hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Fabien LE GALLO <flega...@ubikod.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for download
Date Fri, 04 Apr 2014 08:19:28 GMT
What about 0.96.2 ? According to JIRA, it was supposed to be released
yesterday.
I want to apply HBASE-10850 patch to a stable release but it cannot be
applied to 0.96.1.



On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org> wrote:

> (cc dev@)
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Thank you, the release of 0.98.1 will happen on time unless there is a
> new
> > development.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:23 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> +1 on getting this RC3 out as the release and targetting the bug for
> >> 0.98.2.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Ram
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Anoop John <anoop.hbase@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > >Phoenix 4.0 has no release it can currently run on
> >> > >Can't we get these additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away
> >> >
> >> > I was thinking that for Phoenix 4.0 *release* the 98.1 is needed..
> >>  Thats
> >> > why was in favor of correcting the bug in 98.1 itself..  Ya 98.2 can
> >> come
> >> > out in a month time and at that time 4.0 can upgrade to that..  Sounds
> >> > good.. I am ready to again cast my +1 for this RC.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > >@Anoop - would you mind verifying whether or not
> >> > the TestSCVFWithMiniCluster written as a Phoenix query returns the
> >> correct
> >> > results?
> >> >
> >> > I will check this James..  I think it might be there.  Any way, even
> if
> >> the
> >> > bug is there, there can be a work around solution in Phoenix filter
> code
> >> > which I can try out  (If you would like to get)
> >> >
> >> > -Anoop-
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > That is a feasible option.
> >> > >
> >> > > I have changed Fix Version of HBASE-10850 to 0.98.2
> >> > >
> >> > > Cheers
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM, lars hofhansl <larsh@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > To be fair, Phoenix should not have relied on an unreleased
> >> dependency.
> >> > > (I
> >> > > > know there are corporate timing issues, but they really should
not
> >> > force
> >> > > us
> >> > > > into situations like these).
> >> > > >
> >> > > > As far as I understand the issue, it not just a performance but
> can
> >> > lead
> >> > > > to incorrect results.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Then again, this issue has existed in all of 0.96 and 0.98 so
far
> >> > (over 5
> >> > > > months).
> >> > > >
> >> > > > So, I'd be in favor of releasing 0.98.1 now, and doing 0.98.2
> soon,
> >> in
> >> > 14
> >> > > > or 20 days (that would also pull back some of the time lost in
the
> >> > > 0.98.1RC
> >> > > > cycle).
> >> > > >
> >> > > > -- Lars
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > ________________________________
> >> > > >  From: James Taylor <jtaylor@salesforce.com>
> >> > > > To: "user@hbase.apache.org" <user@hbase.apache.org>
> >> > > > Cc: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <dev@hbase.apache.org>
> >> > > > Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:57 AM
> >> > > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3)
> is
> >> > > > available for download
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no
> >> release
> >> > it
> >> > > > can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter,
> >> so
> >> > it
> >> > > > seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get
> these
> >> > > > additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
> >> > > >
> >> > > >     James
> >> > > >
> >> > > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> >> > > > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Regards
> >> > > > > Ram
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > Understood, Andy.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Cheers
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> >> > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> >> > > > > > >wrote:
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > However, I may very well release the next RC even
if I am
> the
> >> > only
> >> > > +1
> >> > > > > > vote
> >> > > > > > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch
fire. So
> >> please
> >> > > take
> >> > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to
the 0.98
> branch
> >> or
> >> > > file
> >> > > > > > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours.
This is it for
> >> > > 0.98.1.
> >> > > > > > >  0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1
release.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Cheers
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John
<
> >> anoop.hbase@gmail.com
> >> > >
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850  I think
better we can fix
> >> this in
> >> > > > 98.1
> >> > > > > > > release
> >> > > > > > > >> itself.  Also Phoenix plan to use this
98.1 and Phoenix
> >> uses
> >> > > > > essential
> >> > > > > > > CF
> >> > > > > > > >> optimization.
> >> > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1
in such a case,
> >> > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> >> > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > >> -Anoop-
> >> > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna
vasudevan <
> >> > > > > > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > >>> +1 on the RC.
> >> > > > > > > >>> Checked the signature.
> >> > > > > > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and
ran the testcases.
> >> > > > > > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and
Visibility labels.
> >> > >  Everything
> >> > > > > > looks
> >> > > > > > > >>> fine.
> >> > > > > > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >>> Regards
> >> > > > > > > >>> Ram
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM,
Elliott Clark <
> >> > > > eclark@apache.org>
> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>> +1
> >> > > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>> Checked the hash
> >> > > > > > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> >> > > > > > > >>>> Played with a single node.  Everything
seemed good
> after
> >> > ITBLL
> >> > > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23
AM, Stack <
> >> stack@duboce.net>
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> +1
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> The hash is good.  Doc. and
layout looks good.  UI
> seems
> >> > > fine.
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default
hadoop 2.2 in hbase
> >> > against a
> >> > > > tip
> >> > > > > > of
> >> > > > > > > >>> the
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster.
 Seems to basically work
> >> (small
> >> > > big
> >> > > > > > linked
> >> > > > > > > >>>> list
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> test worked).
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against
this RC.
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing
our Jon's thunder but in
> >> case
> >> > he
> >> > > is
> >> > > > > too
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll
note that he has gotten
> our
> >> > > > internal
> >> > > > > > rig
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> running against the tip of
the 0.98 branch and it has
> >> been
> >> > > > > passing
> >> > > > > > > >>> green
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small
cluster over hours.
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> St.Ack
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49
AM, Andrew Purtell <
> >> > > > > > > apurtell@apache.org
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1
release candidate (RC3) is
> >> available
> >> > > for
> >> > > > > > > >>> download
> >> > > > > > > >>>> at
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/
and
> >> Maven
> >> > > > > artifacts
> >> > > > > > > >>> are
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> also
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> available in the temporary
repository
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > >
> >> > >
> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing
key D5365CCD.
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in
this release can be found
> here:
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate
and vote +1/-1 by
> midnight
> >> > > > Pacific
> >> > > > > > Time
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> (00:00
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether
or not we should release
> >> this
> >> > as
> >> > > > > > 0.98.1.
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> --
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Best regards,
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>  - Andy
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack
prove their worth by
> hitting
> >> > > back. -
> >> > > > > > Piet
> >> > > > > > > >>>> Hein
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >
> >    - Andy
> >
> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> > (via Tom White)
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 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