hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Snapshots branch trunk merging
Date Wed, 13 Feb 2013 00:59:44 GMT
Can you clarify whether it is required to keep revision history for the
merge ?


On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 3:42 PM, lars hofhansl <larsh@apache.org> wrote:

> Are we keeping the revision history of the snapshot branch when we do the
> merge?
> Or are you planning to apply the mega patch to trunk?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jonathan Hsieh <jon@cloudera.com>
> To: dev@hbase.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 2:12 PM
> Subject: Snapshots branch trunk merging
> 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

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message