hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mikhail Antonov <olorinb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Branch for 1.3
Date Mon, 21 Mar 2016 08:35:01 GMT
Hi folks,

bringing this topic up again. I'm planning to start spinning 1.3 builds and
see if/where they break in a week or two, and (depending on how it does)
start preparing RCs in a month or maybe two. So, let's see where we are.

Big items first. There were long debates around three big items - MOBs,
Spark connector and RS groups, whether we should have them or not.

 - MOBs
I believe we decided that they aren't going to go in branch-1, and hence
not in branch-1.3 for sure. We might get back to that debate and
re-consider MOBs for branch-1 if 2.0 is delayed, but almost certainly they
won't make it in 1.3 timeframe anyway as I feel.

- Spark connector - HBASE-14160 it looks like it has 3 subtasks open, one
of which is big one (HBASE-14375) - define public API for Spark
integration. From the Jira looks like active work is happening on other
subtasks, but not on this one. So how's public API going? How stable it is?
Who would want to have Spark in 1.3 and willing to help with this? OTOH -
who has objections about back-porting it? Has anyone been using it in some
real environment?

 - RS groups - there was recently a thread about them, I'd like to bring it
up again and get to some conclusion.

Other features which we had in flight a month ago -

 - HBASE-15181 - date based tiered compactions has landed
 - HBASE-11290 - unlock RegionStates. I'm afraid the codebase has moved
forward quite a bit since the benchmark was run on this change :( - Francis
- are you using it now? If we could have some benchmarks on the latest
rebase that I think would be great.


 - HBASE-13557 - special handling for system tables WALs - should we still
keep it targeted for 1.3?
 - HBASE-13017 - keep table state in meta, this one doesn't look like it's
going to make it in

As a new item on my list - I'm looking forward to see more of HBASE-15492
(memory optimizations) subtasks to go in branch-1.

Thanks!
Mikhail

On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I'm starting a push at work to get us up on 1.2. Assuming that happens
> later this year I think that will be the end of my close attention to 0.98.
>
> > On Feb 26, 2016, at 1:54 PM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> In the meantime those of us running HBase in production would benefit
> from
> >> fairly frequent minor releases.
> >
> > +1. Having to look back to 0.98 to get some new feature is problematic.
> >
> >> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Elliott Clark <eclark@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I disagree. We have agreed that 2.0 will have a new assignement
> manager.
> >>> There's a lot of work that has been done on getting that in, so far
> there
> >>> are no benefits to the end user from all that work. We should stick
> with
> >>> the plan and release 2.0 when it's ready.
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Stephen Jiang <
> syuanjiangdev@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Thanks for Mikhail for taking the 1.3 RM role.  Looks like we have a
> >> lot
> >>> of
> >>>> new things in 1.3 release.
> >>>>
> >>>> Based on the experience of 1.1 and 1.2 release, it takes a lot of
> >> efforts
> >>>> to get a stable minor release out.  From this, I have my own 2-cents
> on
> >>> 1.4
> >>>> release.  The plan is to have 2.0 release during summer time of this
> >> year
> >>>> (yeah, *this year).  * Given the limited time and resource,  after 1.3
> >>>> release, instead of spending effort on 1.4 release, the community
> >> should
> >>>> focus on stabilizing master (or branch-2, not exist as of now) branch
> >> and
> >>>> make 2.0 release a priority.  2.0 release would bring more values to
> >>>> customer  & move towards maturity of HBASE product.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks
> >>>> Stephen
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 1:49 AM, Mikhail Antonov <
> olorinbant@gmail.com
> >>>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Created an umbrella jira for 1.3 release - HBASE-15341
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So it looks like we may have 1.4 release before 2.0 is out? I tried
> >> to
> >>>> add
> >>>>> 1.4 version in jira so we can keep it in branch-1 poms but I
> >> couldn't -
> >>>>> looks like I don't have permissions?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -Mikhail
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
> >>>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> The guy we had looking at streaming replication moved on and
> >> there's
> >>> no
> >>>>>> immediate plans to take on the work, FWIW
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 3:33 PM, Matteo Bertozzi <
> >>>>> theo.bertozzi@gmail.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I was shooting for summer for hbase 2.0, the main problem
is that
> >>>> there
> >>>>>> is
> >>>>>>> still no code for the new AM or for fs changes, which are
the two
> >>>> that
> >>>>>> may
> >>>>>>> impact compatibility (working slowly on that). Streaming
> >>> replication
> >>>>> and
> >>>>>>> others seems compatible enough but no code there too.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Matteo
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Mikhail Antonov <
> >>>> olorinbant@gmail.com
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Agreed. I just meant - readiness of 2.0 is something
affecting
> >>>>>> decisions
> >>>>>>> on
> >>>>>>>> whether or not to backport mobs to branch-1 (which is
itself
> >>>> separate
> >>>>>>>> thread).
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> -Mikhail
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Sean Busbey <
> >>> busbey@cloudera.com>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Mikhail Antonov
<
> >>>>>> olorinbant@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> - "Shouldn't we rather try to get 2.0 release
out and have
> >>>> mobs
> >>>>>>>> there".
> >>>>>>>>> -
> >>>>>>>>>> So how far do we feel 2.0 release is?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 2.0 readiness probably deserves its own [DISCUSS]
thread, but
> >>>> we're
> >>>>>> now
> >>>>>>>>> past a year since the HBase 1.0.0 release, so I
hope it's
> >> soon.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>> Sean
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>> Michael Antonov
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   - Andy
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back.
- Piet
> >>>> Hein
> >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>> Michael Antonov
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Best regards,
> >>
> >>   - Andy
> >>
> >> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> >> (via Tom White)
> >>
>



-- 
Thanks,
Michael Antonov

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