hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stack <st...@duboce.net>
Subject Re: Moving 2.0 forward
Date Tue, 24 Oct 2017 06:08:08 GMT
That'd be a good one to get in Ram.
S

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 9:42 PM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Stack
>
> Do you want HBASE-18995 before the alpha-4 (REmoving exposed internal APIs
> from CellUtil)? Because you had mentioned no more API changes. If so I will
> start making changes and put up a patch ASAP.
>
> Regards
> Ram
>
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:22 AM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > I was trying to work on helping out on the outstanding alpha-4 stuff
> last
> > > week -- will be continuing to try to do the same this week.
> > >
> > > If you need any help, Stack, or if others need reviews where I haven't
> > > noticed on my own: feel free to @mention me.
> > >
> > >
> > Thanks for the offer Josh. All items seem assigned and are being actively
> > worked on. If you get a moment, reviews by you (or anyone else) helps
> move
> > the process along.
> >
> > We need to merge in HBASE-18410 branch to pick up Filter improvements.
> Then
> > HBASE-13346 can go in.
> >
> > You are already helping out on HBASE-18906, thanks. Looks like that will
> be
> > addressed by other alpha-4s about to land.
> >
> > St.Ack
> > TODOs: https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/HBASE/versions/12341594
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On 10/23/17 12:53 PM, Stack wrote:
> > >
> > >> (Reviving this thread)
> > >>
> > >> Lets push out alpha-4 this week. Alpha-4 is the release that has the
> > >> refactor of the Coprocessor API shutting down access to internals
> marked
> > >> InterfaceAudience.Private.
> > >>
> > >> The outstanding list is here:
> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/HBASE/versions/12341594
> > >>
> > >> Please push in anything marked alpha-4 that belongs to you.
> > >>
> > >> If issue, talk out loud on this thread. If you need a review to land
> an
> > >> item, shout on the issue and here; we'll help you out.
> > >>
> > >> As is, items are coming along nicely I'd say. We need to merge the
> > filter
> > >> branch -- HBASE-18410 -- so APIs are finished for hbase2.
> > >>
> > >> Post alpha-4, we'll have to hunt down our downstreamers and help them
> > test
> > >> on top of alpha-4 so rolling into beta-1, we have confidence our
> > >> downstreamers know what to expect (or we discover what we missed
> BEFORE
> > we
> > >> beta-1).
> > >>
> > >> Thanks for time,
> > >> S
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I'll put up an alpha3 RC Monday, probably Monday night. That should be
> > >>> time, if we all sprint, for the public-facing API fixes to be done.
> > >>>
> > >>> I had a bunch of Coprocessor refactor and fixup scheduled for alpha3
> > but
> > >>> it is plain that more time is needed (in spite of valiant effort so
> far
> > >>> by
> > >>> Anoop, Duo, Appy, etc.). Therefore, lets run a 2.0.0-alpha-4 whose
> > theme
> > >>> is
> > >>> "Coprocessor Fixup". Hopefully we can put an alpha-4 up by the
> > following
> > >>> week.
> > >>>
> > >>> We should then be ready for beta (beta == no new features, no API
> > >>> changes,
> > >>> just fixes).
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>> St.Ack
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> I put up the hbase-2.0.0-alpha2 release candidate. Please vote on it.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> For hbase-2.0.0-alpha3, the theme is solidifying API. I hope to
get
> a
> > >>>> release out in the next week or so.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I did a weeding of 2.0.0 issues over the last day. If folks are
> > >>>> interested in helping out, below are the items I think we need
done
> > for
> > >>>> alpha3 (below are at least 'Critical' status, are API possibly
> > altering
> > >>>> items, and are absent those JIRAs that are making active progress,
> > i.e.
