phoenix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Josh Elser <els...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] 5.0.0-beta release before month's end?
Date Mon, 29 Jan 2018 23:59:47 GMT
Time is running short for that "end of month", but here's some progress.

I've been able to run through most of the ITs on a linux box. Yay!

* There are known local index issues PHOENIX-4440. I saw LocalIndexIT,
LocalIndexSplitMergeIT, and MutableRollbackIT all fail. Are you
tracking PHOENIX-4440 for all of these, Rajeshbabu?
* IndexScrutinyToolIT is broken, just filed PHOENIX-4565 for that but
it needs to be triaged to determine if we consider it an alpha/beta
release blocker or not. I'm leaning "no"
* Commit IT @Ignore patches on PHOENIX-4494 and PHOENIX-4561
* Decide what to do with PHOENIX-4482 (IT failure due to WAL impl
changing underneath). I'd appreciate those with more insight into
WAL-recovery/index-replay test code to comment as to what we should do
with WALReplayWithIndexWritesAndCompressedWALIT

After this short list, I think we can push out an RC.

- Josh

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 7:32 PM, Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org> wrote:
> I don't think so. We (I use that loosely -- I'd hardly lump my contributions
> to this effort in the same room as the contributions of the others) have
> been moving fast to get back to functional state. This have definitely
> lapsed.
>
> It is a blocker to make sure 5.x isn't missing stuff from 4.x and vice-versa
> before we consider a 5.0.0 "stable" release. I don't think this needs to
> block the alpha/beta I was hoping to get to this week.
>
>
> On 1/22/18 3:10 PM, James Taylor wrote:
>>
>> Have you guys back ported the removal of deprecated APIs patches to the
>> 4.x
>> branches? That'll probably help minimize the merge conflicts we see going
>> forward.
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 1:03 PM, James Taylor <jamestaylor@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Awesome! That's great work!!
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hah, funny you should ask! I was just thinking that I should send out a
>>>> note.
>>>>
>>>> * Rajeshbabu and Sergey are trying to track down a nasty issue that the
>>>> IndexScrutiny tool has caught where there are dangling index records
>>>> (PHOENIX-4534)
>>>> * Rajeshbabu is also looking into some local index failures
>>>> * Ankit has done some testing of the phoenix-hive integration, I think
>>>> phoenix-spark is also looking OK
>>>>
>>>> Last I chatted with folks, they were seeing >90% pass rate of the test
>>>> suite which seems pretty good to me. My plan was to work on a beta
>>>> release
>>>> soon now that we have a beta from HBase. Things are generally functional
>>>> as
>>>> of now -- I think getting it into the hands of folks to get more people
>>>> poking it would be great.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe rc0 next week?
>>>>
>>>> - Josh
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/18/18 1:11 PM, James Taylor wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> How are things looking with the 5.0.0 alpha/beta on HBase 2.x?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 10:57 AM, Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org>
wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Good point. Perhaps "alpha" would be a better label?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IIUC, the issue is that we need the HBase release, and then a Tephra
>>>>>> release, and then we can get Tephra fixed for Phoenix5. Perhaps Ankit
>>>>>> can
>>>>>> provide some more color to the situation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/4/18 12:07 PM, Nick Dimiduk wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Isn't Tephra integration mandatory for transaction support? What
>>>>>> happens
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> a user who has TRANSACTIONAL=true tables when they upgrade? This
>>>>>>> can't
>>>>>>> really fail gracefully. I guess transaction support is still
marked
>>>>>>> 'beta',
>>>>>>> but still, this would be a regression of functionality in "base
>>>>>>> Phoenix".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 8:34 AM Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org>
wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Talked to Rajeshbabu and Ankit offline this morning.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sounds like there are a few integration points which are
still
>>>>>>>> lacking:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> * phoenix-hive: PHOENIX-4423
>>>>>>>> * phoenix-spark: untested (probably broken against newest
Spark)
>>>>>>>> * phoenix-kafka: untested (probably broken against newest
Kafka --
>>>>>>>> see
>>>>>>>> PHOENIX-4515 PHOENIX-4516)
>>>>>>>> * Tephra integration: Needs a new release of Tephra with
some fixes
>>>>>>>> Ankit helped with.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I plan to not consider these 5.0.0-alpha/beta release blockers,
>>>>>>>> we'll
>>>>>>>> just call those out which we don't get tested/fixed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1/2/18 1:08 PM, Josh Elser wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Happy New Year folks!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'd like to test the waters: what do people think about
trying to
>>>>>>>>> get a
>>>>>>>>> 5.0.0 "beta" release out to the community before the
end of
>>>>>>>>> January?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> HBase is doing the same right now with 2.0.0. My thinking
is that
>>>>>>>>> if
>>>>>>>>> things are stable "enough", getting a base for people
to use a 5.0
>>>>>>>>> Phoenix release more easily, we can catch more bugs and
get a
>>>>>>>>> better
>>>>>>>>> product out the door.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thoughts/concerns? I'm happy to RM.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - Josh
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message