Return-Path: 
 <dev-return-42004-apmail-hbase-dev-archive=hbase.apache.org@hbase.apache.org>
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 41C73106BB
	for <apmail-hbase-dev-archive@www.apache.org>;
 Thu,  5 Dec 2013 22:44:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 92018 invoked by uid 500); 5 Dec 2013 22:43:57 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@hbase.apache.org
Received: (qmail 91756 invoked by uid 500); 5 Dec 2013 22:43:57 -0000
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:dev-help@hbase.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@hbase.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@hbase.apache.org>
List-Id: <dev.hbase.apache.org>
Reply-To: dev@hbase.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@hbase.apache.org
Received: (qmail 91724 invoked by uid 99); 5 Dec 2013 22:43:56 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 05 Dec 2013 22:43:56 +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 (nike.apache.org: domain of ndimiduk@gmail.com designates
 209.85.128.170 as permitted sender)
Received: from [209.85.128.170] (HELO mail-ve0-f170.google.com)
 (209.85.128.170)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 05 Dec 2013 22:43:50 +0000
Received: by mail-ve0-f170.google.com with SMTP id oy12so14682914veb.15
        for <multiple recipients>; Thu, 05 Dec 2013 14:43:29 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type;
        bh=b+3P646YJyR0n+LRJwY+6PRshumnMuEry2NDTCSp408=;
        b=avOXi49EXTkcQtf8c2gOiZJv3lwMvzJxVUeG1YTP18coKqBK+YWgUQQhG2DvWp7Pb2
         L20MWNqhIf34djirN/xK/CQ2atsFlTnL9MJM5WgTIqqF3dKuxmLWacFwgHxM+q0Mf77I
         m9lPwG5z6Xb7cTccMWLZAMhMkw7P2x3nRSLfurpeumDs4FOwVBWlH0Ox+dtuOJPm7d97
         r9cjNu+t/PjCDRIEzr9xLhJrkv3Qg0Dhwt5aM15cTQKpRcsVXPsrLNaL91gX80jhH7N1
         jYTRGNB+tvkB12hoh38r+BOiFwd6j2MZU32BbYcDM9VepT7wo2VM8XFUYjEXlviAZOZq
         mp0Q==
X-Received: by 10.58.187.129 with SMTP id fs1mr317966vec.45.1386283409381;
 Thu, 05 Dec 2013 14:43:29 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.58.161.100 with HTTP; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 14:43:09 -0800 (PST)
From: Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 14:43:09 -0800
Message-ID: 
 <CANZa=Gs7BOC6FPiVGhSc-eUibf_b6QPvWvLGRh3VeU+Na34+BQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Anyone out there using HRegionPartitioner ?
To: hbase-dev <dev@hbase.apache.org>, hbase-user <user@hbase.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bacc4282ccd6604ecd14297
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

--047d7bacc4282ccd6604ecd14297
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hi all,

While investigating HBASE-10017, I'm wondering if the above is being used
by anyone? Roman's allegation of data loss is serious and I'm not seeing it
used in the general case.

I propose applying his fix on that ticket, marking HRegionPartitioner as
deprecated in 0.98, and removing it from trunk.

Thoughts?

Thanks,
Nick

--047d7bacc4282ccd6604ecd14297--