hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean-Daniel Cryans <jdcry...@apache.org>
Subject Re: ANN: 0.90.6 RC1 available for download Was: 0.90.6 Release status
Date Fri, 27 Jan 2012 04:55:30 GMT
The thing is we are voting on is a specific artefact, so if it changes
(like changing CHANGES.txt) then it's not the same file hence not the
same thing we voted on (that's also in part why you md5 the tarball).

In http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToRelease you can see that this is
one of the first thing they do in "Updating Release Branch".

J-D

On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 8:48 PM, Ramkrishna.S.Vasudevan
<ramkrishna.vasudevan@huawei.com> wrote:
> Hi
> @J-D
> First of all thanks for testing out the RC.
>
> Regarding the CHANGES.txt I thought like the date will be updated only on
> the day of the release seeing 0.90.5 release date.  It was mentioned 22Dec
> and it was the day when It got released.
>
> Regarding the time for voting limit, we can extend it till Jan 31st.
>
> Please let me know if there are problems with the CHANGES.txt.  As am doing
> the release work for the first time may be some flaws in that.  I ensured
> that all the changes in RC are present in CHANGES.txt under the correct
> release and also moved out some of the JIRAs that did not go into it.
>
> Regards
> Ram
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jdcryans@gmail.com [mailto:jdcryans@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Jean-Daniel Cryans
> Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 3:15 AM
> To: dev@hbase.apache.org
> Subject: Re: ANN: 0.90.6 RC1 available for download Was: 0.90.6 Release
> status
>
> I deployed it on a cluster and ran some YCSB and PE, killed some
> servers. Also I did some local mixings with 0.90.5 to make sure it's
> all compatible. That's all good.
>
> The CHANGES file is wrong tho, it starts with a 0.90.7 commit and it
> doesn't have a release date. Not sure if it really warrants rolling
> out a new RC, I wonder what the others are thinking since in 0.92 we
> stopped updating it.
>
> Finally, 3 days might be a bit short for voting.
>
> J-D
>
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 1:40 AM, Ramakrishna s vasudevan
> <ramkrishna.vasudevan@huawei.com> wrote:
>> Hi Devs
>>
>> HBASE-0.90.6 RC1 is available for download at the following path.
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/~ramkrishna/0.90.6_RC1
>>
>> The following defects are included in this RC
>>
>> HBASE-5196 - Failure in region split after PONR could cause region hole
>> HBASE-5153 - Add retry logic in
> HConnectionImplementation#resetZooKeeperTrackers
>>
>> HBASE-5225 - Backport HBASE-3845 -data loss because lastSeqWritten can
> miss memstore edits
>> HBASE-5235 - HLogSplitter writer thread's streams not getting closed when
> any of the writer threads has exceptions.
>> HBASE-5237 - Addendum for HBASE-5160 and HBASE-4397
>> HBASE-5269 - IllegalMonitorStateException while retryin HLog split in 0.90
> branch. (Induced defect in 0.90.6RC0).
>>
>> HBASE-5179 - Concurrent processing of processFaileOver and
> ServerShutdownHandler may cause region to be assigned before log splitting
> is completed, causing data loss
>>
>> will  not go into the release.  After good testing and confirmation it
> will be committed into future 0.90 and trunk branches.
>>
>> Unless we get any defect from the regression of this RC i would like to
> take this RC for 0.90.6 release.
>>
>> Your suggestions are welcome.
>>
>> Please vote +1/-1 for this RC.  The vote closes on January 29th.
>>
>> Regards
>> Ram
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Ramakrishna s vasudevan
>> Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2012 10:08 PM
>> To: dev@hbase.apache.org
>> Subject: RE: 0.90.6 Release status
>>
>> It is always better to get in a patch with test case.  But if it takes  a
> little more time to get the test case can we verify the patch with good
> cluster testing and raise a JIRA for the test case integration that Stack
> gives.
>>
>> By this way we can get the patch in the release and also satisfies Todd's
> suggestion.
>>
>> Any comments so that i can raise a test task for the same.
>>
>> Regards
>> Ram
>> ________________________________________
>> From: yuzhihong@gmail.com [yuzhihong@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2012 8:13 PM
>> To: dev@hbase.apache.org
>> Cc: dev@hbase.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: 0.90.6 Release status
>>
>> Stack said he would come up with some test for hbase-5179.
>> Suppose that takes a few more days, do you plan to check in the fix into
> 0.90 branch ?
>>
>> According to Todd's suggestion earlier, a Jira shouldn't be open for too
> long during which time patches continuously get checked in.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 21, 2012, at 4:34 AM, Ramakrishna s vasudevan
> <ramkrishna.vasudevan@huawei.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Devs
>>>
>>> After the first RC for 0.90.6 was taken
>>> HBASE-5196 - Failure in region split after PONR could cause region hole
>>> HBASE-5153 - Add retry logic in
> HConnectionImplementation#resetZooKeeperTrackers
>>>
>>> The above 2 defects have been committed.
>>>
>>> HBASE-5179 - Concurrent processing of processFaileOver and
> ServerShutdownHandler may cause region to be assigned before log splitting
> is completed, causing data loss
>>> HBASE-5225 - Backport HBASE-3845 -data loss because lastSeqWritten can
> miss memstore edits
>>> HBASE-5235 - HLogSplitter writer thread's streams not getting closed when
> any of the writer threads has exceptions.
>>> HBASE-5237 - Addendum for HBASE-5160 and HBASE-4397
>>>
>>> HBASE-5179 - is almost in a final stage for committing.  Thanks to
> Chunhui, Ted and Jinchao for persisting on the defect.
>>>
>>> The above defects were found during the testing for RC0. Hence i would
> like to cut another RC once the above
>>> defects goes into 0.90.  By tomorrow 22nd January i would like to take a
> release cut.
>>> Please let me know your suggestions/opinions.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Ram
>

Mime
View raw message