You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@hbase.apache.org by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> on 2022/10/13 21:36:59 UTC

Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line and as a
prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new branch branch-2.6 from
branch-2.

Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the key features of 2.6
are settled in branch-2 before the branching point. Those key features are:
- mTLS RPC
- hbase-backup backport

--
Best regards,
Andrew

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.

I have seen this leak too, in testing with 2.5. I don't think it is a
blocker for branching, but yes I would prefer a solution committed to
branch-2.6 before a 2.6.0 release, if that can be possible.

On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 7:43 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> There is a possible memory leak problem, HBASE-27941, which is found
> when running ITBLL against branch-3.
>
> Viraj reported that it also affects branch-2.x.
>
> Buy anyway, since it also affects branch-2.5, should not be a blocker
> for branch-2.6.
>
> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2023年8月31日周四 00:50写道：
> >
> > Are there any more important or serious issues with branch-2 which are
> not
> > resolved?
> >
> > Planning to cut branch-2.6 from branch-2 on 9/5 and stabilize it for a
> > 2.6.0 release from there.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 7:41 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Let's get HBASE-28028 in too. Since Andrew is still on vacation, let
> > > me find another committer to help review the PR.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年8月24日周四 02:23写道：
> > > >
> > > > We resolved HBASE-28010, so we should be good to go there now.
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 7:22 AM Bryan Beaudreault <
> > > bbeaudreault@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I made
> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-28010 a blocker so we
> > > don’t
> > > > > release a broken new feature. We will have it fixed early this
> week.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 11:08 AM Andrew Purtell <
> > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Let’s do it. We can use the new branch to stabilize for release.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>  I am back from vacation in two weeks and can then lend time and
> AWS
> > > > >> resources for testing (and presumably fixing).
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > On Aug 18, 2023, at 10:53 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > HBASE-27947 has been resolved.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > So I think now we are good to cut branch-2.6?
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Another good news is we are also close to fix the WAL value
> > > > >> > compression issue in HBASE-28028.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Thanks.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年6月23日周五
> 02:47写道：
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> Thanks!
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> We're looking into one other emergent issue that we uncovered
> > > during
> > > > >> the
> > > > >> >> rollout of server side TLS on RegionServers. It seems
> > > > >> nettyDirectMemory has
> > > > >> >> increased substantially when under load with it enabled.
> Details in
> > > > >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27947.
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 12:02 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> > > palomino219@gmail.com
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> PR is ready
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/5305
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> PTAL.
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> Thanks.
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2023年6月22日周四 21:40写道：
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>> Ah, missed your last comment on HBASE-27782.
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>> Let me take a look.
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>> Netty has some rules about how the exceptions are passed
> through
> > > the
> > > > >> >>>> pipeline(especially the order, forward or backward...) but
> > > honestly I
> > > > >> >>>> always forget it just a day later after I finished the
> code...
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>> Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年6月17日周六
> > > 00:43写道：
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> In terms of TLS:
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> - All of our clients (many thousands) in production are
> using
> > > the
> > > > >> >>>>> NettyRpcConnection with TLS enabled. However, these clients
> are
> > > > >> >>> currently
> > > > >> >>>>> connecting to the RegionServer/HMaster through an haproxy
> > > process
> > > > >> >>> local to
> > > > >> >>>>> each server which handles SSL termination. So not quite
> > > end-to-end
> > > > >> yet.
> > > > >> >>>>> - On the server side, most of our QA environment (a thousand
> > > > >> >>> regionservers
> > > > >> >>>>> and ~200 hmasters) are running it. So these are accepting
> TLS
> > > from
> > > > >> >>> clients
> > > > >> >>>>> and using TLS for intra-cluster communication.
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> The migration is tricky for us due to the scale and the fact
> > > that we
> > > > >> >>> need
> > > > >> >>>>> to migrate off haproxy at the same time. Hopefully we should
> > > have
> > > > >> some
> > > > >> >>> of
> > > > >> >>>>> production running end-to-end TLS within the next month or
> so.
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> From what we've seen in QA so far, there have not been any
> major
> > > > >> >>> issues. We
> > > > >> >>>>> also couldn't discern any performance issues in testing,
> though
> > > we
> > > > >> were
> > > > >> >>>>> comparing against our legacy haproxy setup and can't really
> > > compare
> > > > >> >>> against
> > > > >> >>>>> kerberos.
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> One outstanding issue is
> > > > >> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27782,
> > > > >> >>>>> which we still see periodically. It doesn't seem to cause
> actual
> > > > >> >>> issues,
> > > > >> >>>>> since the RpcClient still handles it gracefully, but it does
> > > cause
> > > > >> >>> noise
> > > > >> >>>>> and may have implications.
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 11:41 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> > > > >> palomino219@gmail.com>
> > > > >> >>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>> So any updates here?
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>> Do we have any good news about the TLS usage in production
> so
> > > we
> > > > >> can
> > > > >> >>>>>> move forward on release 2.6.x?
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>> Thanks.
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2023年4月7日周五 09:37写道：
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> Agreed, that sounds like a good plan.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> > > > >> >>> palomino219@gmail.com>
> > > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> I think we could follow the old pattern when we cut a new
> > > release
> > > > >> >>>>>> branch.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> That is, after the new release branch is cut and the new
> > > minor
> > > > >> >>> release
> > > > >> >>>>>> is
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> out, we will do a final release of the oldest release
> line
> > > and
> > > > >> >>> then
> > > > >> >>>>>> mark it
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> as EOL.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> So here, I think once we cut branch-2.6 and release
> 2.6.0, we
> > > > >> >>> can do a
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> final release for 2.4.x and mark 2.4.x as EOL.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> Thanks.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org>
> 于2023年3月27日周一
> > > > >> >>> 09:57写道：
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Primary development on hbase-backup and TLS is complete.
> > > There
> > > > >> >>> are a
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> couple
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> minor things I may want to add to TLS in the future,
> such as
> > > > >> >>>>>> pluggable
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> cert
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> verification. But those are not needed for initial
> release
> > > IMO.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> We are almost ready integrating hbase-backup in
> production.
> > > > >> >>> We’ve
> > > > >> >>>>>> fixed a
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> few minor things (all committed) but otherwise it’s
> worked
> > > > >> >>> well so
> > > > >> >>>>>> far in
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> tests.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> We are a bit delayed in integrating TLS. I’m hopeful it
> will
> > > > >> >>> happen
> > > > >> >>>>>> in
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> the
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> next 2-3 months. It’s a big project for us, so not
> quick,
> > > but
> > > > >> >>>>>> definitely
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> on
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> the roadmap.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> It seems like cloudera may be closer to integrating TLS
> in
> > > > >> >>>>>> production.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Balazs recently filed and fixed HBASE-27673 related to
> mTLS.
> > > > >> >>> Maybe
> > > > >> >>>>>> he can
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> chime in on his status, or let me know if I am totally
> off
> > > > >> >>> base :)
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 9:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > > > >> >>>>>> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Before we open a new code line should we discuss EOL of
> > > 2.4?
> > > > >> >>> After
> > > > >> >>>>>> the
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> first 2.6 release? It’s not required of course but cuts
> > > down
> > > > >> >>> the
> > > > >> >>>>>> amount
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> of
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> labor to have two 2.x code lines (presumably, one as
> stable
> > > > >> >>> and
> > > > >> >>>>>> one as
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> next) rather than three. Perhaps even before that,
> should
> > > we
> > > > >> >>> move
> > > > >> >>>>>> the
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> stable pointer to the latest 2.5 release?
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 26, 2023, at 5:59 PM, 张铎 <
> palomino219@gmail.com>
> > > > >> >>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Bump.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> I believe the mTLS and backup related code have all
> been
> > > > >> >>>>>> finished on
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> branch-2?
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Are there any other things which block us making the
> > > > >> >>> branch-2.6
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> branch?
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Mallikarjun <ma...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月17日周一
> > > > >> >>> 02:09写道：
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On hbase-backup, we are using in production for more
> then
> > > > >> >>> 1
> > > > >> >>>>>> year. I
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> can
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> vouch for it to be stable enough to be in a release
> > > > >> >>> version so
> > > > >> >>>>>> that
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> more
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> people can use it and polished it further.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022, 11:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> My understanding is some folks evaluating and
> polishing
> > > > >> >>> TLS for
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> their
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> production are also considering hbase-backup in the
> same
> > > > >> >>> way,
> > > > >> >>>>>> which
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> is
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> why
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I linked them together. If that is incorrect then
> they
> > > > >> >>> both are
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> still
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> worth
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> considering in my opinion but would have a more
> tenuous
> > > > >> >>> link.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Where we are with hbase-backup is it should
> probably be
> > > > >> >>> ported
> > > > >> >>>>>> to
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> where
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in
> order
> > > > >> >>> for it
> > > > >> >>>>>> to
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> make
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> more
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On
> the
> > > > >> >>> other
> > > > >> >>>>>> hand
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> if
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> it
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> is
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> too unpolished then the experience would be poor.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <
> palomino219@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I believe the second one is still ongoing?
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> 于2022年10月14日周五
> > > > >> >>> 05:37写道：
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code
> line
> > > > >> >>> and
> > > > >> >>>>>> as a
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new
> > > branch
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> branch-2.6
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> from
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch-2.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for
> the
> > > > >> >>> key
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> features
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> of
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.6
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are settled in branch-2 before the branching
> point.
> > > > >> >>> Those key
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> features
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> are:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - mTLS RPC
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - hbase-backup backport
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> --
> > > > >> >>>>>>> Best regards,
> > > > >> >>>>>>> Andrew
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> > > > >> >>>>>>>    It's what we’ve earned
> > > > >> >>>>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> > > > >> >>>>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> > > > >> >>>>>>>   - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Andrew
> >
> > Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> >     It's what we’ve earned
> > Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> > Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> >    - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
>


