Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AB3F56AE1 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 05:00:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 39431 invoked by uid 500); 27 Jul 2011 05:00:11 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 38926 invoked by uid 500); 27 Jul 2011 04:59:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@hbase.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 38909 invoked by uid 99); 27 Jul 2011 04:59:55 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 04:59:55 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of dhruba@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.173 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.215.173] (HELO mail-ey0-f173.google.com) (209.85.215.173) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 04:59:48 +0000 Received: by eyb7 with SMTP id 7so1662494eyb.4 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 21:59:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=EGejTPOzVY7hjOLFjVaQBh/rCUZwhIf5uB63eBNbMGE=; b=gJzkxWPyD0ko+eza0LBbVUkKPO8OveaLJD6pQx853tOta3VO+Iu3YlI1w+yqX5byYy 6sCIM2DuP7M+Gh1BfNs4zRCEeqxLrxTj4fDLlZClNViVZ68keV5yDs3j/CRpNjCiRIww 8aS1xUJQspZCa+KSKvjxIJ89dWtM9WR+oTrxk= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.13.13 with SMTP id z13mr761604faz.114.1311742768274; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 21:59:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.54.154 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Jul 2011 21:59:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1311733766.62212.YahooMailNeo@web65514.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <1311733766.62212.YahooMailNeo@web65514.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 21:59:28 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Move hfile to v2 for 0.92 rather than 0.94? From: Dhruba Borthakur To: dev@hbase.apache.org, Andrew Purtell Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf3054a287bd5e7c04a905e9e0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --20cf3054a287bd5e7c04a905e9e0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 This increases the efficiency of a hbase cluster tremendously. +1 for committing it earlier rather than later. -dhruba On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > +1 > > It's a big patch but has seen much more testing than the typical and is of > high quality as you mention. Earlier rather than later I'd say. But then > let's let 0.92 bake with it sufficiently. > > Best regards, > > > - Andy > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > (via Tom White) > > > >________________________________ > >From: Stack > >To: HBase Dev List > >Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 7:17 PM > >Subject: [DISCUSSION] Move hfile to v2 for 0.92 rather than 0.94? > > > >Shall we commit the patch at > >https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3857 for 0.92? > > > >I reviewed it and its high-quality, with lots of new tests, and an > >attention to self-migration (which it does) that is heartening. > > > >I'm +1 on committing it now to TRUNK in time for 0.92 before this fat > >patch rots our on JIRA. > > > >What you lot think? > > > >St.Ack > > > > > > > -- Connect to me at http://www.facebook.com/dhruba --20cf3054a287bd5e7c04a905e9e0--