hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stack <st...@duboce.net>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release 'development release' HBase 0.89.2010924 rc1?
Date Tue, 05 Oct 2010 03:51:14 GMT
Sure.  That caveat about no warranty, do not use in "production", is
on there already.  And the bug is in ICVs only, right?  We can release
w/ warning that ICVers need to apply the patch, np.

Good stuff,
St.Ack


On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 8:40 PM, Ryan Rawson <ryanobjc@gmail.com> wrote:
> we could yes.  with the caveat that no production use/data loss ahoy.
>
> -ryan
>
> On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Ryan Rawson <ryanobjc@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I ran ycsb on it for a while and it looked ok... but we really cant
>>> ship without the fix to that bug, it has the possibility of causing
>>> serious data loss for heavy users of ICV.
>>>
>>
>> We can ship the DR though, right?  0.90.0RC1 is just around the corner!
>> St.Ack
>>
>>
>>> -ryan
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Jonathan Gray <jgray@facebook.com> wrote:
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> I took it for a test drive today and tested all the basic stuff.  No performance
stuff but I think enough for my vote.
>>>>
>>>> JG
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: jdcryans@gmail.com [mailto:jdcryans@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Jean-
>>>>> Daniel Cryans
>>>>> Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:56 AM
>>>>> To: dev@hbase.apache.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 'development release' HBase 0.89.2010924
>>>>> rc1?
>>>>>
>>>>> My vote is obviously +1, although we hit a bug this weekend regarding
>>>>> HBASE-3008 (for which we'll post a patch soon). Over time, the
>>>>> memstore size of regions with ICVs grows negative, which means that
>>>>> those regions can't flush and when you close them you basically lose
>>>>> all the data since the last flush (since on close it won't flush
>>>>> either). We solved this by disabling ICVs to those tables (basically
>>>>> setting the async ICV queues in the thrift servers to -1), copied the
>>>>> data to another cluster, restarted the cluster with the fix,
>>>>> re-imported the data, then re-enabled the ICVs.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think this is a blocker for a DR, as it only affects users
>>>>> doing only tons of ICVs on particular tables, but it should be
>>>>> disclosed somewhere.
>>>>>
>>>>> J-D
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans
>>>>> <jdcryans@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> > The 0.89.20100830 DR branch was cancelled, here's the new RC off
a
>>>>> new branch.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > As discussed, this release candidate contains a revert of HBASE-2694
>>>>> > which means that it is back on the "very" old master. It is also
very
>>>>> > similar to what we run here in production.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Sources and binaries can be found here:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > http://people.apache.org/~jdcryans/hbase-0.89.20100924-candidate-1/
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Documentation:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > http://people.apache.org/~jdcryans/hbase-0.89.20100924-candidate-
>>>>> 1/hbase-0.89.20100924/docs/
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Here's the list of everything I added since moving from 0830:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >  HBASE-3008  Memstore.updateColumnValue passes wrong flag to
>>>>> heapSizeChange
>>>>> >  HBASE-3035  Bandaid for HBASE-2990
>>>>> >  HBASE-2643  Figure how to deal with eof splitting logs
>>>>> >  HBASE-2941  port HADOOP-6713 - threading scalability for RPC
reads -
>>>>> to HBase
>>>>> >  HBASE-3006  Reading compressed HFile blocks causes way too many
DFS
>>>>> RPC calls
>>>>> >             severly impacting performance
>>>>> >  HBASE-2989  [replication] RSM won't cleanup after locking if
0 peers
>>>>> >  HBASE-2992  [replication] MalformedObjectNameException in
>>>>> ReplicationMetrics
>>>>> >  HBASE-3034  Revert the regions assignment part of HBASE-2694
(and
>>>>> > pals) for 0.89
>>>>> >  HBASE-3033  [replication] ReplicationSink.replicateEntries
>>>>> improvements
>>>>> >  HBASE-2997  Performance fixes - profiler driven
>>>>> >  HBASE-2889  Tool to look at HLogs -- parse and tail -f (patch
#2
>>>>> only)
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Unfortunately I forgot to add HBASE-2986 like Stack asked (sorry,
I
>>>>> > just figured it while reading the old voting thread).
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Should we release this as the next "Development Release"? Please
cast
>>>>> > your vote by Wednesday, September 29th.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Thanks,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > The HBase Team
>>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message