-- 
Best regards,
Andrew

Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
    It's what we’ve earned
Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
   - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by "张铎(Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>.

There is a possible memory leak problem, HBASE-27941, which is found
when running ITBLL against branch-3.

Viraj reported that it also affects branch-2.x.

Buy anyway, since it also affects branch-2.5, should not be a blocker
for branch-2.6.

Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2023年8月31日周四 00:50写道：
>
> Are there any more important or serious issues with branch-2 which are not
> resolved?
>
> Planning to cut branch-2.6 from branch-2 on 9/5 and stabilize it for a
> 2.6.0 release from there.
>
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 7:41 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Let's get HBASE-28028 in too. Since Andrew is still on vacation, let
> > me find another committer to help review the PR.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年8月24日周四 02:23写道：
> > >
> > > We resolved HBASE-28010, so we should be good to go there now.
> > >
> > > On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 7:22 AM Bryan Beaudreault <
> > bbeaudreault@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I made
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-28010 a blocker so we
> > don’t
> > > > release a broken new feature. We will have it fixed early this week.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 11:08 AM Andrew Purtell <
> > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Let’s do it. We can use the new branch to stabilize for release.
> > > >>
> > > >>  I am back from vacation in two weeks and can then lend time and AWS
> > > >> resources for testing (and presumably fixing).
> > > >>
> > > >> > On Aug 18, 2023, at 10:53 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > HBASE-27947 has been resolved.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > So I think now we are good to cut branch-2.6?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Another good news is we are also close to fix the WAL value
> > > >> > compression issue in HBASE-28028.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Thanks.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年6月23日周五 02:47写道：
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Thanks!
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> We're looking into one other emergent issue that we uncovered
> > during
> > > >> the
> > > >> >> rollout of server side TLS on RegionServers. It seems
> > > >> nettyDirectMemory has
> > > >> >> increased substantially when under load with it enabled. Details in
> > > >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27947.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 12:02 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> > palomino219@gmail.com
> > > >> >
> > > >> >>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>> PR is ready
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/5305
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>> PTAL.
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>> Thanks.
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>> 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2023年6月22日周四 21:40写道：
> > > >> >>>>
> > > >> >>>> Ah, missed your last comment on HBASE-27782.
> > > >> >>>>
> > > >> >>>> Let me take a look.
> > > >> >>>>
> > > >> >>>> Netty has some rules about how the exceptions are passed through
> > the
> > > >> >>>> pipeline(especially the order, forward or backward...) but
> > honestly I
> > > >> >>>> always forget it just a day later after I finished the code...
> > > >> >>>>
> > > >> >>>> Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年6月17日周六
> > 00:43写道：
> > > >> >>>>>
> > > >> >>>>> In terms of TLS:
> > > >> >>>>>
> > > >> >>>>> - All of our clients (many thousands) in production are using
> > the
> > > >> >>>>> NettyRpcConnection with TLS enabled. However, these clients are
> > > >> >>> currently
> > > >> >>>>> connecting to the RegionServer/HMaster through an haproxy
> > process
> > > >> >>> local to
> > > >> >>>>> each server which handles SSL termination. So not quite
> > end-to-end
> > > >> yet.
> > > >> >>>>> - On the server side, most of our QA environment (a thousand
> > > >> >>> regionservers
> > > >> >>>>> and ~200 hmasters) are running it. So these are accepting TLS
> > from
> > > >> >>> clients
> > > >> >>>>> and using TLS for intra-cluster communication.
> > > >> >>>>>
> > > >> >>>>> The migration is tricky for us due to the scale and the fact
> > that we
> > > >> >>> need
> > > >> >>>>> to migrate off haproxy at the same time. Hopefully we should
> > have
> > > >> some
> > > >> >>> of
> > > >> >>>>> production running end-to-end TLS within the next month or so.
> > > >> >>>>>
> > > >> >>>>> From what we've seen in QA so far, there have not been any major
> > > >> >>> issues. We
> > > >> >>>>> also couldn't discern any performance issues in testing, though
> > we
> > > >> were
> > > >> >>>>> comparing against our legacy haproxy setup and can't really
> > compare
> > > >> >>> against
> > > >> >>>>> kerberos.
> > > >> >>>>>
> > > >> >>>>> One outstanding issue is
> > > >> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27782,
> > > >> >>>>> which we still see periodically. It doesn't seem to cause actual
> > > >> >>> issues,
> > > >> >>>>> since the RpcClient still handles it gracefully, but it does
> > cause
> > > >> >>> noise
> > > >> >>>>> and may have implications.
> > > >> >>>>>
> > > >> >>>>> On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 11:41 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> > > >> palomino219@gmail.com>
> > > >> >>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>> So any updates here?
> > > >> >>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>> Do we have any good news about the TLS usage in production so
> > we
> > > >> can
> > > >> >>>>>> move forward on release 2.6.x?
> > > >> >>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>> Thanks.
> > > >> >>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2023年4月7日周五 09:37写道：
> > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>> Agreed, that sounds like a good plan.
> > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> > > >> >>> palomino219@gmail.com>
> > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>> I think we could follow the old pattern when we cut a new
> > release
> > > >> >>>>>> branch.
> > > >> >>>>>>>> That is, after the new release branch is cut and the new
> > minor
> > > >> >>> release
> > > >> >>>>>> is
> > > >> >>>>>>>> out, we will do a final release of the oldest release line
> > and
> > > >> >>> then
> > > >> >>>>>> mark it
> > > >> >>>>>>>> as EOL.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>> So here, I think once we cut branch-2.6 and release 2.6.0, we
> > > >> >>> can do a
> > > >> >>>>>>>> final release for 2.4.x and mark 2.4.x as EOL.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>> Thanks.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>> Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年3月27日周一
