hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aditya <adityakish...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: DISCUSSION: 1.0.0
Date Tue, 29 Jul 2014 09:35:41 GMT
Thanks Ted!


On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 4:37 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:

> I started with https://reviews.apache.org/r/23175/
>
> Will continue reviewing this week.
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Aditya <adityakishore@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Did anyone get a chance to take a look at the patches?
>>
>> Regards,
>> aditya...
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 8:37 PM, Aditya <adityakishore@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > The wrapper jar is part of the first patch, which is in git mailbox
>> patch
>> > format.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> You may want to attach the wrapper jar to the JIRA directly.
>> >>
>> >> Cheers
>> >>
>> >> On Jul 19, 2014, at 1:52 AM, Aditya <adityakishore@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Looks like the regular patch command skips any binary included in
>> patches.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 1:37 AM, Aditya <adityakishore@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Thanks for taking a look Ted!
>> >>>
>> >>> Looks like the second patch created with "git diff" excluded the
>> Gradle
>> >>> wrapper JAR from the patch.
>> >>>
>> >>> I would generate a new one which includes this this jar. In the
>> >>> meantime, you should be able to use the first patch attached to the
>> JIRA
>> >>> which is in git-am format and that would let you build.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Nice work, Aditya.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Looks like the hbase-native-client profile requires gradle ?
>> >>>>
>> >>>>      [exec] Error: Could not find or load main class
>> >>>> org.gradle.wrapper.GradleWrapperMain
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Will take a look at your patch.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Cheers
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Aditya <adityakishore@gmail.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> As requested, I have attached a combined patch to the umbrella
JIRA
>> >>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-1015> and
submitted
>> it to
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> jenkins.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Would be great if someone could take a look and provide feedback.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Regards,
>> >>>>> aditya...
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Aditya <adityakishore@gmail.com>
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> > I was hoping to get some initial comments before attaching
patches
>> >>>>> for the
>> >>>>> > build boat.
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > I have broken the entire code into 5 patch sets, layered
in a
>> >>>>> sequnce,
>> >>>>> > each focusing on a particular area (public headers/JNI
>> >>>>> > implementation/Examples+unit test, etc) for the ease of
review.
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/23175/
>> >>>>> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/23176/
>> >>>>> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/23177/
>> >>>>> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/23178/
>> >>>>> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/23179/
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > These are also available as a sequence of patches as the
pull
>> request
>> >>>>> > <https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/1>.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > Only the last patch hooks everything to the HBase build
process
>> >>>>> > (optionally) and hence I was thinking of squashing these
separate
>> >>>>> patches
>> >>>>> > into a single patch to be submitted for build.
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> > On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@gmail.com
>> >
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> >> This ticket has only open subtasks, ie nothing in 'patch
>> >>>>> available'. I
>> >>>>> >> assume you mean HBASE-10168. We'll see about getting
you some
>> >>>>> reviews, but
>> >>>>> >> you should also go about formatting the patch for buildbot.
Also,
>> >>>>> since
>> >>>>> >> your 3 reviews are individually 100+k, you should consider
>> breaking
>> >>>>> them
>> >>>>> >> into three separate tickets.
>> >>>>> >>
>> >>>>> >> my 2¢
>> >>>>> >> -n
>> >>>>> >>
>> >>>>> >>
>> >>>>> >> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Aditya <adityakishore@gmail.com
>> >
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>> >>
>> >>>>> >>> Sorry about that.
>> >>>>> >>>
>> >>>>> >>> Here is the umbrella JIRA
>> >>>>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-1015
>> >>>>> >>>
>> >>>>> >>>
>> >>>>> >>> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Nick Dimiduk <
>> ndimiduk@gmail.com>
>> >>>>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>> >>>
>> >>>>> >>>> Would you mind including the JIRA numbers along
with the
>> request?
>> >>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>> >>>> Thanks,
>> >>>>> >>>> Nick
>> >>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>> >>>> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Aditya <
>> adityakishore@gmail.com>
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>> >>>>> Do we want to have the C APIs part of 1.0.0
release. I had
>> >>>>> posted few
>> >>>>> >>>>> patches and a set of review request sometime
last week.
