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 9388710692 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 23:28:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 7471 invoked by uid 500); 28 Apr 2015 23:28:17 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 7376 invoked by uid 500); 28 Apr 2015 23:28:17 -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 7365 invoked by uid 99); 28 Apr 2015 23:28:16 -0000 Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mail-relay.apache.org) (140.211.11.15) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 23:28:16 +0000 Received: from mail-lb0-f178.google.com (mail-lb0-f178.google.com [209.85.217.178]) by mail-relay.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mail-relay.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id 5A7CF1A0437 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 23:28:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by lbbuc2 with SMTP id uc2so7976129lbb.2 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 16:28:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.112.161.226 with SMTP id xv2mr16656653lbb.106.1430263694246; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 16:28:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.170.168 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 16:27:33 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Andrew Purtell Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 16:27:33 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Rolling Upgrade 0.98 -> 1.1 To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3159e6e49590514d13757 --001a11c3159e6e49590514d13757 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +1 for rolling upgrade from 0.98 to any 1.x for as long as we can manage it. Will make life easier for adopters of the 1.x line who come in later. On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Nick Dimiduk wrote: > We're pretty late in the game to bring this up, but I want to make sure > we're all on the same page. I believe we want to support rolling upgrades > as there have been blocker tickets opened against the release to this > effect. The two things I'm aware of that cause problems here are table > state in meta (HBASE-13017) and distributed log replay (HBASE-12577). Are > there any others we should be aware of? When I search for "Hadoop Flags: > Incompatible change" [0] I do get a couple hits, but I don't think this > flag is well socialized. > > Given the resolution outlined for table states, I'm prone to punt this one > to 1.2. > > For DLR, we have HBASE-12743 opened without clear progress. Devaraj also > mentioned to me that he's been tracking troubles around this feature his > test runs. Unless someone wants to crack this nut today or tomorrow, I > think we should toggle it off. HBASE-13584. > > Other items? > > Thanks, > Nick > > [0]: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HBASE%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%201.1.0%20AND%20%22Hadoop%20Flags%22%20%3D%20%22Incompatible%20change%22 > -- Best regards, - Andy Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White) --001a11c3159e6e49590514d13757--