> > > >> >>> 09:57写道：
> > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> Primary development on hbase-backup and TLS is complete.
> > There
> > > >> >>> are a
> > > >> >>>>>>>> couple
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> minor things I may want to add to TLS in the future, such as
> > > >> >>>>>> pluggable
> > > >> >>>>>>>> cert
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> verification. But those are not needed for initial release
> > IMO.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> We are almost ready integrating hbase-backup in production.
> > > >> >>> We’ve
> > > >> >>>>>> fixed a
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> few minor things (all committed) but otherwise it’s worked
> > > >> >>> well so
> > > >> >>>>>> far in
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> tests.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> We are a bit delayed in integrating TLS. I’m hopeful it will
> > > >> >>> happen
> > > >> >>>>>> in
> > > >> >>>>>>>> the
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> next 2-3 months. It’s a big project for us, so not quick,
> > but
> > > >> >>>>>> definitely
> > > >> >>>>>>>> on
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> the roadmap.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> It seems like cloudera may be closer to integrating TLS in
> > > >> >>>>>> production.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> Balazs recently filed and fixed HBASE-27673 related to mTLS.
> > > >> >>> Maybe
> > > >> >>>>>> he can
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> chime in on his status, or let me know if I am totally off
> > > >> >>> base :)
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 9:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > > >> >>>>>> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Before we open a new code line should we discuss EOL of
> > 2.4?
> > > >> >>> After
> > > >> >>>>>> the
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> first 2.6 release? It’s not required of course but cuts
> > down
> > > >> >>> the
> > > >> >>>>>> amount
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> of
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> labor to have two 2.x code lines (presumably, one as stable
> > > >> >>> and
> > > >> >>>>>> one as
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> next) rather than three. Perhaps even before that, should
> > we
> > > >> >>> move
> > > >> >>>>>> the
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> stable pointer to the latest 2.5 release?
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 26, 2023, at 5:59 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
> > > >> >>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Bump.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> I believe the mTLS and backup related code have all been
> > > >> >>>>>> finished on
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> branch-2?
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Are there any other things which block us making the
> > > >> >>> branch-2.6
> > > >> >>>>>>>> branch?
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Mallikarjun <ma...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月17日周一
> > > >> >>> 02:09写道：
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On hbase-backup, we are using in production for more then
> > > >> >>> 1
> > > >> >>>>>> year. I
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> can
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> vouch for it to be stable enough to be in a release
> > > >> >>> version so
> > > >> >>>>>> that
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> more
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> people can use it and polished it further.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022, 11:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> My understanding is some folks evaluating and polishing
> > > >> >>> TLS for
> > > >> >>>>>>>> their
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> production are also considering hbase-backup in the same
> > > >> >>> way,
> > > >> >>>>>> which
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> is
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> why
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I linked them together. If that is incorrect then they
> > > >> >>> both are
> > > >> >>>>>>>> still
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> worth
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> considering in my opinion but would have a more tenuous
> > > >> >>> link.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Where we are with hbase-backup is it should probably be
> > > >> >>> ported
> > > >> >>>>>> to
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> where
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in order
> > > >> >>> for it
> > > >> >>>>>> to
> > > >> >>>>>>>> make
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> more
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On the
> > > >> >>> other
> > > >> >>>>>> hand
> > > >> >>>>>>>> if
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> it
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> is
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> too unpolished then the experience would be poor.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <palomino219@gmail.com
> > >
> > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I believe the second one is still ongoing?
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五
> > > >> >>> 05:37写道：
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line
> > > >> >>> and
> > > >> >>>>>> as a
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new
> > branch
> > > >> >>>>>>>> branch-2.6
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> from
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch-2.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the
> > > >> >>> key
> > > >> >>>>>>>> features
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> of
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.6
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point.
> > > >> >>> Those key
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> features
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> are:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - mTLS RPC
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - hbase-backup backport
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>> --
> > > >> >>>>>>> Best regards,
> > > >> >>>>>>> Andrew
> > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> > > >> >>>>>>>    It's what we’ve earned
> > > >> >>>>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> > > >> >>>>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> > > >> >>>>>>>   - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> > > >> >>>>>>
> > > >> >>>
> > > >>
> > > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
>     It's what we’ve earned
> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
>    - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.

