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 92CBFD57F for ; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 04:19:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 53488 invoked by uid 500); 21 Feb 2013 04:19:51 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 53408 invoked by uid 500); 21 Feb 2013 04:19:51 -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 53397 invoked by uid 99); 21 Feb 2013 04:19:51 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 04:19:51 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.173 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.216.173] (HELO mail-qc0-f173.google.com) (209.85.216.173) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 21 Feb 2013 04:19:47 +0000 Received: by mail-qc0-f173.google.com with SMTP id b12so3384524qca.18 for ; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 20:19:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=1OtZoX/7RdmWwOBiwdnSZiVy4QIjdclIJt+9RdNlTxQ=; b=oKdrB/sA3XvoIrXhkaj82Xh5FWJrmOYIKXL8cbfj3X9GN3g1HCHsa8aPu9zf10FuF4 HP4ECCA2kGBZp1Qwoo/XteFj2rUKeVwXtt3tNUzAS9RbiVNm6FamlCrNA4iQ3+4QovO+ p390KaPaiC4FaXSTqVikPl/5yfnGJiXRDdYddXEMTjDkkffQGKnhvawBX/ZfRC7Xt5jP SLk9JG9y0hsNuLWQU/NYoxdpBiohk1yT/i61oULKaYTtrBWTG9PVqCTh7ChPbGGte/ca /1SZSxRS3VJopjoKBt0T44RZrdqVPDdI14Mu1qgAe2fqg4xZfJxt5n0BVzld9Pu6ESmk Jrgw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.206.137 with SMTP id fu9mr11097803qab.91.1361420366435; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 20:19:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.49.128.202 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 20:19:25 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 09:49:25 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: =?GB2312?Q?Re=3A_=B4=F0=B8=B4=3A_Some_notes_from_the_HBase_developer_Pow=2D?= =?GB2312?Q?Wow?= From: ramkrishna vasudevan To: dev@hbase.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf300fada354de6204d63461aa X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --20cf300fada354de6204d63461aa Content-Type: text/plain; charset=GB2312 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I checked this out. I am able to hear the voice of the recording. Regards Ram On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 7:26 AM, =D0=BB=C1=BC wrote: > Yes, i am able to hear the recording as well :) > > Regards, > Liang > ________________________________________ > =B7=A2=BC=FE=C8=CB: Dave Wang [dsw@cloudera.com] > =B7=A2=CB=CD=CA=B1=BC=E4: 2013=C4=EA2=D4=C221=C8=D5 0:28 > =CA=D5=BC=FE=C8=CB: dev@hbase.apache.org > =D6=F7=CC=E2: Re: Some notes from the HBase developer Pow-Wow > > Jean-Marc, > > I just tried it and am able to hear the recording. Hmmm, not sure what t= o > do here. Any one else able to access the recording? > > - Dave > > > On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 7:51 AM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari < > jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote: > > > Hi Dave, > > > > I' tried to access the link.I 'm able to load it, but there is no > > sound. Sound is working if I play any other video, but back to webex, > > still not sound. > > > > Is it working for you? > > > > JM > > > > 2013/2/19, Dave Wang : > > > Thanks for the summary Deveraj. > > > > > > The webex recording for the meeting is at: > > > > > > > > > https://cloudera.webex.com/cloudera/ldr.php?AT=3Dpb&SP=3DMC&rID=3D1204181= 37&rKey=3Dd058765b798c47c5 > > > > > > Please let me know if you cannot access it. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > - Dave > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari < > > > jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote: > > > > > >> Awesome! > > >> > > >> Thanks a for those notes Devaraj! > > >> > > >> Very useful for the unfortunates who did not got the chance to join > the > > >> meeting ... > > >> Le 19 f=A8=A6vr. 2013 20:27, "Devaraj Das" a = =A8=A6crit > : > > >> > > >> > - Stabilizing 0.96 / CI > > >> > -- not running continuously > > >> > -- Roman: is it a good idea to run IT under Bigtop > > >> > - the HBase unit tests are good.. > > >> > - What about HBase as a backend for hive - tests for those > > >> > - Do we think there is value with the integration with the > rest > > >> > of the hadoop ecosystem > > >> > -- Jon: What's needed to make this work > > >> > -- Roman: Collective agreement that we want to solve this > > >> > -- Stack: We need to run the IT tests from Enis and Sergey runni= ng > > >> > continuously > > >> > -- Roman: If we all agree that this is something needs to be fix= ed > > >> > .. then yes we would talk about mechanics. Bigtop doesn't have > > >> > expertise in HBase and hence HBase folks would have to debug > failures. > > >> > -- Roman: Bigtop is committed to tests. Less than a dozen tests > for > > >> > hbase currently.. > > >> > -- We have been running validation around RC time. Find all kind= s > of > > >> > issues - sometimes trivial (maybe a config issue), > > >> > -- Roman can offer CI for trunk but will work for only hadoop-2 > > line. > > >> > -- Roman does first line of triage. > > >> > -- No issues to do with other ecosystem artifacts. Bigtop ensure= s > > >> > the right artifacts are in place. > > >> > -- hadoop-2 is important but not particular about the version of > > >> > hadoop within 2. For example 2.0.2 > > >> > -- Gary: Will be good to run security tests > > >> > -- Roman & Devaraj to talk on how this can be done/implemented > > >> > > > >> > On 0.96 branching > > >> > - Lars: > > >> > -- We will have three branches to maintain. > > >> > - Stack: we need to stabilize quickly > > >> > - Enis: What about 0.95. > > >> > - Stack: Just do the snapshots thing. Every week, give a snapshot > > >> > - Enis: we've done a bunch of stuff in RPC.. If we have to break > > >> > something, we can if it is beta (0.96-beta). > > >> > - Agreement is there generally ... Debate on the name with snapsho= t > > >> > versus 95.0/96.0 > > >> > -- 0.95 experimental .. 