Mailing-List: contact dev-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@hbase.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of yuzhihong@gmail.com designates
 209.85.212.177 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        b=YUooK9HyKqVbPX9b/aYf4bCXi+N4X+LKDz5vl9Ttt+xC6s89M9k2s8Pu/f8NfXtVHT
         anDQhQryoovefF9ubPAElPtQVoh2vkUFKQ4DXqotDNmtIlRSlI0HeqgypmGQNt80/Apv
         DNZBbxIb1FXNTQOLLcEzdiT5LTnoQokNdMIXQ=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimm+bMfW6afCv3iXV_5UPM2wELeqg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTint9M=K6xhYt9vU6+Q9t8ugKjgUXg@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinK27Tmr1Pj98xBGaqSvKC0t=cOOg@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimm+bMfW6afCv3iXV_5UPM2wELeqg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 15:26:07 -0700
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=+C-fc+Z1yZOtKUPd=aQvDvpnafg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Release 0.90.3 soon?
From: Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com>
To: dev@hbase.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec520f2f35badde04a266a03e

--bcaec520f2f35badde04a266a03e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

There're two actions we need to take:
1. Figure out the root cause for the following test failure:

Running org.apache.hadoop.hbase.
client.TestHCM
Tests run: 2, Failures: 0, Errors: 2, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 406.707 sec
<<< FAILURE!

Results :

Tests in error:
 testManyNewConnectionsDoesnotOOME(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.client.TestHCM)
 testRegionCaching(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.client.TestHCM)

2. Backport HBASE-3777 to 0.90

Actually these two actions are related.
I can imagine the disappointment among hbase users if HBASE-3777 weren't
included in 0.90.3

My two cents.

On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jdcryans@apache.org>wrote:

> It's a pretty big change and it would need to be backported, but I
> understand your concern.
>
> In my ideal world, 0.92.0 would be released in not too long and this
> would be a non-issue.
>
> In the real world, for all I know, 0.92.0 could be released in 6
> months or more and people would be struggling with ZK connection
> errors during all that time (and we would tell them to patch their
> 0.90 themselves).
>
> Here's what I propose:
>
>  - Release 0.90.3 without HBASE-3777 since it already has enough going
> and it's almost ready to go out.
>  - Backport HBASE-3777 and post the patch in that jira, considering
> that the 0.90 branch won't be changing a lot in the foreseeable future
> so it should apply cleanly for some time.
>  - Point people to that patch and ask them to try it out on 0.90, I
> know for sure that we'll we doing it here.
>  - In the mean time, the patch will get more usage in trunk as we
> prepare a 0.92 release and might find issues.
>  - Finally consider patching it in for 0.90.4 if we have enough
> confidence in it (with or without some other fixes that we would have
> figured out by then).
>
> Does that sound good to you?
>
> Thx,
>
> J-D
>
> On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 2:20 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Can we get HBASE-3777 into 0.90.3 ?
> >
> > On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jdcryans@apache.org
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Hi devs,
> >>
> >> I think we should release 0.90.3 pretty soon, it already has 30 fixed
> >> bugs including 4 blockers and a good bunch of nice to have
> >> fixes/improvements.
> >>
> >> Since there are no other blockers we could build a RC right now but it
> >> seems there's a few more jiras[1] that could be quickly resolved.
> >>
> >> This is why I'm asking all devs to review the jiras that are still
> >> opened against 0.90.3 and to either add a fix or punt.
> >>
> >> Thank you,
> >>
> >> J-D
> >>
> >>
> >> 1.
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&mode=hide&jqlQuery=fixVersion+%3D+%220.90.3%22+AND+project+%3D+HBASE+AND+resolution+%3D+Unresolved+ORDER+BY+updated+DESC
> >>
> >
>

--bcaec520f2f35badde04a266a03e--