hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Enis Söztutar <enis....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: DISCUSSION: 1.0.0
Date Mon, 25 Aug 2014 01:19:01 GMT
Hey,

Yeah, was busy with something else (HBASE-10070 subtasks) for the last
couple of weeks. I intend to get back to 0.99 real soon.

Any help would be awesome. I'll call out for an RC next week.

Enis


On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:

> How we looking for a 0.99.0?
>
> I can go review of outstanding issue list np Enis, just say, but you
> probably have a notion on where we are already.
>
> Grand,
> St.Ack
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 2:35 AM, Aditya <adityakishore@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > 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