Mailing-List: contact dev-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@hbase.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of andrew.purtell@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.192.169 as permitted sender)
Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 3rd HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC2) is available
 for download
References: 
 <CA+RK=_BJm=TgLYGWjwJBuKJXPWCJrQc0kWMSEJhHpSres6WPjg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+RK=_DK4QyMecJ52reY166CjEZfKa=Fs1r0EdUbZvB_cCFJqg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALte62zCTQeyqZ=3r0zYS6qqvJsTbUXMk-yL7ARXNup3=hX_0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALte62yKt1pOdzB=4O3DPyUYbF1Wx=fGzCGBjeb_JRr_Njw+4g@mail.gmail.com>
 <ED634F27-E73B-465C-91DC-2749EA63EE39@gmail.com>
 <EC99E2E8-C9B3-4EFC-8B04-A525436F6E3E@gmail.com>
 <B484243C-EEC1-452D-996A-9C8CF781D438@gmail.com>
 <B954F61B-820B-4B07-BCDD-9A939D7D84DB@gmail.com>
From: Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <B954F61B-820B-4B07-BCDD-9A939D7D84DB@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <3150E850-A57F-48F1-B3CE-D11ABF8C1EB7@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 16:44:18 +0100
To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <dev@hbase.apache.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)

Ok, RC3 coming up by tomorrow.=20


> On Mar 29, 2014, at 3:52 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
> Yes.=20
>=20
> With HBASE-10863, I change my vote to -1
>=20
> Thanks=20
>=20
>> On Mar 29, 2014, at 7:48 AM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com> wr=
ote:
>>=20
>> Ted, is that a -1?
>>=20
>>> On Mar 29, 2014, at 2:13 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>=20
>>> HBASE-10863 is a fix that should be included in 0.98.1
>>>=20
>>> W.r.t. Conclusion of voting period of RC3, it is reasonable to have some=
  flexibility.=20
>>>=20
>>> Cheers
>>>=20
>>>> On Mar 29, 2014, at 4:14 AM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com> w=
rote:
>>>>=20
>>>> If we need another RC, then I can do this in the evening Amsterdam time=
 today or tomorrow and run a new vote. I guess at this point it should concl=
ude on April 6?=20
>>>>=20
>>>> I wanted to hit a release date of March 31 because Phoenix's 4.0.0 RC d=
epends on having a 0.98.1 available. Of course if there is a veto worthy iss=
ue then downstream will be better served by waiting.=20
>>>>=20
>>>> Also, I will be spinning a 0.98.2 to hit a release date target +30 days=
 from .1.=20
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>> On Mar 29, 2014, at 12:00 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>=20
>>>>> After some more testing in secure deployment of 0.98, I found some iss=
ue
>>>>> with cell visibility labels.
>>>>> Namely:
>>>>> HBASE-10863 Scan doesn't return rows for user who has authorization by=

>>>>> visibility label in secure deployment
>>>>> HBASE-10857 clear_auths command gives exception on existing label and u=
ser
>>>>> in secure deployment
>>>>>=20
>>>>> Underneath, they are actually caused by one defect:
>>>>> DefaultScanLabelGenerator#dropLabelsNotInUserAuths() would erroneously=
 drop
>>>>> labels due to mismatching username.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> The fix, attached to HBASE-10863, switches to calling user.getShortNam=
e()
>>>>> which is consistent with AccessController in working with Kerberos
>>>>> principals.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> =46rom users' point of view, it would be expected that cell visibility=
 labels
>>>>> work in secure deployment.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> I want to solicit opinion on whether RC3 is needed.
>>>>> If RC3 comes out, I would expect a quick vote.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>=20
>>>>>=20
>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> - checked documentation and tarball
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> - Ran unit test suite which passed
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> - Ran in local and distributed mode
>>>>>> - checked the UI pages
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 9:27 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>=
wrote:
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> Unit test suite passes 100% 25 times out of 25 runs.
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> Cluster testing looks good with LoadTestTool, YCSB, ITI, and ITIBLL.=

>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> An informal performance test on a small cluster comparing 0.98.0 and=

>>>>>>> 0.98.1
>>>>>>> indicates no serious perf regressions. See email to dev@ titled
>>>>>>> "Comparsion
>>>>>>> between 0.98.0 and 0.98.1RC1 using YCSB". The results are still rele=
vant
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> this RC.
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> Some of the integration tests have issues when run in local mode but=
 this
>>>>>>> test only problem can be fixed later.
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.or=
g
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> The 3rd HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC2) is available for downl=
oad
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC2/ and Maven artifacts a=
re
>>>>>>>> also available in the temporary repository
>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1=
014
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=3D1=
2310753&version=3D12325664
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> This is the last RC expected for this version unless we find a new
>>>>>>>> blocker.
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific Tim=
e
>>>>>>>> (00:00 -0800 GMT) on March 31 on whether or not we should release t=
his
>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>> 0.98.1.
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> - Andy
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet=
 Hein
>>>>>>>> (via Tom White)
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> - Andy
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet H=
ein
>>>>>>> (via Tom White)
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>=20