0.96 will be stable > > >> > -- If we go with 0.95, releasing will be easier as well.. > > >> > -- 0.95 will not be in production.. > > >> > -- 0.96 will be off 0.95 branch and not trunk based > > >> > > > >> > - How do we go about committing issues.. (issue commit rate is low= ) > > >> > -- 0.94 is stable - 2 new commits and 2 new bugs a day > > >> > -- 0.96 has lots of issues not reviewed > > >> > -- Break up the patch into multiple smaller pieces to make review > > >> > easier > > >> > -- Branching on a big feature was suggested - > > >> > --- Issues: committer needs to be there > > >> > Sergey: If the rate of change is high on common code (to > the > > >> > branches) then merging will be tough > > >> > --- Jon: Refactor should be done in the main branch (since it > > >> > doesn't add any new funtionality) > > >> > --- Release often to reduce #backports overall and issues with > > >> > that.. > > >> > > > >> > - Review process .. how to drive a review to closure. Effort goes > > >> > waste if the review process is not completed. The same reviewer > should > > >> > continue to review the patch .. > > >> > - Hard to enforce any process > > >> > - Enis: there should be a summary of the patch and all that .. so > that > > >> > the review process is helped.. Hard to understand the architecture > of > > >> > the patch unless documented > > >> > - Jon: It should be easy to make a one-to-one correspondence betwe= en > > >> > the description and the patch > > >> > - The commit should have only the jira# as opposed to pages of > > >> description > > >> > > > >> > - Component owners: is this working. Committers need to be > forthcoming > > >> > with reviews > > >> > -- Maybe review the modules and add some more if needed. > > >> > > > >> > -- Good that we have more contributions coming than we have > > >> > reviewers, but unless we keep up, we will plateau > > >> > -- Mail on dev@ list if review doesn't happen > > >> > > > >> > - Dev co-ordination: > > >> > -- How best can we pull together > > >> > -- Priorities: > > >> > --- Getting 0.96 out is priority > > >> > --- Backports to 0.94 will happen .. until 0.96 is stable > > >> > --- 0.92 release ? Any committer who wants to make a release ca= n > do > > >> > so (maybe with some backports, etc.) > > >> > --- Backporting can be tough if there are bugs and the bugfix h= as > > >> > to be applied to all branches > > >> > > > >> > - HBASE-2600 - this requires a change in the client and the server= . > > >> > They have to be changed in lock-step. Its hard to do this .. Jon > > >> > doesn't want to have the fix for 0.96. So 0.98 might be another > > >> > singular release. Maybe do a rewrite of the meta after taking a lo= ck > > >> > on the meta, do a shim layer to handle the backward compat. betwee= n > > >> > 0.96 and 0.98 > > >> > > > >> > - What do people want to get into 0.94 > > >> > -- The biggest thing - Snapshots, mostly new code, about a 3rd of > the > > >> > stuff in 0.94 already > > >> > -- Compactions improvments - no backport > > >> > > > >> > - How devs can better co-ordinate > > >> > -- Snapshots co-ordination working well > > >> > -- One page design is useful (makes it readable and all) > > >> > -- How about handling the stripe compaction - where an idea lead= s > to > > >> > a bunch of others > > >> > -- Again write-up should be done > > >> > > > >> > - Should we change the description to match the comments > > >> > -- Two ideas suggested: > > >> > --- We probably should have the description updated with the > > >> > "Date: new description" if the issue at hand is updated > > >> > --- Should we have a summary after a bunch of comments - yes > > >> > > > >> > - The face-to-face meetings are useful. We should semd out the > minutes > > >> > of the discussion to the dev list. We probably should have more > > >> > focused huddles. Discuss but don't decide (decide on the jira)! > > >> > > > >> > - Jon: Would people be amenable to merge sooner rather than later = on > > >> > snapshots? Tested and being beaten up. > > >> > - Stack: Yes > > >> > > > >> > - What else goes in in 0.96: > > >> > -- RPC refactor > > >> > -- ROOT removal > > >> > -- Compaction stuff > > >> > -- Package name mailing list thread - there is now a jira on tha= t. > > >> > We shouldn't break clients. Package name changes is not worth the > > >> > trouble. > > >> > > > >> > - A bunch of discussions on the RPC with KeyValue/Cells > > >> > > > >> > - What do we do about usability > > >> > -- It'll be nice if we don't need to change configs.. > > >> > -- Maybe expose more metrics and then allow for online config > > >> > changes since automatic config is difficult and needs to be battle > > >> > tested and all. > > >> > > > >> > - Benchmarking of the release: > > >> > -- We should measure the overhead of PB stuff > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > --20cf300fada354de6204d63461aa--