hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jonathan Hsieh <...@cloudera.com>
Subject Current status of 1.2.0RC0
Date Thu, 09 Jul 2015 13:47:39 GMT
Let's have some testing of this before we commit to this decision. I'd hate
for us to be in a situation where reality doesn't jive with theory due to
something self inflicted.  I also feel that removing well exercised code
paths in minor versions seems risky. (No qualms for removing in major
version)

My main concern isn't hbase client to hbase server. I buy that.

I'm concerned about a sever side hbase rolling upgrade where masters and
rs's are different versions / settings.  E.g. Does a pv2 only master
failover properly with a nonpv2 master in the presence of mixed version
rs's.  Does the master failover test cover this situation?

Jon

On Monday, July 6, 2015, Enis Söztutar <enis@apache.org
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','enis@apache.org');>> wrote:

> >
> >
> > > Would not being able to opt out of this break rolling upgrade from 1.0
> or
> > 1.1?
> >
>
> It should not (in theory). The client side does not need to know that the
> operation is executed via proc v2. The HBaseAdmin class has the
> compatibility layer to work with masters which know about proc v2 or not.
> And if the client does not know about proc v2, it will still observe the
> side affects (whether the tables regions are created in meta, etc) and work
> as expected.
>
>
> >
> >
> > > Enis
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 2:01 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Jul 5, 2015 1:36 PM, "Stack" <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Folks!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I believe I've now worked through the logistics to put up the
> first
> > > RC
> > > > for
> > > > > > 1.2.0. At the moment I'm waiting on a Procedure V2 blocker[1],
> > which
> > > I
> > > > hope
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > May I add HBASE-14012 to the above list Sean? (Almost done)
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Fine by me. Please make sure it is blocker priority with a fix
> version
> > of
> > > > 1.2.0.
> > > >
> > > > > 1.2.0 has Distributed Log Replay enabled by default. We good with
> > this?
> > > > > I've not done much testing with it enabled. Have others?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I haven't yet. I figured during RC0 I'd try to hit it hard and then
> > file
> > > > tickets as needed.
> > > >
> > > > If we leave it on we'll need docs for how to do a rolling upgrade.
> > > >
> > > > > 1.2.0 also has flush-by-store enabled by default. This has been
> > tested
> > > a
> > > > > bunch and looks pretty good to me.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Good to hear, this and can't-opt-out-procv2 are my other big
> unknowns.
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > // HBase Tech Lead, Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > // jon@cloudera.com // @jmhsieh
> >
>


-- 
// Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
// HBase Tech Lead, Software Engineer, Cloudera
// jon@cloudera.com // @jmhsieh

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