hbase-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Enis Söztutar <e...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] EOL 1.1 Release Branch
Date Sat, 05 Nov 2016 01:22:35 GMT
I also think that having 1.1 going for a bit longer might be helpful still,
especially if the ITBLL is failing with branch-1.2. Almost all of our
internal testing happens with a 1.1 based code base, so I cannot tell
whether 1.2 / 1.3 is the same stability or not.

Enis

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 5:05 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org> wrote:

> Thanks. Yes I have been eyeing HBASE-16093. There might be another corner
> case there.
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Gary Helmling <ghelmling@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > The behavior: Looks like failed split/compaction rollback: row(s) in
> META
> > > without HRegionInfo, regions deployed without valid meta entries (at
> > > first), regions on HDFS without valid meta entries (later, after RS
> > > carrying them are killed by chaos), holes in the region chain leading
> to
> > > timeouts and job failure.
> > >
> > >
> > The empty regioninfo in meta sounds like HBASE-16093, though that fix is
> in
> > 1.2.  Interested to see if there are other problems around splits though.
> > Do you have a JIRA yet for tracking?
> >
> >
> > >
> > > You'll know you have found it when on the ITBLL console its meta
> scanner
> > > starts complaining about rows in meta without serialized HRegionInfo.
> > >
> > >
> > Will keep an eye out for this in our ITBLL runs here.
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
>    - Andy
>
> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> (via Tom White)
>

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