hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mike Drob <md...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Moving 2.0 forward
Date Fri, 21 Jul 2017 16:30:40 GMT
Thanks for tracking this, Stack!

One thing that is not clear to me from your summary and the linked document
is which release we can block on tests? Unit tests are in bad shape (but
getting better) and I recently started looking at ITs which also need some
care.

Mike

On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:

> Status update girls and boys!
>
> hbase-2.0.0-alpha1 went out June 22nd.
>
> alpha2 has been a bit slow to follow (holidays) though there has been
> steady progress closing out blockers and criticals by a bunch of you all.
> The plan is for a release in the first week or so of August. It should be
> fully up on hbase-thirdparty using updated (and relocated) versions of
> netty, guava, and protobuf as well as a default deploy that has
> master-carrying-no-regions.
>
> alpha3 will follow soon after and will focus on making sure our user-facing
> APIs are clean (branch-1 compatible, no illicit removals/mods, and so on)
> and that basic upgrade 'works'.
>
> betas start in September?
>
> I've been keeping a rough general state here [1] (please update any section
> that is lagging actuality) but for details on what blockers and criticals
> remain, see the JIRA 2.0 view [2]. Recent issue-gardening has brought 2.0
> into better focus. Feel free to review and punt items you think can wait
> till 3.0 or 2.1. If you want to pull in more stuff, please ask first.
>
> Thanks,
> St.Ack
>
> 1.
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9iEu_
> ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit#
> 2. https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/HBASE/versions/12327188
>
>
> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 1:46 AM, 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino219@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> HBASE-18037 is a new blocker. I'm currently working on it, will be
> >> finished
> >> soon I think.
> >>
> >> I made it a blocker then and added it to our hbase2 release doc [1] list
> > as a blocker.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > St.Ack
> >
> > 1. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9iEu_
> > ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit#
> >
> >
> >> 2017-05-15 14:12 GMT+08:00 Stack <stack@duboce.net>:
> >>
> >>
> >> > A month on. Status.
> >> >
> >> > I've been working on the HBASE-14614 branch cluster testing. After a
> >> load
> >> > of fixing, the branch passes smaller test runs (an hour or so of ITBLL
> >> up
> >> > to 2B rows w/ killing monkeys). When I go larger, to a scale I've not
> >> done
> >> > in a while, I start to run into other interesting issues -- some of
> >> which
> >> > are related to AMv2 (I'm fixing), but others are not (100G WALs that
> >> take
> >> > ten minutes to split makes for interesting cascades when monkeys kill
> >> > inside the ten minutes...). I intend to keep on with this larger scale
> >> > testing since it is uncovering good stuff (especially when HDFS is dog
> >> slow
> >> > because of background replications) but my thinking is that I should
> be
> >> > large scale testing branch-2, not just HBASE-14614. I think
> HBASE-14614,
> >> > the new AMv2, is good enough to merge to master these times. Given it
> is
> >> > the last blocker, once in, I'll cut the hbase2 branch.
> >> >
> >> > I'll start up a 'Merge HBASE-14614' DISCUSSION thread in the next day
> >> or so
> >> > (I need to fix some unit tests...).
> >> >
> >> > The AMv2 doc is still a work in progress but should give a gist on
> >> where we
> >> > are currently[1].  There is a bunch of todo still but seems tractable;
> >> e.g.
> >> > rolling upgrade, finish doc., and we don't have an HBCK since it needs
> >> to
> >> > be recast in light of how stuff now works but a redo on HBCK is
> >> premature
> >> > given we don't know failure types as yet (we just fix the problems as
> >> they
> >> > come up).
> >> >
> >> > St.Ack
> >> > 1.
> >> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eVKa7FHdeoJ1-
> >> > 9o8yZcOTAQbv0u0bblBlCCzVSIn69g/edit#
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 1:43 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Some status:
> >> > >
> >> > > AMv2 (HBASE-14614) is near to passing all tests caveat my disabling
> of
> >> > all
> >> > > to-do w/ fsck (fsck needs revamp) and tests that expect that they
> can
> >> > move
> >> > > hbase;meta off master (AMv2 enforces this constraint; it is supposed
> >> to
> >> > be
> >> > > enforced on AMv1 but meta-on-master is incompletely realized in AMv1
> >> and
> >> > > AMv2). A few other tests have been disabled for various reasons. See
> >> [1]
> >> > > for full list.
> >> > >
> >> > > There is a hefty list of TODOs still (Again see the messy doc [1])
> but
> >> > the
> >> > > only 'blocker', IMO, is community confidence in AMv2. Currently,
> >> cluster
> >> > > tests with chaos fail (new form of 'stuck' regions). Takes time
> >> > > investigating.
> >> > >
> >> > > Will keep you all posted.
> >> > > St.Ack
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > 1. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eVKa7FHdeoJ1-
> >> > > 9o8yZcOTAQbv0u0bblBlCCzVSIn69g/edit#heading=h.92vclum0bvod
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 1:14 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> apurtell@apache.org>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> +1 on branching (yay!)
> >> > >>
> >> > >> I have EC2 resources for running ITBLL etc.