Are there any more important or serious issues with branch-2 which are not
resolved?

Planning to cut branch-2.6 from branch-2 on 9/5 and stabilize it for a
2.6.0 release from there.

On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 7:41 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Let's get HBASE-28028 in too. Since Andrew is still on vacation, let
> me find another committer to help review the PR.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年8月24日周四 02:23写道：
> >
> > We resolved HBASE-28010, so we should be good to go there now.
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 7:22 AM Bryan Beaudreault <
> bbeaudreault@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I made
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-28010 a blocker so we
> don’t
> > > release a broken new feature. We will have it fixed early this week.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 11:08 AM Andrew Purtell <
> andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Let’s do it. We can use the new branch to stabilize for release.
> > >>
> > >>  I am back from vacation in two weeks and can then lend time and AWS
> > >> resources for testing (and presumably fixing).
> > >>
> > >> > On Aug 18, 2023, at 10:53 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > HBASE-27947 has been resolved.
> > >> >
> > >> > So I think now we are good to cut branch-2.6?
> > >> >
> > >> > Another good news is we are also close to fix the WAL value
> > >> > compression issue in HBASE-28028.
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks.
> > >> >
> > >> > Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年6月23日周五 02:47写道：
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Thanks!
> > >> >>
> > >> >> We're looking into one other emergent issue that we uncovered
> during
> > >> the
> > >> >> rollout of server side TLS on RegionServers. It seems
> > >> nettyDirectMemory has
> > >> >> increased substantially when under load with it enabled. Details in
> > >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27947.
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 12:02 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> palomino219@gmail.com
> > >> >
> > >> >>> wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> PR is ready
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/5305
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> PTAL.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Thanks.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2023年6月22日周四 21:40写道：
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Ah, missed your last comment on HBASE-27782.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Let me take a look.
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Netty has some rules about how the exceptions are passed through
> the
> > >> >>>> pipeline(especially the order, forward or backward...) but
> honestly I
> > >> >>>> always forget it just a day later after I finished the code...
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年6月17日周六
> 00:43写道：
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> In terms of TLS:
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> - All of our clients (many thousands) in production are using
> the
> > >> >>>>> NettyRpcConnection with TLS enabled. However, these clients are
> > >> >>> currently
> > >> >>>>> connecting to the RegionServer/HMaster through an haproxy
> process
> > >> >>> local to
> > >> >>>>> each server which handles SSL termination. So not quite
> end-to-end
> > >> yet.
> > >> >>>>> - On the server side, most of our QA environment (a thousand
> > >> >>> regionservers
> > >> >>>>> and ~200 hmasters) are running it. So these are accepting TLS
> from
> > >> >>> clients
> > >> >>>>> and using TLS for intra-cluster communication.
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> The migration is tricky for us due to the scale and the fact
> that we
> > >> >>> need
> > >> >>>>> to migrate off haproxy at the same time. Hopefully we should
> have
> > >> some
> > >> >>> of
> > >> >>>>> production running end-to-end TLS within the next month or so.
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> From what we've seen in QA so far, there have not been any major
> > >> >>> issues. We
> > >> >>>>> also couldn't discern any performance issues in testing, though
> we
> > >> were
> > >> >>>>> comparing against our legacy haproxy setup and can't really
> compare
> > >> >>> against
> > >> >>>>> kerberos.
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> One outstanding issue is
> > >> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27782,
> > >> >>>>> which we still see periodically. It doesn't seem to cause actual
> > >> >>> issues,
> > >> >>>>> since the RpcClient still handles it gracefully, but it does
> cause
> > >> >>> noise
> > >> >>>>> and may have implications.
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 11:41 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> > >> palomino219@gmail.com>
> > >> >>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> So any updates here?
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> Do we have any good news about the TLS usage in production so
> we
> > >> can
> > >> >>>>>> move forward on release 2.6.x?
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> Thanks.
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2023年4月7日周五 09:37写道：
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>> Agreed, that sounds like a good plan.
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> > >> >>> palomino219@gmail.com>
> > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> I think we could follow the old pattern when we cut a new
> release
> > >> >>>>>> branch.
> > >> >>>>>>>> That is, after the new release branch is cut and the new
> minor
> > >> >>> release
> > >> >>>>>> is
> > >> >>>>>>>> out, we will do a final release of the oldest release line
> and
> > >> >>> then
> > >> >>>>>> mark it
> > >> >>>>>>>> as EOL.
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> So here, I think once we cut branch-2.6 and release 2.6.0, we
> > >> >>> can do a
> > >> >>>>>>>> final release for 2.4.x and mark 2.4.x as EOL.
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> Thanks.
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年3月27日周一
> > >> >>> 09:57写道：
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>> Primary development on hbase-backup and TLS is complete.
> There
> > >> >>> are a
> > >> >>>>>>>> couple
> > >> >>>>>>>>> minor things I may want to add to TLS in the future, such as
> > >> >>>>>> pluggable
> > >> >>>>>>>> cert
> > >> >>>>>>>>> verification. But those are not needed for initial release
> IMO.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>> We are almost ready integrating hbase-backup in production.
> > >> >>> We’ve
> > >> >>>>>> fixed a
> > >> >>>>>>>>> few minor things (all committed) but otherwise it’s worked
> > >> >>> well so
> > >> >>>>>> far in
> > >> >>>>>>>>> tests.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>> We are a bit delayed in integrating TLS. I’m hopeful it will
> > >> >>> happen
> > >> >>>>>> in
> > >> >>>>>>>> the
> > >> >>>>>>>>> next 2-3 months. It’s a big project for us, so not quick,
> but
> > >> >>>>>> definitely
> > >> >>>>>>>> on
> > >> >>>>>>>>> the roadmap.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>> It seems like cloudera may be closer to integrating TLS in
> > >> >>>>>> production.
> > >> >>>>>>>>> Balazs recently filed and fixed HBASE-27673 related to mTLS.
> > >> >>> Maybe
> > >> >>>>>> he can
> > >> >>>>>>>>> chime in on his status, or let me know if I am totally off
> > >> >>> base :)
> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 9:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > >> >>>>>> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> Before we open a new code line should we discuss EOL of
> 2.4?
> > >> >>> After
> > >> >>>>>> the
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> first 2.6 release? It’s not required of course but cuts
> down
> > >> >>> the
> > >> >>>>>> amount
> > >> >>>>>>>>> of
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> labor to have two 2.x code lines (presumably, one as stable
> > >> >>> and
> > >> >>>>>> one as
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> next) rather than three. Perhaps even before that, should
> we
> > >> >>> move
> > >> >>>>>> the
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> stable pointer to the latest 2.5 release?
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 26, 2023, at 5:59 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
> > >> >>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Bump.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> I believe the mTLS and backup related code have all been
> > >> >>>>>> finished on
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> branch-2?
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Are there any other things which block us making the
> > >> >>> branch-2.6
> > >> >>>>>>>> branch?
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Mallikarjun <ma...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月17日周一
> > >> >>> 02:09写道：
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On hbase-backup, we are using in production for more then
> > >> >>> 1
> > >> >>>>>> year. I
> > >> >>>>>>>>> can
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> vouch for it to be stable enough to be in a release
> > >> >>> version so
> > >> >>>>>> that
> > >> >>>>>>>>> more
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> people can use it and polished it further.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022, 11:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> My understanding is some folks evaluating and polishing
> > >> >>> TLS for
> > >> >>>>>>>> their
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> production are also considering hbase-backup in the same
> > >> >>> way,
> > >> >>>>>> which
> > >> >>>>>>>>> is
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> why
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I linked them together. If that is incorrect then they
> > >> >>> both are
> > >> >>>>>>>> still
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> worth
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> considering in my opinion but would have a more tenuous
> > >> >>> link.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Where we are with hbase-backup is it should probably be
> > >> >>> ported
> > >> >>>>>> to
> > >> >>>>>>>>> where
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in order
> > >> >>> for it
> > >> >>>>>> to
> > >> >>>>>>>> make
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> more
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On the
> > >> >>> other
> > >> >>>>>> hand
> > >> >>>>>>>> if
> > >> >>>>>>>>> it
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> is
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> too unpolished then the experience would be poor.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <palomino219@gmail.com
> >
> > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I believe the second one is still ongoing?
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五
> > >> >>> 05:37写道：
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line
> > >> >>> and
> > >> >>>>>> as a
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new
> branch
> > >> >>>>>>>> branch-2.6
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> from
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch-2.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the
> > >> >>> key
> > >> >>>>>>>> features
> > >> >>>>>>>>> of
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.6
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point.
> > >> >>> Those key
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> features
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> are:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - mTLS RPC
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - hbase-backup backport
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>> --
> > >> >>>>>>> Best regards,
> > >> >>>>>>> Andrew
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> > >> >>>>>>>    It's what we’ve earned
> > >> >>>>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> > >> >>>>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> > >> >>>>>>>   - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>
> > >>
> > >
>


-- 
Best regards,
Andrew

Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
    It's what we’ve earned
Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
   - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by "张铎(Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>.

Let's get HBASE-28028 in too. Since Andrew is still on vacation, let
me find another committer to help review the PR.

Thanks.

Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年8月24日周四 02:23写道：
>
> We resolved HBASE-28010, so we should be good to go there now.
>
> On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 7:22 AM Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > I made
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-28010 a blocker so we don’t
> > release a broken new feature. We will have it fixed early this week.
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 11:08 AM Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Let’s do it. We can use the new branch to stabilize for release.
> >>
> >>  I am back from vacation in two weeks and can then lend time and AWS
> >> resources for testing (and presumably fixing).
> >>
> >> > On Aug 18, 2023, at 10:53 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > HBASE-27947 has been resolved.
> >> >
> >> > So I think now we are good to cut branch-2.6?
> >> >
> >> > Another good news is we are also close to fix the WAL value
> >> > compression issue in HBASE-28028.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks.
> >> >
> >> > Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年6月23日周五 02:47写道：
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks!
> >> >>
> >> >> We're looking into one other emergent issue that we uncovered during
> >> the
> >> >> rollout of server side TLS on RegionServers. It seems
> >> nettyDirectMemory has
> >> >> increased substantially when under load with it enabled. Details in
> >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27947.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 12:02 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino219@gmail.com
> >> >
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> PR is ready
> >> >>>
> >> >>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/5305
> >> >>>
> >> >>> PTAL.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Thanks.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2023年6月22日周四 21:40写道：
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Ah, missed your last comment on HBASE-27782.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Let me take a look.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Netty has some rules about how the exceptions are passed through the
> >> >>>> pipeline(especially the order, forward or backward...) but honestly I
> >> >>>> always forget it just a day later after I finished the code...
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年6月17日周六 00:43写道：
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> In terms of TLS:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> - All of our clients (many thousands) in production are using the
> >> >>>>> NettyRpcConnection with TLS enabled. However, these clients are
> >> >>> currently
> >> >>>>> connecting to the RegionServer/HMaster through an haproxy process
> >> >>> local to
> >> >>>>> each server which handles SSL termination. So not quite end-to-end
> >> yet.
> >> >>>>> - On the server side, most of our QA environment (a thousand
> >> >>> regionservers
> >> >>>>> and ~200 hmasters) are running it. So these are accepting TLS from
> >> >>> clients
> >> >>>>> and using TLS for intra-cluster communication.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> The migration is tricky for us due to the scale and the fact that we
> >> >>> need
> >> >>>>> to migrate off haproxy at the same time. Hopefully we should have
> >> some
> >> >>> of
> >> >>>>> production running end-to-end TLS within the next month or so.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> From what we've seen in QA so far, there have not been any major
> >> >>> issues. We
> >> >>>>> also couldn't discern any performance issues in testing, though we
> >> were
> >> >>>>> comparing against our legacy haproxy setup and can't really compare
> >> >>> against
> >> >>>>> kerberos.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> One outstanding issue is
> >> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27782,
> >> >>>>> which we still see periodically. It doesn't seem to cause actual
> >> >>> issues,
> >> >>>>> since the RpcClient still handles it gracefully, but it does cause
> >> >>> noise
> >> >>>>> and may have implications.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 11:41 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> >> palomino219@gmail.com>
> >> >>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> So any updates here?
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Do we have any good news about the TLS usage in production so we
> >> can
> >> >>>>>> move forward on release 2.6.x?
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Thanks.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2023年4月7日周五 09:37写道：
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> Agreed, that sounds like a good plan.
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> >> >>> palomino219@gmail.com>
> >> >>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> I think we could follow the old pattern when we cut a new release
> >> >>>>>> branch.
> >> >>>>>>>> That is, after the new release branch is cut and the new minor
> >> >>> release
> >> >>>>>> is
> >> >>>>>>>> out, we will do a final release of the oldest release line and
> >> >>> then
> >> >>>>>> mark it
> >> >>>>>>>> as EOL.
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> So here, I think once we cut branch-2.6 and release 2.6.0, we
> >> >>> can do a
> >> >>>>>>>> final release for 2.4.x and mark 2.4.x as EOL.
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Thanks.
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年3月27日周一
> >> >>> 09:57写道：
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> Primary development on hbase-backup and TLS is complete. There
> >> >>> are a
> >> >>>>>>>> couple
> >> >>>>>>>>> minor things I may want to add to TLS in the future, such as
> >> >>>>>> pluggable
> >> >>>>>>>> cert
> >> >>>>>>>>> verification. But those are not needed for initial release IMO.
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> We are almost ready integrating hbase-backup in production.
> >> >>> We’ve
> >> >>>>>> fixed a
> >> >>>>>>>>> few minor things (all committed) but otherwise it’s worked
> >> >>> well so
> >> >>>>>> far in
> >> >>>>>>>>> tests.
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> We are a bit delayed in integrating TLS. I’m hopeful it will
> >> >>> happen
> >> >>>>>> in
> >> >>>>>>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>> next 2-3 months. It’s a big project for us, so not quick, but
> >> >>>>>> definitely
> >> >>>>>>>> on
> >> >>>>>>>>> the roadmap.
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> It seems like cloudera may be closer to integrating TLS in
> >> >>>>>> production.
> >> >>>>>>>>> Balazs recently filed and fixed HBASE-27673 related to mTLS.
> >> >>> Maybe
> >> >>>>>> he can
> >> >>>>>>>>> chime in on his status, or let me know if I am totally off
> >> >>> base :)
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 9:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> >> >>>>>> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> Before we open a new code line should we discuss EOL of 2.4?
> >> >>> After
> >> >>>>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>>> first 2.6 release? It’s not required of course but cuts down
> >> >>> the
> >> >>>>>> amount
> >> >>>>>>>>> of
> >> >>>>>>>>>> labor to have two 2.x code lines (presumably, one as stable
> >> >>> and
> >> >>>>>> one as
> >> >>>>>>>>>> next) rather than three. Perhaps even before that, should we
> >> >>> move
> >> >>>>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>>> stable pointer to the latest 2.5 release?
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 26, 2023, at 5:59 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Bump.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> I believe the mTLS and backup related code have all been
> >> >>>>>> finished on
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> branch-2?
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Are there any other things which block us making the
> >> >>> branch-2.6
> >> >>>>>>>> branch?
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Mallikarjun <ma...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月17日周一
> >> >>> 02:09写道：
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On hbase-backup, we are using in production for more then
> >> >>> 1
> >> >>>>>> year. I
> >> >>>>>>>>> can
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> vouch for it to be stable enough to be in a release
> >> >>> version so
> >> >>>>>> that
> >> >>>>>>>>> more
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> people can use it and polished it further.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022, 11:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> >> >>>>>>>>>> andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> My understanding is some folks evaluating and polishing
> >> >>> TLS for
> >> >>>>>>>> their
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> production are also considering hbase-backup in the same
> >> >>> way,
> >> >>>>>> which
> >> >>>>>>>>> is
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> why
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I linked them together. If that is incorrect then they
> >> >>> both are
> >> >>>>>>>> still
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> worth
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> considering in my opinion but would have a more tenuous
> >> >>> link.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Where we are with hbase-backup is it should probably be
> >> >>> ported
> >> >>>>>> to
> >> >>>>>>>>> where
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in order
> >> >>> for it
> >> >>>>>> to
> >> >>>>>>>> make
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> more
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On the
> >> >>> other
> >> >>>>>> hand
> >> >>>>>>>> if
> >> >>>>>>>>> it
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> is
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> too unpolished then the experience would be poor.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
> >> >>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I believe the second one is still ongoing?
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五
> >> >>> 05:37写道：
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line
> >> >>> and
> >> >>>>>> as a
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new branch
> >> >>>>>>>> branch-2.6
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> from
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch-2.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the
> >> >>> key
> >> >>>>>>>> features
> >> >>>>>>>>> of
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.6
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point.
> >> >>> Those key
> >> >>>>>>>>>> features
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> are:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - mTLS RPC
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - hbase-backup backport
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> --
> >> >>>>>>> Best regards,
> >> >>>>>>> Andrew
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> >> >>>>>>>    It's what we’ve earned
> >> >>>>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> >> >>>>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> >> >>>>>>>   - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>
> >>
> >

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org>.

We resolved HBASE-28010, so we should be good to go there now.

On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 7:22 AM Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org>
wrote:

