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 34E64106FE for ; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 08:19:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 33803 invoked by uid 500); 4 Apr 2014 08:19:55 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 33756 invoked by uid 500); 4 Apr 2014 08:19:55 -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 33742 invoked by uid 99); 4 Apr 2014 08:19:53 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Apr 2014 08:19:53 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy includes SPF record at spf.trusted-forwarder.org) Received: from [209.85.216.47] (HELO mail-qa0-f47.google.com) (209.85.216.47) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Apr 2014 08:19:49 +0000 Received: by mail-qa0-f47.google.com with SMTP id w5so2746149qac.6 for ; Fri, 04 Apr 2014 01:19:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Ahip+6ahmFvh0buvSsUcGXSGFb0EbTf/rhGvD9aLdRI=; b=bY6GidC7w/NPzXEmj9EtuGvkipuwR6INuPdRRu0/sb3XsPk9m+oGAz9Bg2ZGefVlgG 2MZbq0rrNvRhxQ0JE+8iDWqf6VJrHcBYu2j6LYy3KrA3SHDWfrUCylAn/OcGk5kzIirI EmNKZ4ciwufgc+KEMGKOXjfD3XFeNfVvtHjLF8yahcMADg3rHr4yhQQ54Zi86vMoVgtI L+hxE1Wz9UdiEJX559qR3+ldmiVouPNdn9iSYTtjsXi5yiaOMofneroN5ucxZabbSIFn ocPBglD01EHNjGUu0WM9zbNDQP+cEDazqjI98R1YqYRDCC0Z3321xUUyqnz1DBy9euO/ uWrw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl6g8TRavXWn17MSYapqZnBo5OClyaXWXSfvjTOIy9M2IgWKiByPvsbA7F/mnJzfzyX5GPJ MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.3.5 with SMTP id 5mr12742470qal.45.1396599568374; Fri, 04 Apr 2014 01:19:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.49.207 with HTTP; Fri, 4 Apr 2014 01:19:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <996F7897-903F-484D-BD3B-DC478EBD7998@gmail.com> <1396552573.75268.YahooMailNeo@web140606.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 10:19:28 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for download From: Fabien LE GALLO To: user@hbase.apache.org Cc: "dev@hbase.apache.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c3cfda2aaa2d04f6332d8b X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --001a11c3cfda2aaa2d04f6332d8b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 What about 0.96.2 ? According to JIRA, it was supposed to be released yesterday. I want to apply HBASE-10850 patch to a stable release but it cannot be applied to 0.96.1. On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > (cc dev@) > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Andrew Purtell > wrote: > > > 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 < > >> stack@duboce.net> > >> > > > 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) > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > > - Andy > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > (via Tom White) > --001a11c3cfda2aaa2d04f6332d8b--