phoenix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Geoffrey Jacoby <>
Subject Re: Differences in 4.x branches
Date Fri, 14 Jun 2019 14:34:42 GMT
Karan mentions on PHOENIX-4009 that it relies on libraries introduced in
HBase 1.4 and up and so is intentionally missing from 4.x-HBase-1.3. That
sort of divergence happens occasionally and is one of the reasons why we
have separate branches.

At a glance at PHOENIX-5228 though, I'd have expected that to be nearly
identical across versions.


On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 10:41 PM <> wrote:

>  I think in the end it's mostly two jiras that cause the difference:
> PHOENIX-5228 - this one is weird since there seem to be so many
> unnecessary differences between the branches, and non seems to be
> canonically right. It's pretty big so I can perhaps see how this happened.
> PHOENIX-4009 - which was just not pushed to 1.3
> The rest are mostly minor changes that seem legit. If we can push
> PHOENIX-4009 to -1.3 as well, one could do a quick run between the branches
> and make PHOENIX-5228 the same, without the need to force-push.
> The difference in tests-failures are present, though. PartialCommitIT for
> example fails on the -1.3 branch only. And no green run of -1.4 or master,
> yet.
> I've done some work, too, to speed the test up. Some runs now finish in
> just over 2h now (never below 3h before).Oh got another green -1.5 run ;-)
> -- Lars
>     On Thursday, June 13, 2019, 8:51:00 PM PDT, Andrew Purtell <
>> wrote:
>  What I would recommend is take on branch as the canonical branch, I guess
> the 1.5 one since Lars says it’s testing out green. Find the common
> ancestor prior to divergence. For all other branches reset the head to that
> ancestor and then pick forward from 1.5 one commit at a time, fixing up for
> compile issues due the the different HBase versions. Then make a push to
> resolve any lingering test issues. This means all but the 1.5 branch would
> have history rewritten and would be force pushed. However in exchange
> you’ll have common and consistent history on all.
> If this is an acceptable result I have undertaken this kind of janitorial
> work and would be pleased to offer my services for clean up duty. The ginsu
> I mean git knives for slicing and dicing history are sharp and at the
> ready. At the conclusion of the work you the Phoenix community will have
> only the last step to perform, which would be to resolve any lingering test
> issues.
> > On Jun 13, 2019, at 7:29 PM, "" <>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> > we have three active 4.x branches: 4.x-HBase-1.3, 4.x-HBase-1.4,
> 4.x-HBase-1.5.
> > It looks like we're lacking _basic_ discipline here. There are patches
> in some branches but not in others, some patches are different between
> these branches for no good reason, different tests fail, etc.
> > I have run out of my available time to track these all down. I filed
> Jiras to that extend, but as is we're completely unable to release a
> coherent 4.15.0 version of Phoenix (it will be different between the three
> versions)
> >
> > We can either just declare 4.x-HBase-1.3 dead and align -1.4 and -1.5,
> or folks reading this can please push their changes everywhere, or ... I
> don't know we give up? Release anyway?
> > The 4.x-HBase-1.5 test suite is passing - I spent a lot of time on at
> least that. There are no excuses like "But it failed before!".(there's at
> least one known flapper, and I'll try to fix or disable that test)
> >
> > I'll stay to my threat and veto/revert any patch that changes that.If
> that ends up swimming against the stream and eats up too much of my time,
> I'll just give up!
> > -- Lars

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