> I made
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-28010 a blocker so we don’t
> release a broken new feature. We will have it fixed early this week.
>
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 11:08 AM Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Let’s do it. We can use the new branch to stabilize for release.
>>
>>  I am back from vacation in two weeks and can then lend time and AWS
>> resources for testing (and presumably fixing).
>>
>> > On Aug 18, 2023, at 10:53 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > HBASE-27947 has been resolved.
>> >
>> > So I think now we are good to cut branch-2.6?
>> >
>> > Another good news is we are also close to fix the WAL value
>> > compression issue in HBASE-28028.
>> >
>> > Thanks.
>> >
>> > Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年6月23日周五 02:47写道：
>> >>
>> >> Thanks!
>> >>
>> >> We're looking into one other emergent issue that we uncovered during
>> the
>> >> rollout of server side TLS on RegionServers. It seems
>> nettyDirectMemory has
>> >> increased substantially when under load with it enabled. Details in
>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27947.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 12:02 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino219@gmail.com
>> >
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> PR is ready
>> >>>
>> >>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/5305
>> >>>
>> >>> PTAL.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks.
>> >>>
>> >>> 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2023年6月22日周四 21:40写道：
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Ah, missed your last comment on HBASE-27782.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Let me take a look.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Netty has some rules about how the exceptions are passed through the
>> >>>> pipeline(especially the order, forward or backward...) but honestly I
>> >>>> always forget it just a day later after I finished the code...
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年6月17日周六 00:43写道：
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> In terms of TLS:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> - All of our clients (many thousands) in production are using the
>> >>>>> NettyRpcConnection with TLS enabled. However, these clients are
>> >>> currently
>> >>>>> connecting to the RegionServer/HMaster through an haproxy process
>> >>> local to
>> >>>>> each server which handles SSL termination. So not quite end-to-end
>> yet.
>> >>>>> - On the server side, most of our QA environment (a thousand
>> >>> regionservers
>> >>>>> and ~200 hmasters) are running it. So these are accepting TLS from
>> >>> clients
>> >>>>> and using TLS for intra-cluster communication.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The migration is tricky for us due to the scale and the fact that we
>> >>> need
>> >>>>> to migrate off haproxy at the same time. Hopefully we should have
>> some
>> >>> of
>> >>>>> production running end-to-end TLS within the next month or so.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> From what we've seen in QA so far, there have not been any major
>> >>> issues. We
>> >>>>> also couldn't discern any performance issues in testing, though we
>> were
>> >>>>> comparing against our legacy haproxy setup and can't really compare
>> >>> against
>> >>>>> kerberos.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> One outstanding issue is
>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27782,
>> >>>>> which we still see periodically. It doesn't seem to cause actual
>> >>> issues,
>> >>>>> since the RpcClient still handles it gracefully, but it does cause
>> >>> noise
>> >>>>> and may have implications.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 11:41 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
>> palomino219@gmail.com>
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> So any updates here?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Do we have any good news about the TLS usage in production so we
>> can
>> >>>>>> move forward on release 2.6.x?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Thanks.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2023年4月7日周五 09:37写道：
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Agreed, that sounds like a good plan.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
>> >>> palomino219@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> I think we could follow the old pattern when we cut a new release
>> >>>>>> branch.
>> >>>>>>>> That is, after the new release branch is cut and the new minor
>> >>> release
>> >>>>>> is
>> >>>>>>>> out, we will do a final release of the oldest release line and
>> >>> then
>> >>>>>> mark it
>> >>>>>>>> as EOL.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> So here, I think once we cut branch-2.6 and release 2.6.0, we
>> >>> can do a
>> >>>>>>>> final release for 2.4.x and mark 2.4.x as EOL.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Thanks.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年3月27日周一
>> >>> 09:57写道：
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Primary development on hbase-backup and TLS is complete. There
>> >>> are a
>> >>>>>>>> couple
>> >>>>>>>>> minor things I may want to add to TLS in the future, such as
>> >>>>>> pluggable
>> >>>>>>>> cert
>> >>>>>>>>> verification. But those are not needed for initial release IMO.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> We are almost ready integrating hbase-backup in production.
>> >>> We’ve
>> >>>>>> fixed a
>> >>>>>>>>> few minor things (all committed) but otherwise it’s worked
>> >>> well so
>> >>>>>> far in
>> >>>>>>>>> tests.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> We are a bit delayed in integrating TLS. I’m hopeful it will
>> >>> happen
>> >>>>>> in
>> >>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>> next 2-3 months. It’s a big project for us, so not quick, but
>> >>>>>> definitely
>> >>>>>>>> on
>> >>>>>>>>> the roadmap.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> It seems like cloudera may be closer to integrating TLS in
>> >>>>>> production.
>> >>>>>>>>> Balazs recently filed and fixed HBASE-27673 related to mTLS.
>> >>> Maybe
>> >>>>>> he can
>> >>>>>>>>> chime in on his status, or let me know if I am totally off
>> >>> base :)
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 9:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
>> >>>>>> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Before we open a new code line should we discuss EOL of 2.4?
>> >>> After
>> >>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>> first 2.6 release? It’s not required of course but cuts down
>> >>> the
>> >>>>>> amount
>> >>>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>> labor to have two 2.x code lines (presumably, one as stable
>> >>> and
>> >>>>>> one as
>> >>>>>>>>>> next) rather than three. Perhaps even before that, should we
>> >>> move
>> >>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>> stable pointer to the latest 2.5 release?
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 26, 2023, at 5:59 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Bump.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> I believe the mTLS and backup related code have all been
>> >>>>>> finished on
>> >>>>>>>>>>> branch-2?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Are there any other things which block us making the
>> >>> branch-2.6
>> >>>>>>>> branch?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Mallikarjun <ma...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月17日周一
>> >>> 02:09写道：
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On hbase-backup, we are using in production for more then
>> >>> 1
>> >>>>>> year. I
>> >>>>>>>>> can
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> vouch for it to be stable enough to be in a release
>> >>> version so
>> >>>>>> that
>> >>>>>>>>> more
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> people can use it and polished it further.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022, 11:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
>> >>>>>>>>>> andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> My understanding is some folks evaluating and polishing
>> >>> TLS for
>> >>>>>>>> their
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> production are also considering hbase-backup in the same
>> >>> way,
>> >>>>>> which
>> >>>>>>>>> is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> why
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I linked them together. If that is incorrect then they
>> >>> both are
>> >>>>>>>> still
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> worth
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> considering in my opinion but would have a more tenuous
>> >>> link.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Where we are with hbase-backup is it should probably be
>> >>> ported
>> >>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>> where
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in order
>> >>> for it
>> >>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>> make
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> more
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On the
>> >>> other
>> >>>>>> hand
>> >>>>>>>> if
>> >>>>>>>>> it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> too unpolished then the experience would be poor.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I believe the second one is still ongoing?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五
>> >>> 05:37写道：
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line
>> >>> and
>> >>>>>> as a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new branch
>> >>>>>>>> branch-2.6
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> from
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch-2.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the
>> >>> key
>> >>>>>>>> features
>> >>>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.6
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point.
>> >>> Those key
>> >>>>>>>>>> features
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> are:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - mTLS RPC
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - hbase-backup backport
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>> Best regards,
>> >>>>>>> Andrew
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
>> >>>>>>>    It's what we’ve earned
>> >>>>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
>> >>>>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
>> >>>>>>>   - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>
>>
>

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org>.

I made
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-28010 a blocker so we don’t
release a broken new feature. We will have it fixed early this week.

