hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ryan Rawson <ryano...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release 'development release' HBase 0.89.2010924 rc1?
Date Mon, 04 Oct 2010 23:56:36 GMT
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.

-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