hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean-Daniel Cryans <jdcry...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release 'development release' HBase 0.89.2010830 rc2?
Date Wed, 15 Sep 2010 23:35:44 GMT
After some discussions today here at SU between Todd and the team, it
was suggested that this 0.89 release contains more of what we run in
production here. One major difference is that we reverted most of
HBASE-2694 since we had issues with the ZK-based assignment, didn't
know exactly how many other issues lurked in there, that most of those
fixes would probably not apply to the new master, and that it was
generally much slower than the pre-2694 master. I also helped Vidhya
with his 700 nodes today by patching 0.89.20100830 with 2694's revert,
and starting his cluster became much more faster.

tl;dr I propose that we sink this RC and build a new one with 2694
reverted (except for the core ZKW changes).

What do the devs think?



On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 5:14 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jdcryans@apache.org> wrote:
> Second RC, new vote!
> Source binary and source tar balls are available here:
>  http://people.apache.org/~jdcryans/hbase-0.89.20100830-candidate-2/
> You can also browse the candidate documentation here:
>  http://people.apache.org/~jdcryans/hbase-0.89.20100830-candidate-2/hbase-0.89.20100830/docs/
> Issues resolved since 0.89.20100726, our second 0.89.x release, are
> roughly ~23 issues odd including fixed deadlocks, better handling of
> IOEs during splits and improvements for filters: see
> http://su.pr/2HwiUe. 3 issues were also fixed for RC2:
> HBASE-2975 DFSClient names in master and RS should be unique
> HBASE-2967 Failed split: IOE 'File is Corrupt' -- sync length not
> being written out to SequenceFile
> HBASE-2964 Deadlock when RS tries to RPC to itself inside SplitTransaction
> Shall we release this candidate as the third in our 0.89.x series of
> developer releases?
> Please see previous threads on 0.89 releases for more information
> about the purpose of this release candidate - in particular, this
> 'developer release' is for those who can tolerate risk and who are
> willing to give feedback in advance of our next major release.  We're
> not making any guarantees that this is bug free. Its definitely not
> for production deploys.
> We'll do another release like this in a few weeks after the new master
> code has gone in.
> Please vote by Thursday, September 16th.
> Thanks,
> J-D

View raw message