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] HBase 0.90.1 rc0 is available for download
Date Sat, 12 Feb 2011 05:59:38 GMT
I am generally +1, but we'll need another RC to address HBASE-3524.

Here is some of my other report of running this:

Been running a variant of this found here:

https://github.com/stumbleupon/hbase/tree/su_prod_90

Running in "dev" here at SU now.

Also been testing that against our Hadoop CDH3b2 patched in with
HDFS-347.  In uncontended YCSB runs this did improve much 'get'
numbers, but in a 15 thread contended test the average get time goes
from 12.1 ms -> 6.9ms.  We plan to test this more and roll in to our
production environment.  With 0.90.1 + a number of our patches,
Hadoopw/347 I loaded 30gb in using YCSB.

Still working on getting VerifyingWorkload to run and verify this
data. But no exceptions.

-ryan

On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 7:10 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org> wrote:
> Seems reasonable to stay -1 given HBASE-3524.
>
> This weekend I'm rolling RPMs of 0.90.1rc0 + ... a few patches (including 3524) ... for
deployment to preproduction staging. Depending how that goes we may have jiras and patches
for you next week.
>
> Best regards,
>
>    - Andy
>
>
>
>> From: Stack <stack@duboce.net>
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] HBase 0.90.1 rc0 is available for download
>> To: apurtell@apache.org
>> Cc: dev@hbase.apache.org
>> Date: Friday, February 11, 2011, 9:35 AM
>>
>> Yes.  We need to fix the assembly.  Its going to trip folks up.  I
>> don't think it a sinker on the RC though, especially as we
>> shipped 0.90.0 w/ this same issue.  What you think boss?
>>
>> St.Ack
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 9:30 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > No an earlier version from before that I failed to
>> delete while moving jars around. So this is a user problem,
>> but I forsee it coming up again and again.
>
>
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message