the discussion On May 22, 2015 10:58 AM, "Alan Gates" wrote: > I don't think anyone is advocating for option 2, as that would be > disastrous. Option 3 is closest to what I'm prop

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

Thanks for your feedback Chris. It sounds like there are a couple of reasonable concerns being voiced repeatedly: 1) Fragmentation, the two branches will drift too far apart. 2) Stagnation, branch-1 will effectively become a dead-end. So I modify the proposal as follows to deal with those: 1)

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

I don't think anyone is advocating for option 2, as that would be disastrous. Option 3 is closest to what I'm proposing, though again dropping support for Hadoop 1 is only a part of it. Alan. Alexander Pivovarov May 22, 2015 at 10:03 Looks like we discussing 3 o

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

the proposal correctly: we are going > >>>>>to > >>>>> have two main branches, one for hadoop-1 and one for hadoop-2. > >>>>> > >>>>> We shouldn't tie this to hadoop-1 and 2. It's about Hive not > >>>>>H

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

not >>>>>Hadoop. >>>>> It will be some time before Hive's branch-2 is stable, while Hadoop-2 >>>>>is >>>>> already well established. >>>>> >>>>> New features >>>>> are only merged to branch-2. Tha

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

t;>>> >>>>  Are we also making two lines of releases: ene for branch-1 >>>> and one for branch-2? Won't that be confusing and also burdensome if >>>>we >>>> release say 1.3, 2.0, 2.1, 1.4... >>>> >>>>  I'm assert

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

void putting new >>>> features only on branch-1, unless they only made sense in that >>>>context. >>>> But I assume we'll see people contributing to branch-1 for some time. >>>> >>>> Are we also making two lines of releases: ene fo

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

>>> need some way to make early releases of many of the new features. I >>> believe that this proposal is less confusing than if we start putting >>>the >>> new features in 1.x branches. This is particularly true because it >>>would >>> help us to start

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

changes. —Vaibhav From: Alan Gates Reply-To: "dev@hive.apache.org" Date: Friday, May 15, 2015 at 4:11 PM To: "dev@hive.apache.org" Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features Anyone else have feedback on this? If not I'll start a vote ne

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

I think that it is past time for Hive to have a "stable" and "next" branch. Every release from Hive 0.11 to Hive 1.2 has been a major release in terms of changes and functionality. Part of what we've been missing is a way of making stable releases that don't move as fast and supports the customers

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

n faster dev time for these important changes. —Vaibhav From: Alan Gates Reply-To: "dev@hive.apache.org" Date: Friday, May 15, 2015 at 4:11 PM To: "dev@hive.apache.org" Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features Anyone else have feedback on this

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

ases of many of the new features. I >>> believe that this proposal is less confusing than if we start putting the >>> new features in 1.x branches. This is particularly true because it would >>> help us to start being able to drop older functionality like Hadoop-1 and >

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

duce, which is very hard to do in the 1.x line without stranding users. >> >> Please note that we will have hadoop 3 soon. What's the story there? >> >> As I said above, I don't see this as tied to Hadoop versions. >> >> Alan. >> >> Thanks, >&g

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

; > Alan. > > > Thanks, > Xuefu > > > > On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 4:43 PM, Vaibhav Gumashta > wrote: > > +1 on the new branch. I think it’ll help in faster dev time for these > important changes. > > —Vaibhav > > From: Alan Gates > Reply-To

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

ache.org" Date: Friday, May 15, 2015 at 4:11 PM To: "dev@hive.apache.org" Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features Anyone else have feedback on this? If not I'll start a vote next week. Alan. Gopal Vijayaraghavan May 14, 2015 at 10:44 Hi, +1

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

nk it’ll help in faster dev time for these > important changes. > > —Vaibhav > > From: Alan Gates > Reply-To: "dev@hive.apache.org" > Date: Friday, May 15, 2015 at 4:11 PM > To: "dev@hive.apache.org" > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

May 15, 2015 at 4:11 PM To: "dev@hive.apache.org<mailto:dev@hive.apache.org>" mailto:dev@hive.apache.org>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features Anyone else have feedback on this? If not I'll start a vote next week. Alan. [cid:part1.02010204.04070

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

Anyone else have feedback on this? If not I'll start a vote next week. Alan. Gopal Vijayaraghavan May 14, 2015 at 10:44 Hi, +1 on the idea. Having a stable release branch with ongoing fixes where we do not drop major features would be good all around. It lets us a

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

Hi, +1 on the idea. Having a stable release branch with ongoing fixes where we do not drop major features would be good all around. It lets us accelerate the pace of development, drop major features or rewrite them entirely without dragging everyone else kicking & screaming into that release. C

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

+1 This is great for development of new features in hive and making them available to useres. This also helps users who are slow to move to new version of hadoop, they can still bug fixes and features compatible with hadoop 1 in new hive 1.x releases. It will also be easier for users to remember w

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

+1 for the proposal. New branch definitely helps us moving forward quickly with new features and deprecating the old stuffs (20S shims and mapreduce). Thanks Prasanth On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 7:20 PM -0700, "Vikram Dixit K" mailto:vikram.di...@gmail.com>> wrote: The proposal sounds good. Sup

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

The proposal sounds good. Supporting and maintaining hadoop-1 is hard and conflict in API changes in 2.x of hadoop keeps us from using new and better APIs as it breaks compilation. +1 Thanks Vikram. On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 7:17 PM, Sergey Shelukhin wrote: > That sounds like a good idea. > Some

Re: [DISCUSS] Supporting Hadoop-1 and experimental features

That sounds like a good idea. Some features could be back ported to branch-1 if viable, but at least new stuff would not be burdened by Hadoop 1/MR code paths. Probably also a good place to enable vectorization and other perf features by default while we make alpha releases. +1 On 15/5/11, 15:38,