On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 11:08 AM Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Let’s do it. We can use the new branch to stabilize for release.
>
>  I am back from vacation in two weeks and can then lend time and AWS
> resources for testing (and presumably fixing).
>
> > On Aug 18, 2023, at 10:53 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > HBASE-27947 has been resolved.
> >
> > So I think now we are good to cut branch-2.6?
> >
> > Another good news is we are also close to fix the WAL value
> > compression issue in HBASE-28028.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年6月23日周五 02:47写道：
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >> We're looking into one other emergent issue that we uncovered during the
> >> rollout of server side TLS on RegionServers. It seems nettyDirectMemory
> has
> >> increased substantially when under load with it enabled. Details in
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27947.
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 12:02 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> PR is ready
> >>>
> >>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/5305
> >>>
> >>> PTAL.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks.
> >>>
> >>> 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2023年6月22日周四 21:40写道：
> >>>>
> >>>> Ah, missed your last comment on HBASE-27782.
> >>>>
> >>>> Let me take a look.
> >>>>
> >>>> Netty has some rules about how the exceptions are passed through the
> >>>> pipeline(especially the order, forward or backward...) but honestly I
> >>>> always forget it just a day later after I finished the code...
> >>>>
> >>>> Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年6月17日周六 00:43写道：
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In terms of TLS:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - All of our clients (many thousands) in production are using the
> >>>>> NettyRpcConnection with TLS enabled. However, these clients are
> >>> currently
> >>>>> connecting to the RegionServer/HMaster through an haproxy process
> >>> local to
> >>>>> each server which handles SSL termination. So not quite end-to-end
> yet.
> >>>>> - On the server side, most of our QA environment (a thousand
> >>> regionservers
> >>>>> and ~200 hmasters) are running it. So these are accepting TLS from
> >>> clients
> >>>>> and using TLS for intra-cluster communication.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The migration is tricky for us due to the scale and the fact that we
> >>> need
> >>>>> to migrate off haproxy at the same time. Hopefully we should have
> some
> >>> of
> >>>>> production running end-to-end TLS within the next month or so.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From what we've seen in QA so far, there have not been any major
> >>> issues. We
> >>>>> also couldn't discern any performance issues in testing, though we
> were
> >>>>> comparing against our legacy haproxy setup and can't really compare
> >>> against
> >>>>> kerberos.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> One outstanding issue is
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27782,
> >>>>> which we still see periodically. It doesn't seem to cause actual
> >>> issues,
> >>>>> since the RpcClient still handles it gracefully, but it does cause
> >>> noise
> >>>>> and may have implications.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 11:41 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> palomino219@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> So any updates here?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Do we have any good news about the TLS usage in production so we can
> >>>>>> move forward on release 2.6.x?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2023年4月7日周五 09:37写道：
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Agreed, that sounds like a good plan.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> >>> palomino219@gmail.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I think we could follow the old pattern when we cut a new release
> >>>>>> branch.
> >>>>>>>> That is, after the new release branch is cut and the new minor
> >>> release
> >>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>> out, we will do a final release of the oldest release line and
> >>> then
> >>>>>> mark it
> >>>>>>>> as EOL.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> So here, I think once we cut branch-2.6 and release 2.6.0, we
> >>> can do a
> >>>>>>>> final release for 2.4.x and mark 2.4.x as EOL.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年3月27日周一
> >>> 09:57写道：
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Primary development on hbase-backup and TLS is complete. There
> >>> are a
> >>>>>>>> couple
> >>>>>>>>> minor things I may want to add to TLS in the future, such as
> >>>>>> pluggable
> >>>>>>>> cert
> >>>>>>>>> verification. But those are not needed for initial release IMO.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> We are almost ready integrating hbase-backup in production.
> >>> We’ve
> >>>>>> fixed a
> >>>>>>>>> few minor things (all committed) but otherwise it’s worked
> >>> well so
> >>>>>> far in
> >>>>>>>>> tests.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> We are a bit delayed in integrating TLS. I’m hopeful it will
> >>> happen
> >>>>>> in
> >>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>> next 2-3 months. It’s a big project for us, so not quick, but
> >>>>>> definitely
> >>>>>>>> on
> >>>>>>>>> the roadmap.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> It seems like cloudera may be closer to integrating TLS in
> >>>>>> production.
> >>>>>>>>> Balazs recently filed and fixed HBASE-27673 related to mTLS.
> >>> Maybe
> >>>>>> he can
> >>>>>>>>> chime in on his status, or let me know if I am totally off
> >>> base :)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 9:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> >>>>>> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Before we open a new code line should we discuss EOL of 2.4?
> >>> After
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>> first 2.6 release? It’s not required of course but cuts down
> >>> the
> >>>>>> amount
> >>>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>> labor to have two 2.x code lines (presumably, one as stable
> >>> and
> >>>>>> one as
> >>>>>>>>>> next) rather than three. Perhaps even before that, should we
> >>> move
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>> stable pointer to the latest 2.5 release?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 26, 2023, at 5:59 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Bump.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I believe the mTLS and backup related code have all been
> >>>>>> finished on
> >>>>>>>>>>> branch-2?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Are there any other things which block us making the
> >>> branch-2.6
> >>>>>>>> branch?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Mallikarjun <ma...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月17日周一
> >>> 02:09写道：
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On hbase-backup, we are using in production for more then
> >>> 1
> >>>>>> year. I
> >>>>>>>>> can
> >>>>>>>>>>>> vouch for it to be stable enough to be in a release
> >>> version so
> >>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>> more
> >>>>>>>>>>>> people can use it and polished it further.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022, 11:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> >>>>>>>>>> andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> My understanding is some folks evaluating and polishing
> >>> TLS for
> >>>>>>>> their
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> production are also considering hbase-backup in the same
> >>> way,
> >>>>>> which
> >>>>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>>> why
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I linked them together. If that is incorrect then they
> >>> both are
> >>>>>>>> still
> >>>>>>>>>>>> worth
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> considering in my opinion but would have a more tenuous
> >>> link.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Where we are with hbase-backup is it should probably be
> >>> ported
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>> where
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in order
> >>> for it
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>> make
> >>>>>>>>>>>> more
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On the
> >>> other
> >>>>>> hand
> >>>>>>>> if
> >>>>>>>>> it
> >>>>>>>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> too unpolished then the experience would be poor.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I believe the second one is still ongoing?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五
> >>> 05:37写道：
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line
> >>> and
> >>>>>> as a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new branch
> >>>>>>>> branch-2.6
> >>>>>>>>>>>> from
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch-2.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the
> >>> key
> >>>>>>>> features
> >>>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.6
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point.
> >>> Those key
> >>>>>>>>>> features
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> are:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - mTLS RPC
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - hbase-backup backport
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>> Andrew
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> >>>>>>>    It's what we’ve earned
> >>>>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> >>>>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> >>>>>>>   - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> >>>>>>
> >>>
>

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>.

Let’s do it. We can use the new branch to stabilize for release.

 I am back from vacation in two weeks and can then lend time and AWS resources for testing (and presumably fixing).