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:07 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net>
wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> > Some notes on progress toward hbase2.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Given that stability and performance are NOT emergent behaviors
> but
> >> > >> rather
> >> > >> > projects unto themselves, my thought is that we commit all
that
> >> we've
> >> > >> > agreed as core for hbase2 (see [1]), branch, and then work
on
> >> > >> stabilizing
> >> > >> > and perf rather than do stabilize, commit, and then branch.
What
> >> this
> >> > >> means
> >> > >> > in practice is that for features like Inmemory Compaction,
we
> >> commit
> >> > it
> >> > >> > defaulted 'on' ("BASIC" mode) which is what we want in hbase2.
> >> Should
> >> > it
> >> > >> > prove problematic under test, we disable it before release.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Are folks good w/ this mode? I ask because, in a few issues
there
> >> are
> >> > >> > requests for proof that a master feature is 'stable' before
> commit.
> >> > >> This is
> >> > >> > normally a healthy request only in master's case, it is hard
to
> >> > >> demonstrate
> >> > >> > stability given its current state.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Other outstanding issues such as decisions about whether
master
> >> hosts
> >> > >> > system tables only (by default), I'm thinking, we can work
out
> post
> >> > >> branch
> >> > >> > in alpha/betas before release.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > The awkward item is the long-pole Assignment Manager. This
is an
> >> > >> > all-or-nothing affair. Here we are switching in a new Master
> core.
> >> > >> While I
> >> > >> > think it fine that AMv2 is incomplete come branch time, those
of
> us
> >> > >> working
> >> > >> > on the new AM still need to demonstrate to you all that it
> >> basically
> >> > >> > viable.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > The point-of-no-return is commit of the patch in HBASE-14614.
> >> > >> HBASE-14614
> >> > >> > (AMv2) is coming close to passing all unit tests. We'll spend
> some
> >> > time
> >> > >> > running it on a cluster to make sure it fundamentally sound
and
> >> will
> >> > >> report
> >> > >> > back on our experience. There has been an ask for some dev
doc
> and
> >> > >> > low-levels on how it works (in progress). Let satisfaction
of
> these
> >> > >> > requests be blockers on commit. We'll put the HBASE-14614
commit
> up
> >> > for
> >> > >> a
> >> > >> > vote on dev list given its import.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Branch will happen after HBASE-14614 goes in (or its rejection)
> >> with
> >> > our
> >> > >> > first alpha soon after. Its looking like a week or two at
least
> >> given
> >> > >> how
> >> > >> > things have been going up to this.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > I intend to start in on hbase2 stability/perf projects after
we
> >> > branch.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Interested in any thoughts you all might have on the above
(Would
> >> also
> >> > >> > appreciate updates on state in [1] if you are a feature owner).
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Thanks,
> >> > >> > St.Ack
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > 1. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4
> >> > >> > z9iEu_ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit#
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > > Stack wrote:
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > >> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Josh Elser<elserj@apache.org>
> >> > >> wrote:
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> Thanks for pulling in the FS Quotas work, Stack.
I'm trying to
> >> > cross
> >> > >> the
> >> > >> > >>> last T's and dot the last I's.
> >> > >> > >>>
> >> > >> > >>> The biggest thing I know I need to do still
is to write a new
> >> > >> chapter
> >> > >> > to
> >> > >> > >>> the book. After that, I'd start entertaining
larger
> >> > >> reviews/discussions
> >> > >> > >>> to
> >> > >> > >>> merge the feature into master. Anyone with free
time
> (giggles)
> >> is
> >> > >> more
> >> > >> > >>> than
> >> > >> > >>> welcome to start perusing :)
> >> > >> > >>>
> >> > >> > >>>
> >> > >> > >>> Out of interest, this could come in after 2.0
Josh? Any 2.0
> >> > specific
> >> > >> > >> needs
> >> > >> > >> to make this work?
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> Meantime, updated the 2.0 doc 1.
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> Thanks Josh,
> >> > >> > >> St.Ack
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >> 1.
> >> > >> > >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9i
> >> > >> > >> Eu_ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit#
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > >>
> >> > >> > > Nope, no need to block 2.0 on this one (given the other,
> related
> >> > >> > chatter).
> >> > >> > > Would be nice to get it in, but I completely understand
if it
> >> slips
> >> > :)
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> > > Thanks for updating the doc for me!
> >> > >> > >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >> --
> >> > >> Best regards,
> >> > >>
> >> > >>    - Andy
> >> > >>
> >> > >> If you are given a choice, you believe you have acted freely.
-
> >> Raymond
> >> > >> Teller (via Peter Watts)
> >> > >>
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>

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