hbase-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mikhail Antonov (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-18397) StoreFile accounting issues on branch-1.3 and branch-1
Date Tue, 10 Oct 2017 03:55:00 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18397?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16198131#comment-16198131

Mikhail Antonov commented on HBASE-18397:

[~apurtell] I'm considering lowering the priority of this jira due to the fact that it hasn't
been reproduced recently and I don't seem to see lots of people complaining about it.  What
do you think?

> StoreFile accounting issues on branch-1.3 and branch-1
> ------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: HBASE-18397
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18397
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Umbrella
>          Components: regionserver, Scanners
>    Affects Versions: 1.3.0
>            Reporter: Mikhail Antonov
>            Priority: Critical
>             Fix For: 2.0.0, 1.3.2
> This jira is an umbrella for a set of issues around store file accounting on branch-1.3
and branch-1 (I believe).
> At this point I do believe that many / most of those issues are related to backport of
HBASE-13082 done  long time ago. A number of related issues were identified and fixed previously,
but some still yet to be debugged and fixed. I think that this class of problems prevents
us from releasing 1.3.2 and moving stable pointer to branch 1.3 at this point, so marking
as critical.
> Below is overview by Andrew Purtell from dev list: (Subject: _Re: Branch 1.4 update_):
> {quote}
> Let me provide some context.
> The root issue was fallout from a locking change introduced just prior to
> release of 1.3. That change was HBASE-13082. Lars H proposed a change. It
> was committed to trunk but quickly reverted. After the revert Lars decided
> to drop the work rather than fix it for reapplication. However, the work
> was picked up by others and eventually found its way into branch-1, then
> branch-1.3, then 1.3.x releases. There were unintended side effects,
> causing bugs. The umbrella issue HBASE-18397 tracks a bunch of fix work the
> community has done since. The last known bug fix was HBASE-18771, found and
> fixed by our Abhishek. The last known change I know of was work I did on
> HBASE-18786 to remove some dodgy exception handling (prefer aborts to
> silent data corruption). Is this enough to move the stable pointer?
> According to our testing at Salesforce, yes, so far. We have yet to run in
> full production. Give us a few months of that and my answer will be
> unconditional one way or another. According to some offline conversation
> with Mikhail and Gary, the answer is in fact no, they still have one hairy
> use case causing occasional problems that look like more of this, but that
> feedback predates HBASE-18771.{quote}

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

View raw message