hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [UPDATE] Finishing up 0.96 --> WAS Re: 0.95 and 0.96 remaining issues
Date Sat, 03 Aug 2013 21:08:30 GMT
Is there a patch available for the tracing work mentioned? I don't think
I've seen anything about it.


On Saturday, August 3, 2013, Stack wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
>
> > The end of July is upon us.  I intend to cut a 0.95.2 next weekend and
> > 0.95.2 will be 0.96.0 but for bug fixes and migration polish.  No more
> > 'features' will be allowed after next weekend.
> >
> >
> >
> > I have done some moving around of hbase 0.95.2 issues [1] to reflect what
> > the priorities are for this week (to my mind).  It is all about polish,
> bad
> > bugs, unit test failures, and packaging/publishing/build issues.
> >
> > I'll be working on the blockers this week [2].  A few are in need of
> > reviews; e.g. "HBASE-3787 Increment is non-idempotent but client retries
> > RPC".  Feel free to take over any blockers if you'd like to help out:
> e.g.
> > "HBASE-7386 Investigate providing some supervisor support for znode
> > deletion"
> >
> > Criticals [3] are mostly just unit test issues that are probably fixed by
> > now and another few that are patches in need of test/review: e.g.
> > "HBASE-8874 PutCombiner is skipping KeyValues while combining puts of
> same
> > row during bulkload" and "HBASE-8778 Region assigments scan table
> directory
> > making them slow for huge tables".
> >  "HBASE-6127 TestAtomicOperation#testMultiRowMutationMultiThreads
> > occasionally fails" is a bad one in need of attention.  Again, if up for
> > helping out, be our guest.
> >
> > There are some great patches hanging out in the priority major issues
> > section that are patch available that could be committed but for want of
> > review: e.g. "HBASE-8369 MapReduce over snapshot files".
> >
> > Regards the big features that are racing to make the 0.96 cutoff --
> namely
> > namespaces, tags, and serialization lib -- as I see it, Francis needs
> > reviews if namespaces are to make it, tags ditto, and the serialization
> > libs are nice-to-have auxillaries that can come in at any time.  If not
> > done by the end of this week, then as I see it, these features do not
> make
> > the cut.
> >
> > Unit tests are mostly passing.  The problematics are being worked on
> (e.g.
> > JD is on the replication set -- it likely a real problem rather than a
> > flakey test).
> >
> > How's the above sound?
> > St.Ack
> >
> > P.S. It is late but if folks want to meet this week to hack in patches
> > together, just say.  I could organize an afternoon or day if you all
> think
> > it would be a good idea.
> >
> > 1.
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE/fixforversion/12320040#selectedTab=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.project%3Aversion-issues-panel
> > 2.
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HBASE%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%220.95.2%22%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20priority%20%3D%20Blocker%20ORDER%20BY%20key%20DESC
> > 3.
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HBASE%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%220.95.2%22%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20priority%20%3D%20Critical%20ORDER%20BY%20key%20DESC
> >
> >
> >
> UPDATE:
>
> I was to cut 0.95.2 this weekend.  I am pushing out the cut-date to Weds or
> so of next week.  The gating factor is namespaces.  It needs a few more
> days of patch cycling.  I'll cut 0.95.2 after it goes in.  It'll be the
> last feature on the 0.95/0.96 branch.  Thereafter, only bug fixes,
> migration cleanup, and doc additions will be allowed (0.96.0RC will follow
> soon after the 0.95.2 developer release goes out).
>
> It looks like the serialization ilb will make the cut, API+Ordering; Nick
> has signed-on some consumers it seems.
>
> On KV tags, we have an outstanding -1 but -1s can change; lets see what the
> new posted patch looks like.
>
> Elliott has fancy-pants tracing that he should be able to get in before
> 0.95.2.
>
> On the dodgy-looking outstanding blockers:
>
> "HBASE-3787 Increment is non-idempotent but client retries RPC" still needs
> reviews.  It is a difficult problem well-researched by our Sergey; perhaps
> this does not make it?
>
> On "HBASE-7386 Investigate providing some supervisor support for znode
> deletion" we could doc. the "ugly" wrapper/watcher process with why it
> exists and suggest it should be supervise instead (with a template) but
> this could be post release?
>
