I am good with that as well. Mind that we are not only dropping a binary distribution for Hadoop 2.2.0, but also the source compatibility with 2.2.0.
Lets also reconfigure Travis to test - Hadoop1 - Hadoop 2.3 - Hadoop 2.4 - Hadoop 2.6 - Hadoop 2.7 On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 6:19 AM, Chiwan Park <chiwanp...@apache.org> wrote: > +1 for dropping Hadoop 2.2.0 > > Regards, > Chiwan Park > > > On Sep 4, 2015, at 5:58 AM, Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > +1 to what Robert said. > > > > On Thursday, September 3, 2015, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> > wrote: > > I think most cloud providers moved beyond Hadoop 2.2.0. > > Google's Click-To-Deploy is on 2.4.1 > > AWS EMR is on 2.6.0 > > > > The situation for the distributions seems to be the following: > > MapR 4 uses Hadoop 2.4.0 (current is MapR 5) > > CDH 5.0 uses 2.3.0 (the current CDH release is 5.4) > > > > HDP 2.0 (October 2013) is using 2.2.0 > > HDP 2.1 (April 2014) uses 2.4.0 already > > > > So both vendors and cloud providers are multiple releases away from > Hadoop 2.2.0. > > > > Spark does not offer a binary distribution lower than 2.3.0. > > > > In addition to that, I don't think that the HDFS client in 2.2.0 is > really usable in production environments. Users were reporting > ArrayIndexOutOfBounds exceptions for some jobs, I also had these exceptions > sometimes. > > > > The easiest approach to resolve this issue would be (a) dropping the > support for Hadoop 2.2.0 > > An alternative approach (b) would be: > > - ship a binary version for Hadoop 2.3.0 > > - make the source of Flink still compatible with 2.2.0, so that users > can compile a Hadoop 2.2.0 version if needed. > > > > I would vote for approach (a). > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 5:01 PM, Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> > wrote: > > While working on high availability (HA) for Flink's YARN execution I > stumbled across some limitations with Hadoop 2.2.0. From version 2.2.0 to > 2.3.0, Hadoop introduced new functionality which is required for an > efficient HA implementation. Therefore, I was wondering whether there is > actually a need to support Hadoop 2.2.0. Is Hadoop 2.2.0 still actively > used by someone? > > > > Cheers, > > Till > > > > > > > >