>> >>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Enis Söztutar
<
>> >>>>> enis.soz@gmail.com>
>> >>>>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> >>>>> > On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Mikhail
Antonov <
>> >>>>> >>>>> olorinbant@gmail.com>
>> >>>>> >>>>> > wrote:
>> >>>>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > Moved ZK watcher & listener
subtask out of scope
>> >>>>> HBASE-10909. Enis
>> >>>>> >>>>> - with
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > that, I guess HBASE-10909 can
be marked in branch-1?
>> >>>>> >>>>> > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > Sounds good.
>> >>>>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > HBASE-11464 - this is the jira
where I'll capture tasks to
>> >>>>> >>>>> abstract hbase
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > client from ZK (mostly it would
be post-1.0 work).
>> >>>>> >>>>> > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > Not sure whether we can make it fully
backwards compatible
>> >>>>> with 1.0
>> >>>>> >>>>> > clients. I guess we will see when
the patches are done.
>> >>>>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > Thanks,
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > Mikhail
>> >>>>> >>>>> > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > 2014-07-03 12:52 GMT-07:00 Stack
<stack@duboce.net>:
>> >>>>> >>>>> > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 12:25
PM, Mikhail Antonov <
>> >>>>> >>>>> olorinbant@gmail.com
>> >>>>> >>>>> > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > wrote:
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > Guys,
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > getting back to ZK
abstraction work w.r.t. release 1.0
>> >>>>> and
>> >>>>> >>>>> > thereafter,
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > some
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > status update. So as
we're getting closer to complete
>> >>>>> >>>>> HBASE-10909, it
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > looks
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > like the steps may
be like this:
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > >  - there are 2 subtasks
out there not closed yet, one
>> of
>> >>>>> which
>> >>>>> >>>>> is
>> >>>>> >>>>> > about
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > log
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > splitting (and Sergey
S has submitted a patch for
>> >>>>> review),
>> >>>>> >>>>> another is
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > abstraction of ZK watcher
(this is what I've been
>> >>>>> working on
>> >>>>> >>>>> in the
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > background; but after
sketching the patch it seems
>> like
>> >>>>> >>>>> without being
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > able
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > to modify the control
flows and some changes in the
>> >>>>> module
>> >>>>> >>>>> structure,
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > it'd
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > be a lot of scaffolding
code not really simplifying
>> >>>>> current
>> >>>>> >>>>> code). So
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > I'd
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > propose to descope
abstraction of ZK watcher jira
>> >>>>> >>>>> (HBASE-11073),
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > namely:
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > convert it to top-level
JIRA and continue to work on
>> it
>> >>>>> >>>>> separately;
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > rename
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > HBASE-10909 to "ZK
abstraction: phase 1", and mark it
>> as
>> >>>>> >>>>> closed as
>> >>>>> >>>>> > soon
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > as
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > log splitting jira
is completed. This way HBASE-10909
>> >>>>> fits to
>> >>>>> >>>>> > branch-1.
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > Sounds good to me.
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > >  - secondly, in the
discussion to the CatalogTracker
>> >>>>> patch, we
>> >>>>> >>>>> > started
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > talking about modifying
client to not know about ZK,
>> but
>> >>>>> >>>>> rather keep
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > the
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > location of current
masters and talk to them using RPC
>> >>>>> calls.
>> >>>>> >>>>> This
>> >>>>> >>>>> > work
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > can
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > not go into branch-1,
as it involves invasive changes
>> in
>> >>>>> client
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > including
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > new RPC. As I understand
the branching schema now,
>> those
>> >>>>> >>>>> changes can
>> >>>>> >>>>> > go
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > to
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > master branch, we just
don't merge them to branch-1,
>> and
>> >>>>> >>>>> depending on
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > their
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > completeness we can
pull them to 1.1 release or so.
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > You have it right Mikhail.
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > > St.Ack
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > --
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > Thanks,
>> >>>>> >>>>> > > Michael Antonov
>> >>>>> >>>>> > >
>> >>>>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>> >>>>
>> >>>>> >>>
>> >>>>> >>
>> >>>>> >
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message