hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Enis Söztutar <e...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSSION] Update on HBASE-10070 / Merge into trunk
Date Fri, 23 May 2014 23:16:23 GMT
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Jimmy Xiang <jxiang@cloudera.com> wrote:

> I remember there are some public interface changes. What's the story about
> compatibility and rolling upgrade?
>

Sorry this fell through cracks. The code is rolling restart compatible. The
only limitation is that you should not create
a new table with region replicas >1 until the rolling restart is complete.
If so, the region replicas cannot be opened and keep
bouncing (region name cannot be parsed), but it still should not cause
issues.


>
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > I would be in favor of a merge to trunk, but next week some time after
> all
> > issues slated for the 0.98.3 release have been committed through trunk.
> > Otherwise the rebasing, new review, and probable new test failures would
> > mean the RC misses the deadline significantly.
> >
> >
> > On Wednesday, May 21, 2014, Enis Söztutar <enis@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > We would like to give an update on the status of HBASE-10070 work, and
> > open
> > > up discussion for how we can do further development.
> > >
> > > We seem to be at a point where we have the core functionality of the
> > > region replica, as described in HBASE-10070 working. As pointed out
> > > under the section "Development Phases" in the design doc posted on the
> > > jira HBASE-10070, this work was divided into two broad phases. The
> first
> > > phase introduces region replicas concept, the new consistency model,
> and
> > > corresponding RPC implementations. All of the issues for Phase 1 can be
> > > found under [3]. Phase 2 is still in the works, and contains the
> proposed
> > > changes listed under [4].
> > >
> > > With all the issues committed in HBASE-10070 branch in svn, we think
> that
> > > the "phase-1" is complete. The user documentation on HBASE-10513 gives
> an
> > > accurate picture of what has been done in phase-1 and what the impact
> of
> > > using this feature is, APIs etc. We have added
> > > a couple of IT tests as part of this work and we have tested the work
> > > we did in "phase-1" of the project quite extensively in Hortonworks'
> > > infrastructure.
> > >
> > > In summary, with the code in branch, you can create tables with region
> > > replicas, do gets / multi gets and scans using TIMELINE consistency
> with
> > > high availability. Region replicas periodically scan the files of the
> > > primary and pick up flushed / committed files. The RPC paths /
> > assignment,
> > > balancing etc are pretty stable. However some more performance analysis
> > and
> > > tuning is needed. More information can be found in [1] and [2].
> > >
> > >
> > > As a reminder, the development has been happening in the branch -
> > > hbase-10070 (https://github.com/apache/hbase/tree/hbase-10070). We
> have
> > > been pretty diligent about more than one committer's +1 on the branch
> > > commits and for almost all the subtasks in HBASE-10070 there is more
> than
> > > one +1 except for test fix issues or more trivial issues, where there
> > maybe
> > >  only one +1.  Enis/Nicolas/Sergey/Devaraj/Nick are the main
> contributors
> > > of code in the phase-1 and many patches have been reviewed already by
> > > people outside
> > > this group (mainly Stack, Jimmy)
> > >
> > > For Phase 2, we think that we can deliver on the proposed design
> > > incrementally over the next couple of months. However, we think that it
> > > might be ok to merge the changes from phase 1 first, then do a
> > > commit-as-you-go approach for remaining items. Therefore, we would like
> > to
> > > propose  to merge the branch to trunk, and continue the work over
> there.
> > > This might also result in more reviews.
> > >
> > > Alternatively, we can continue the work in the branch, and do the merge
> > at
> > > the end of Phase 2, but that will make the review process a bit more
> > > tricky, which is why we would like the merge sooner.
> > >
> > > What do you think? Comments, concerns?
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12644237/hbase-10513_v1.patch
> > > [2]
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.slideshare.net/enissoz/hbase-high-availability-for-reads-with-time
> > > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10070
> > > [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-11183
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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