hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jonathan Hsieh <...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: Snapshots branch trunk merging
Date Thu, 14 Feb 2013 14:44:54 GMT
Hey all,

I've successfully ported the git repo to an svn branch.  The branch is
called hbase-7290v2 (I made some mistakes on v1). Here's a link to
what the svn snapshots repo looks like:


This is the official branch now --  we'll now commit fixes from the
pre-trunk-merge mega-patch reviews to that branch.  Note that the
branch has also been straightened so that only merges from trunk come
in (on in branch merges).  Because the svn branch is now the official
branch, I've made my personal repo at https://github.com/jmhsieh/hbase
read-only by others again.

You can see from the current jmhsieh/snapshots github branch, I merged
it with the apache svn (from 2/1/13, and soon to be updated with 2/12
and 2/14 merges), and they are identical (modulo some commit message
fixes).   I will likely merge from trunk every other day or so to keep
it up with trunk until the merge to trunk goes through.


Almost there!


On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
> I took a quick look at the megapatch attached to hbase-7290.  Added some
> minor remarks to the issue.
> +1 on commit as long as hadoopqa is green (caveat the flakies).
> St.Ack
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <jon@cloudera.com> wrote:
>> Hey all,
>> We did a branch merge of the snapshot branch (hbase-6055 and
>> hbase-7290 combined) with trunk on 2/1/13.  This merge initially had
>> several always broken tests but  since then Ted, Matteo and myself
>> fixed all the always-broken unit tests.  I've merged again today
>> 2/12/13 [1], and posted a patch on HBASE-7290 for the hadoopqa bot to
>> run.
>> There are primarily four of us who worked on this branch -- Jesse Y,
>> Matteo, Ted Yu and myself, so if we each +1, technically we would have
>> the 3 +1's required and could merge.  I wanted to solicit +1's from
>> the four who worked  on it (all committers now) and also find out if
>> anyone else has started reviewing the code or intends to in the next
>> few days.  It is a large patch (1.3MB) that I can post on review
>> board, but it may be easier to understand by going to the different
>> individual jiras (some of which have design docs).   Generally we've
>> been using a looser of review then commit for each of the subtasks. If
>> I get clean test runs from the QA bot and +1's from the folks who
>> worked on it or planned on reviewing it, I'd like merge sooner rather
>> than later.
>> On the unit testing front, I've personally gotten one error-free unit
>> tests runs runs and one with a failure in hbase-examples:
>> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.coprocessor.example.TestBulkDeleteProtocol.testBulkDeleteFamily.
>> On the system testing side, I've been testing the pre-merge version
>> outlined by Aleks [2] and it had been fairly robust on a 5 node
>> cluster with fault injection.  I've also done some testing on a 20
>> node cluster (no fault injection) and a few runs on a 100 node cluster
>> where the snapshoting feature has been robust.
>> Thanks,
>> Jon.
>> [1] https://github.com/jmhsieh/hbase/tree/snapshot-merge-0212
>> [2] http://markmail.org/message/pdbkq654ipuxyt6a
>> --
>> // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
>> // Software Engineer, Cloudera
>> // jon@cloudera.com

// Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
// Software Engineer, Cloudera
// jon@cloudera.com

View raw message