> > >>>> the
> > >>>> HTD/HCD revamp by Chia-Ping Tsai). A project NOT listed that needs
> > >>>> doing is
> > >>>> what Andrew did comparing 1.3. and 1.4 APIs
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * HBASE-18622 Mitigate compatibility concerns between branch-1
and
> > >>>> branch-2
> > >>>> This is to do what Andrew did between 1.3 and 1.4 branches only
do
> it
> > >>>> between branch-1 and branch-2.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * HBASE-10462 Recategorize some of the client facing Public /
> Private
> > >>>> interfaces
> > >>>> This one is almost done. It could do with a finish, attention to
the
> > >>>> items in last comment, and then our codebase could do with another
> > sweep
> > >>>> after the spirit of this issue since a bunch has gone in since
the
> > pass
> > >>>> that was the basis of this issue.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * HBASE-10504 Define Replication Interface
> > >>>> I was going to take a crack at this as part of the revamp forced
by
> > >>>> 'HBASE-15982 Interface ReplicationEndpoint extends Guava's Service'
> > but
> > >>>> if
> > >>>> anyone else is interested, be my guest.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * HBASE-14996 Some more API cleanup for 2.0
> > >>>> Has a bunch of subtasks, some of which are being worked on. Needs
> > >>>> finishing.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * HBASE-14998 Unify synchronous and asynchronous methods in Admin
> and
> > >>>> cleanup
> > >>>> Needs a pass. Small issue I think. Could also look at new
> AsyncClient
> > >>>> and
> > >>>> make sure symmetry.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * HBASE-15607 Remove PB references from Admin for 2.0
> > >>>> Predicated on result of an ongoing DISCUSSION thread but needs
to be
> > >>>> done.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Rolling upgrade will have implications for our API. Would be good
to
> > try
> > >>>> it and figure what needs fixup (as said above, according to trial
by
> > >>>> Sean,
> > >>>> we might not be too bad here):
> > >>>> * HBASE-16060 1.x clients cannot access table state talking to
2.0
> > >>>> cluster
> > >>>> * HBASE-16550 Procedure v2 - Add AM compatibility for 2.x Master
and
> > 1.x
> > >>>> RSs; i.e. support Rolling Upgrade from hbase-1 to -2.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * HBASE-17442 Move most of the replication related classes to
> > >>>> hbase-server package
> > >>>> The above would be good to do generally but it may make for ripples
> in
> > >>>> API so would be good to do now.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * HBASE-18106 Redo ProcedureInfo and LockInfo
> > >>>> Balazs is working on this. The idea is that we avoid adding two
new
> > >>>> types
> > >>>> to our API, two types that are nought but curtailed, read-only
views
> > on
> > >>>> internals. Input if you have time appreciated.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * HBASE-18596 A hbase1 cluster should be able to replicate to a
> hbase2
> > >>>> cluster; verify
> > >>>> Esteban is looking at this one
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * HBASE-9417 SecureBulkLoadEndpoint should be folded in core
> > >>>> * HBASE-17143 Scan improvement
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Our Coprocessor Interface needs a tough edit. It exposes
> > implementations
> > >>>> marked audience Private and returns implementations rather than
> > >>>> Interfaces.
> > >>>> In a few locations, we allow returning an alternate implementation
> > >>>> altogether which is probably something we don't want a CP doing.
To
> > that
> > >>>> end, the following issues started by Duo and Anoop need to be taken
> to
> > >>>> the
> > >>>> finish line; ideally they'd have an owner:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * HBASE-18169 Coprocessor fix and cleanup before 2.0.0 release
<=
> The
> > >>>> umbrella issue.
> > >>>> * HBASE-18298 RegionServerServices Interface cleanup for CP expose
> > >>>> * HBASE-16769 Deprecate/remove PB references from MasterObserver
and
> > >>>> RegionServerObserver
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Nice-to-haves:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * HBASE-15284 Make TimeRange constructors IA.Private and remove
> unused
> > >>>> TimeRange constructors
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * HBASE-10944 Remove all kv.getBuffer() and kv.getRow() references
> > >>>> existing in the code
> > >>>> This is the end of an old long-running project moving up on to
Cell
> > >>>> Interface. We think it is done but for a few little items (deprecate
> > KV
> > >>>> methods in MR and provide Cell versions instead...)
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * HBASE-13271 Table#puts(List<Put>) operation is indeterminate;
> needs
> > >>>> fixing
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * HBASE-13346 Clean up Filter package for post 1.0
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * HBASE-14255 Simplify Cell creation post 1.0
> > >>>> * HBASE-14997
> > >>>> Move compareOp and Comparators out of filter to client package
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * HBASE-13740 Stop using Hadoop private interfaces
> > >>>>
> > >>>> What about:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * HBASE-18601 Remove Htrace 3.2
> > >>>> As has been noted, the HTrace API is our 'trace' API.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> If interested in any of the above and you need a legup, just ask
in
> > the
> > >>>> issue and I'll be by....