> Criticals seem to be all in good hands wanting a bit of testing or a last
> review.  Lets get them in.
>
> Reviewing the major issues, I do not see anything we should hold up the
> release; please speak up if you think different (How about HBASE-7667, the
> stripe compaction work or the fsync work in HBASE-5954?.
>
> On unit tests, we are mostly passing now as reported a few days ago.  There
> are a few flakies that would be sweet to purge; e.g:
>
> HBASE-7980 TestZKInterProcessReadWriteLock fails occasionally in QA test
> run
> HBASE-9023 TestIOFencing.testFencingAroundCompactionAfterWALSync
>
> TestDistributedLogSplitting can go 'invisibile' on occasion; i.e. tests
> fail it is only one absent from list of completed tests.
>
> But unit tests are looking good on 0.95 and trunk:
> https://builds.apache.org/view/H-L/view/HBase/
>
> Your RM,
> St.Ack
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
> >
> >> I am shooting for end of July for 0.96 being 'complete'.   I would like
> >> to make a 0.96 release in August.  We have some criticals outstanding
> but I
> >> think we could ship even if these are not fixed in time (excepting
> >> migration polish and of course remaining build fixes).  See [1.] for the
> >> current list of issues.  Please re-prioritize issues as you see fit (or
> >> better, move issues out of 0.95.2 if you do not think they will be done
> in
> >> time).
> >>
> >> What to do with namespaces -- the last 0.96 'feature' -- given the above
> >> timeline?  Currently it is a massive patch out on a branch.  It is still
> >> not done, in want of review, and the author is going on holidays for a
> few
> >> weeks soon.  My thinking as of now, going by the rate of change over the
> >> last few weeks and estimating what is yet to be done, is that namespaces
> >> will not make it.  I am willing to be convinced otherwise but that is
> how
> >> it looks to me currently.
> >>
> >> I am going to start just disabling flakey unit tests in 0.95 from here
> on
> >> out.  When folks get the itch, they can fix at leisure first on trunk
> and
> >> then over in 0.95.
> >>
> >> What else?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> St.Ack
> >>
> >> 1.
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE/fixforversion/12320040#selectedTab=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.project%3Aversion-issues-panel
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 8:45 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> (Changed the subject)
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I want to see initial data type APIs ship out with 0.95.2. A patch for
> >>>> ordered byte serialization is up (HBASE-8201) and is nearing
> >>>> steady-state.
> >>>> However, sershe is the only person who's left feedback. I just posted
> an
> >>>> early patch for the data type API itself (HBASE-8693). It should get
> >>>> some
> >>>> eyes from all manor of interested parties, but I'll settle for folk
> from
> >>>> Phoenix for now.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> It would be cool if Phoenix and Kiji fellows and any one else
> interested
> >>> would weigh in and take a look see.
> >>>
> >>> This does not strike me as something we should hold up the release for
> >>> though.  It looks like something that could go in at any time?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Should these tasks be escalated to criticals in order to grab
> attention?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> I don't think that works going by past experience (and I don't think
> >>> this a blocker on 0.96)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Additional comments inline.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> ...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>  Namespaces is the long pole and progress seems slow.  Do we hold up
> the
> >>>> > release for them?  How can we hurry this effort along?  Swat team
> >>>> descends
> >>>> > on Y!?
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> >>>> It would be a shame to not get a decision on this in for 0.96.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> Agree.  We need to get 0.96 out though.  It has been too long.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>  + Is anyone testing?  Integration tests fail on ec2 build from time
> to
> >>>> time
> >>>> > [2].  Our Elliott dug in on one of the failures a few days back
and
> >>>> found
> >>>> > legit issue w/ no retry on admin tasks (I heart hbase-it tests).
>  Our
>


-- 
Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)

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