hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Todd Lipcon <t...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release 'development release' HBase 0.89.2010830 rc2?
Date Fri, 17 Sep 2010 01:39:50 GMT
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 4:35 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jdcryans@apache.org>wrote:

> 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?
>
>
+1. I think we all anticipate that the *next* RC (including the new master)
is going to be less stable initially until we've gone through some rounds of
testing and fixes. So let's make this last pre-new-master release as good as
possible. Releasing something that people are already running successfully
in production seems like a good idea.

-Todd


> 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
> >
>



-- 
Todd Lipcon
Software Engineer, Cloudera

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message