Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 45C0F102E0 for ; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 06:30:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 32981 invoked by uid 500); 4 Apr 2014 06:30:33 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 32724 invoked by uid 500); 4 Apr 2014 06:30:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@hbase.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 32405 invoked by uid 99); 4 Apr 2014 06:30:30 -0000 Received: from minotaur.apache.org (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Apr 2014 06:30:30 +0000 Received: from localhost (HELO mail-wi0-f170.google.com) (127.0.0.1) (smtp-auth username apurtell, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Apr 2014 06:30:29 +0000 Received: by mail-wi0-f170.google.com with SMTP id bs8so2056974wib.5 for ; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 23:30:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.194.92.177 with SMTP id cn17mr17087721wjb.18.1396593027961; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 23:30:27 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.226.17 with HTTP; Thu, 3 Apr 2014 23:29:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <996F7897-903F-484D-BD3B-DC478EBD7998@gmail.com> <1396552573.75268.YahooMailNeo@web140606.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> From: Andrew Purtell Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 08:29:47 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for download To: "user@hbase.apache.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7beb91aa53d8c904f631a79d --047d7beb91aa53d8c904f631a79d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Thank you, the release of 0.98.1 will happen on time unless there is a new development. On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:23 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan < ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 on getting this RC3 out as the release and targetting the bug for > 0.98.2. > > Regards > Ram > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Anoop John wrote: > > > >Phoenix 4.0 has no release it can currently run on > > >Can't we get these additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away > > > > I was thinking that for Phoenix 4.0 *release* the 98.1 is needed.. Thats > > why was in favor of correcting the bug in 98.1 itself.. Ya 98.2 can come > > out in a month time and at that time 4.0 can upgrade to that.. Sounds > > good.. I am ready to again cast my +1 for this RC. > > > > > > >@Anoop - would you mind verifying whether or not > > the TestSCVFWithMiniCluster written as a Phoenix query returns the > correct > > results? > > > > I will check this James.. I think it might be there. Any way, even if > the > > bug is there, there can be a work around solution in Phoenix filter code > > which I can try out (If you would like to get) > > > > -Anoop- > > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Ted Yu wrote: > > > > > That is a feasible option. > > > > > > I have changed Fix Version of HBASE-10850 to 0.98.2 > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM, lars hofhansl > wrote: > > > > > > > To be fair, Phoenix should not have relied on an unreleased > dependency. > > > (I > > > > know there are corporate timing issues, but they really should not > > force > > > us > > > > into situations like these). > > > > > > > > As far as I understand the issue, it not just a performance but can > > lead > > > > to incorrect results. > > > > > > > > Then again, this issue has existed in all of 0.96 and 0.98 so far > > (over 5 > > > > months). > > > > > > > > So, I'd be in favor of releasing 0.98.1 now, and doing 0.98.2 soon, > in > > 14 > > > > or 20 days (that would also pull back some of the time lost in the > > > 0.98.1RC > > > > cycle). > > > > > > > > -- Lars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: James Taylor > > > > To: "user@hbase.apache.org" > > > > Cc: "dev@hbase.apache.org" > > > > Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:57 AM > > > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is > > > > available for download > > > > > > > > > > > > I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release > > it > > > > can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so > > it > > > > seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these > > > > additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]? > > > > > > > > James > > > > > > > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan < > > > > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time. > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > Ram > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Understood, Andy. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98 > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell < > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com > > > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the > > only > > > +1 > > > > > > vote > > > > > > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please > > > take > > > > > the > > > > > > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch > or > > > file > > > > > > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for > > > 0.98.1. > > > > > > > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John < > anoop.hbase@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this > in > > > > 98.1 > > > > > > > release > > > > > > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses > > > > > essential > > > > > > > CF > > > > > > > >> optimization. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case, > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Considering those we need a new RC. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> -Anoop- > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan < > > > > > > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>> +1 on the RC. > > > > > > > >>> Checked the signature. > > > > > > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases. > > > > > > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. > > > Everything > > > > > > looks > > > > > > > >>> fine. > > > > > > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too. > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> Regards > > > > > > > >>> Ram > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark < > > > > eclark@apache.org> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> +1 > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> Checked the hash > > > > > > > >>>> Checked the tar layout. > > > > > > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after > > ITBLL > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> +1 > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems > > > fine. > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase > > against a > > > > tip > > > > > > of > > > > > > > >>> the > > > > > > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work > (small > > > big > > > > > > linked > > > > > > > >>>> list > > > > > > > >>>>> test worked). > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC. > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case > > he > > > is > > > > > too > > > > > > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our > > > > internal > > > > > > rig > > > > > > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has > been > > > > > passing > > > > > > > >>> green > > > > > > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours. > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> St.Ack > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell < > > > > > > > apurtell@apache.org > > > > > > > >>>>>> wrote: > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is > available > > > for > > > > > > > >>> download > > > > > > > >>>> at > > > > > > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven > > > > > artifacts > > > > > > > >>> are > > > > > > > >>>>> also > > > > > > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016 > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD. > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here: > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664 > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight > > > > Pacific > > > > > > Time > > > > > > > >>>>> (00:00 > > > > > > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this > > as > > > > > > 0.98.1. > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> -- > > > > > > > >>>>>> Best regards, > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> - Andy > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting > > > back. - > > > > > > Piet > > > > > > > >>>> Hein > > > > > > > >>>>>> (via Tom White) > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Best regards, - Andy Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White) --047d7beb91aa53d8c904f631a79d--