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thanks,
> > >>>> St.Ack
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Stack <stack@duboce.net>
wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Heads-up:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I'm about to put up an hbase-2.0.0-alpha2 Release Candidate.
Theme
> is
> > >>>>> updated dependencies, reliance on relocated popular libs (guava,
> > netty,
> > >>>>> protobuf), purge of checked-in generated src, and
> > >>>>> master-carries-no-regions
> > >>>>> by default.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> alpha3 I hope will follow soon after (end-of-August?). Its
theme
> will
> > >>>>> be
> > >>>>> settling the APIs and compatibility (At first blush, we are
not
> > >>>>> looking too
> > >>>>> bad; our Sean ran some tests over weekend that have hbase-1
client
> > >>>>> running
> > >>>>> against an hbase-2 cluster....). The Coprocessor Interface
revamp
> > >>>>> should be
> > >>>>> done by alpha3 (i.e. returning Interfaces rather than
> > Implementations,
> > >>>>> and
> > >>>>> our shutdown of CPs accessing classes in hbase marked
> > >>>>> InterfaceAudience).
> > >>>>> We'll also have purged thirdparty classes from our API; e.g.
guava
> > 0.12
> > >>>>> Service showing through in our replication API and protobufs
in
> Admin
> > >>>>> Interface. On alpha3, we will have to do a bunch of outreach
to
> make
> > >>>>> sure
> > >>>>> our downstreamers are up on what is coming down the pipe.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Beta1 in mid-September?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I encourage you to check out the items marked for hbase2:
> > >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/HBASE/versions/12327188
> Edit
> > >>>>> as
> > >>>>> you see appropriate. Punt if you know the JIRA will not get
any
> > >>>>> attention
> > >>>>> in next month or so.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> A bunch of issues marked blocker are unassigned. I'll leave
them as
> > is
> > >>>>> another while but I'll boot them soon.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> While I have your attention:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> + I think we should leave thrift version at 0.9.3. Moving hbase
> > thrift
> > >>>>> to 0.10.0 will break existing clients. The change is easy enough
if
> > >>>>> folks
> > >>>>> need to upgrade their hbase thrift. See HBASE-18591.
> > >>>>> + Upgrade from 0.94 is disallowed. You have to get to 1.0 first
> > >>>>> (0.98?).
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> St.Ack
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 9:43 AM, Stack <stack@duboce.net>
wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On 7/31/17 9:00 AM, Stack wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Josh Elser<elserj@apache.org>
> > >>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> ...
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> I like the idea of this also hitting 2.0 as
it would make the
> > >>>>>>>>> feature a
> > >>>>>>>>> bit more "real", but am obviously a little
nervous (I have no
> > >>>>>>>>> reason
> > >>>>>>>>> to be
> > >>>>>>>>> nervous though). I am pretty happy with the
feature in terms of
> > how
> > >>>>>>>>> much it
> > >>>>>>>>> is covered via testing.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17748
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Sounds good to me. Whats involved? Backport?
If so, +1 Josh.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Last think on space quota says that need doc too.
See 'Space
> > Quota'
> > >>>>>>>> in
> > >>>>>>>> here:
> > >>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9i
> > >>>>>>>> Eu_ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit#heading=h.wuw3a6jukzo5
> > >>>>>>>> Does this little section need an update Josh?
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>>>> S
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Yep, just a couple of cherry-picks. Good test coverage
and some
> > docs
> > >>>>>>> already included for 17748.  Happy to put that on my
plate if
> > you're
> > >>>>>>> good
> > >>>>>>> with it. I can reasonably assume that no one is against
it :)
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> I think I had knocked out docs for the "phase 1" stuff
before we
> > >>>>>>> merged it in from the original feature branch. I'll
double check
> > and
> > >>>>>>> update
> > >>>>>>> the gdoc. Perhaps this was just a timing thing.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Thanks Josh,
> > >>>>>> S
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
>

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