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 7063F10758 for ; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 16:35:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 78994 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2014 16:34:58 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 77889 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2014 16:34:54 -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 77658 invoked by uid 99); 3 Apr 2014 16:34:52 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 16:34:52 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of andrew.purtell@gmail.com designates 209.85.192.170 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.192.170] (HELO mail-pd0-f170.google.com) (209.85.192.170) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 16:34:47 +0000 Received: by mail-pd0-f170.google.com with SMTP id v10so2035757pde.29 for ; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 09:34:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=references:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:cc:from:subject:date:to; bh=KW/L7x0bCvan6zWcrkrhVG1a8a6ljy0QZ3X2IePouDo=; b=ihVNjkOSvUEo8KGcXekRRxbIPexfPJDEA1CSy0Xah/EYjEeaXitxcBULf40Z4ortsk A9Cj5+3BxVFQCjKeq9qa/ecdFR8suLz7hnBufwf+0XKUKbm5suyhseF4/JBC41e0Hgrp 6sWxPyfEAJQdqNekNdrBRRBKRouZajxPnrQk9SCnDIO5BMNm7eVUi17UMl0vMpmYNLhL zeH9H1s541uqfppW1dlCWJmirigVInOFEB0RVVfCFrSHwrmPVxhNG1Ip0E0eCKVfiSkf Q4lblHyj3Siott0dnwrMnuw0mh98rdW6Fi9SZBjyghSwHtpUrsO+e9wB/CiJgiO3Pf/j tU2w== X-Received: by 10.66.197.135 with SMTP id iu7mr8365525pac.149.1396542864688; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 09:34:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.47.175.70] ([166.170.40.194]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id my6sm12194934pbc.36.2014.04.03.09.34.21 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 03 Apr 2014 09:34:23 -0700 (PDT) References:

<996F7897-903F-484D-BD3B-DC478EBD7998@gmail.com>

Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <61B64D0F-1895-4287-B930-B3C0845F580E@gmail.com> Cc: "dev@hbase.apache.org" X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (11D167) From: Andrew Purtell Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for download Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 18:34:17 +0200 To: "user@hbase.apache.org" X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org This would be my preference also. Can someone provide a definitive statement on if a critical/blocker bug exis= ts for Phoenix or not? If not, we have sufficient votes at this point to car= ry the RC and can go forward with the release at the end of the vote period.= =20 > On Apr 3, 2014, at 5:57 PM, James Taylor wrote: >=20 > 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]? >=20 > James >=20 > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month >=20 >=20 > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan < > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote: >=20 >> Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time. >>=20 >> Regards >> Ram >>=20 >>=20 >>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu wrote: >>>=20 >>> Understood, Andy. >>>=20 >>> I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98 >>>=20 >>> Cheers >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell >>> wrote: >>>=20 >>>> I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow. >>>>=20 >>>> 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. >>>>=20 >>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu wrote: >>>>>=20 >>>>> I agree with Anoop's assessment. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Cheers >>>>>=20 >>>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John >> wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> 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. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case, >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Considering those we need a new RC. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> -Anoop- >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan < >>>>>> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> +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. >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>> Ram >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark >>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Checked the hash >>>>>>>> Checked the tar layout. >>>>>>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack wrote: >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> 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). >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> 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. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> St.Ack >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell < >>>> apurtell@apache.org >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>=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=3D123107= 53&version=3D12325664 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> 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. >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> - Andy >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - >>> Piet >>>>>>>> Hein >>>>>>>>>> (via Tom White) >>=20