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 Tue, 23 Jan 2018 00:32:57 GMT
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