hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Todd Lipcon <t...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: dynamic RPC and coprocessor changes
Date Wed, 06 Oct 2010 02:57:11 GMT
I agree with Jon here.

It's not a matter of viewing it as second-class, but more that it's not
necessarily within scope for this exact release -- in general we have always
talked about 0.90 as a release where we focus on stability and durability. A
giant new framework (awesome though it is) seems less important for this
specific dot release. I also agree that we need to have a few more use cases
developed to flesh out the API and get more exposure before merging.

The idea of the development release series was to give people exposure to
stuff (and get testing) before it ended up in a so-called "stable" release.
A large merge should definitely go through at least one or two dev releases
before showing up in an even-numbered .0. I would also support a
"coprocessors preview" release done in parallel with 0.90, available on the
Apache download page, that would let interested people get involved and try
the branch before it's part of trunk.

For the same reasons, I also wanted to release 0.89.20100924 as 0.90 and
push off the new master to 92, but I think I lost that one :)

I also agree strongly with Jon that we should immediately start an 0.91 DR
series with coprocessors merged as soon as 0.90 is released. We have some
good momentum, and moving quickly towards the next bit will help keep it up.


On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jonathan Gray <jgray@facebook.com> wrote:

> Committing this stuff onto trunk the day before a feature freeze and as we
> move towards stability gives me a little bit of the fear.
> I completely understand that it's been worked on for quite some time and
> think this stuff is awesome.  But I still wish I had more time to give it
> further review and to actually take this stuff for a test spin.  Right now
> that's just not possible with all the work to be done stabilizing and
> testing trunk (and I think time is best spent right now stabilizing the
> master/rs versus new features).
> Personally, I have a bunch of fairly sweeping compaction, flush, and split
> changes that have been partially reviewed but I haven't had the time to push
> them over the finish line.  I hope to get them in immediately after an 0.90
> branch is cut and trunk becomes 0.92.  This should be rather soon.  I'd like
> to see 0.92 get released in short order after 0.90 as there are lots of
> changes that just have not made it into 0.90 yet.  So even if we waited to
> commit, we could work hard towards the next major release (I don't think
> there are any major rewrites planned)  :)
> With this kind of big change and addition of new APIs, my preference would
> be to have it committed early in a trunk cycle (versus immediately before a
> release is cut).  That way, we can play with it ourselves, see how it works,
> try out some of our own ideas for usage of CPs, etc... In doing that, I
> would expect there would be suggestions for changes in the API, additions to
> the API, naming changes to be more clear from a non-implementer POV, etc...
> By putting it in immediately before a release, the original API can't be
> broken, class names can't be changed, all would need to be deprecated,
> etc...
> The other issue I have with the current CP code that I have read is the
> number of new classes introduced into existing core packages (especially
> clent).  Looking at some of their names, they are generic sounding and it's
> not clear to me without digging in that they are part of coprocessors.  Is
> it possible to move CP stuff into client.cp packages and the like?  Or
> prefix with CoProc or some way to keep this stuff separated?
> I apologize for dropping this on you now and if no one else feels the same,
> I am not going to spoil the party.
> But is it critical that this gets into 0.90 and into a release now?  Could
> we wait for 0.92 and get this committed in a couple weeks and allowed to
> mature a bit on trunk before it's released?
> JG
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andrew Purtell [mailto:apurtell@apache.org]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 7:14 PM
> > To: dev@hbase.apache.org
> > Subject: dynamic RPC and coprocessor changes
> >
> > We've been nursing dynamic RPC and coprocessor changes for a couple of
> > weeks now and don't see any failures beyond what are already on trunk
> > with them applied.
> >
> > I was going to apply them tonight but will wait until tomorrow given
> > that trunk is already disrupted a little.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> >     - Andy
> >
> >
> >
> >

Todd Lipcon
Software Engineer, Cloudera

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