> On Aug 18, 2023, at 10:53 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> HBASE-27947 has been resolved.
> 
> So I think now we are good to cut branch-2.6?
> 
> Another good news is we are also close to fix the WAL value
> compression issue in HBASE-28028.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年6月23日周五 02:47写道：
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> 
>> We're looking into one other emergent issue that we uncovered during the
>> rollout of server side TLS on RegionServers. It seems nettyDirectMemory has
>> increased substantially when under load with it enabled. Details in
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27947.
>> 
>> 
>>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 12:02 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> PR is ready
>>> 
>>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/5305
>>> 
>>> PTAL.
>>> 
>>> Thanks.
>>> 
>>> 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2023年6月22日周四 21:40写道：
>>>> 
>>>> Ah, missed your last comment on HBASE-27782.
>>>> 
>>>> Let me take a look.
>>>> 
>>>> Netty has some rules about how the exceptions are passed through the
>>>> pipeline(especially the order, forward or backward...) but honestly I
>>>> always forget it just a day later after I finished the code...
>>>> 
>>>> Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年6月17日周六 00:43写道：
>>>>> 
>>>>> In terms of TLS:
>>>>> 
>>>>> - All of our clients (many thousands) in production are using the
>>>>> NettyRpcConnection with TLS enabled. However, these clients are
>>> currently
>>>>> connecting to the RegionServer/HMaster through an haproxy process
>>> local to
>>>>> each server which handles SSL termination. So not quite end-to-end yet.
>>>>> - On the server side, most of our QA environment (a thousand
>>> regionservers
>>>>> and ~200 hmasters) are running it. So these are accepting TLS from
>>> clients
>>>>> and using TLS for intra-cluster communication.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The migration is tricky for us due to the scale and the fact that we
>>> need
>>>>> to migrate off haproxy at the same time. Hopefully we should have some
>>> of
>>>>> production running end-to-end TLS within the next month or so.
>>>>> 
>>>>> From what we've seen in QA so far, there have not been any major
>>> issues. We
>>>>> also couldn't discern any performance issues in testing, though we were
>>>>> comparing against our legacy haproxy setup and can't really compare
>>> against
>>>>> kerberos.
>>>>> 
>>>>> One outstanding issue is
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27782,
>>>>> which we still see periodically. It doesn't seem to cause actual
>>> issues,
>>>>> since the RpcClient still handles it gracefully, but it does cause
>>> noise
>>>>> and may have implications.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 11:41 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> So any updates here?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Do we have any good news about the TLS usage in production so we can
>>>>>> move forward on release 2.6.x?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2023年4月7日周五 09:37写道：
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Agreed, that sounds like a good plan.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
>>> palomino219@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I think we could follow the old pattern when we cut a new release
>>>>>> branch.
>>>>>>>> That is, after the new release branch is cut and the new minor
>>> release
>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> out, we will do a final release of the oldest release line and
>>> then
>>>>>> mark it
>>>>>>>> as EOL.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> So here, I think once we cut branch-2.6 and release 2.6.0, we
>>> can do a
>>>>>>>> final release for 2.4.x and mark 2.4.x as EOL.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年3月27日周一
>>> 09:57写道：
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Primary development on hbase-backup and TLS is complete. There
>>> are a
>>>>>>>> couple
>>>>>>>>> minor things I may want to add to TLS in the future, such as
>>>>>> pluggable
>>>>>>>> cert
>>>>>>>>> verification. But those are not needed for initial release IMO.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> We are almost ready integrating hbase-backup in production.
>>> We’ve
>>>>>> fixed a
>>>>>>>>> few minor things (all committed) but otherwise it’s worked
>>> well so
>>>>>> far in
>>>>>>>>> tests.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> We are a bit delayed in integrating TLS. I’m hopeful it will
>>> happen
>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> next 2-3 months. It’s a big project for us, so not quick, but
>>>>>> definitely
>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>> the roadmap.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> It seems like cloudera may be closer to integrating TLS in
>>>>>> production.
>>>>>>>>> Balazs recently filed and fixed HBASE-27673 related to mTLS.
>>> Maybe
>>>>>> he can
>>>>>>>>> chime in on his status, or let me know if I am totally off
>>> base :)
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 9:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
>>>>>> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Before we open a new code line should we discuss EOL of 2.4?
>>> After
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> first 2.6 release? It’s not required of course but cuts down
>>> the
>>>>>> amount
>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> labor to have two 2.x code lines (presumably, one as stable
>>> and
>>>>>> one as
>>>>>>>>>> next) rather than three. Perhaps even before that, should we
>>> move
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> stable pointer to the latest 2.5 release?
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 26, 2023, at 5:59 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Bump.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> I believe the mTLS and backup related code have all been
>>>>>> finished on
>>>>>>>>>>> branch-2?
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Are there any other things which block us making the
>>> branch-2.6
>>>>>>>> branch?
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Mallikarjun <ma...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月17日周一
>>> 02:09写道：
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On hbase-backup, we are using in production for more then
>>> 1
>>>>>> year. I
>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>>> vouch for it to be stable enough to be in a release
>>> version so
>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>>>>> people can use it and polished it further.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022, 11:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
>>>>>>>>>> andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> My understanding is some folks evaluating and polishing
>>> TLS for
>>>>>>>> their
>>>>>>>>>>>>> production are also considering hbase-backup in the same
>>> way,
>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>> why
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I linked them together. If that is incorrect then they
>>> both are
>>>>>>>> still
>>>>>>>>>>>> worth
>>>>>>>>>>>>> considering in my opinion but would have a more tenuous
>>> link.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where we are with hbase-backup is it should probably be
>>> ported
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> where
>>>>>>>>>>>>> more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in order
>>> for it
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> make
>>>>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>>>>>>> progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On the
>>> other
>>>>>> hand
>>>>>>>> if
>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> too unpolished then the experience would be poor.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I believe the second one is still ongoing?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五
>>> 05:37写道：
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line
>>> and
>>>>>> as a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new branch
>>>>>>>> branch-2.6
>>>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch-2.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the
>>> key
>>>>>>>> features
>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.6
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point.
>>> Those key
>>>>>>>>>> features
>>>>>>>>>>>>> are:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - mTLS RPC
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - hbase-backup backport
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>> Andrew
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
>>>>>>>    It's what we’ve earned
>>>>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
>>>>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
>>>>>>>   - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
>>>>>> 
>>>

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by "张铎(Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>.

HBASE-27947 has been resolved.

So I think now we are good to cut branch-2.6?

Another good news is we are also close to fix the WAL value
compression issue in HBASE-28028.

Thanks.

Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年6月23日周五 02:47写道：
>
> Thanks!
>
> We're looking into one other emergent issue that we uncovered during the
> rollout of server side TLS on RegionServers. It seems nettyDirectMemory has
> increased substantially when under load with it enabled. Details in
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27947.
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 12:02 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > PR is ready
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/5305
> >
> > PTAL.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2023年6月22日周四 21:40写道：
> > >
> > > Ah, missed your last comment on HBASE-27782.
> > >
> > > Let me take a look.
> > >
> > > Netty has some rules about how the exceptions are passed through the
> > > pipeline(especially the order, forward or backward...) but honestly I
> > > always forget it just a day later after I finished the code...
> > >
> > > Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年6月17日周六 00:43写道：
> > > >
> > > > In terms of TLS:
> > > >
> > > > - All of our clients (many thousands) in production are using the
> > > > NettyRpcConnection with TLS enabled. However, these clients are
> > currently
> > > > connecting to the RegionServer/HMaster through an haproxy process
> > local to
> > > > each server which handles SSL termination. So not quite end-to-end yet.
> > > > - On the server side, most of our QA environment (a thousand
> > regionservers
> > > > and ~200 hmasters) are running it. So these are accepting TLS from
> > clients
> > > > and using TLS for intra-cluster communication.
> > > >
> > > > The migration is tricky for us due to the scale and the fact that we
> > need
> > > > to migrate off haproxy at the same time. Hopefully we should have some
> > of
> > > > production running end-to-end TLS within the next month or so.
> > > >
> > > > From what we've seen in QA so far, there have not been any major
> > issues. We
> > > > also couldn't discern any performance issues in testing, though we were
> > > > comparing against our legacy haproxy setup and can't really compare
> > against
> > > > kerberos.
> > > >
> > > > One outstanding issue is
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27782,
> > > > which we still see periodically. It doesn't seem to cause actual
> > issues,
> > > > since the RpcClient still handles it gracefully, but it does cause
> > noise
> > > > and may have implications.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 11:41 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > So any updates here?
> > > > >
> > > > > Do we have any good news about the TLS usage in production so we can
> > > > > move forward on release 2.6.x?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > > Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2023年4月7日周五 09:37写道：
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Agreed, that sounds like a good plan.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> > palomino219@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think we could follow the old pattern when we cut a new release
> > > > > branch.
> > > > > > > That is, after the new release branch is cut and the new minor
> > release
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > out, we will do a final release of the oldest release line and
> > then
> > > > > mark it
> > > > > > > as EOL.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So here, I think once we cut branch-2.6 and release 2.6.0, we
> > can do a
> > > > > > > final release for 2.4.x and mark 2.4.x as EOL.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年3月27日周一
> > 09:57写道：
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Primary development on hbase-backup and TLS is complete. There
> > are a
> > > > > > > couple
> > > > > > > > minor things I may want to add to TLS in the future, such as
> > > > > pluggable
> > > > > > > cert
> > > > > > > > verification. But those are not needed for initial release IMO.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We are almost ready integrating hbase-backup in production.
> > We’ve
> > > > > fixed a
> > > > > > > > few minor things (all committed) but otherwise it’s worked
> > well so
> > > > > far in
> > > > > > > > tests.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We are a bit delayed in integrating TLS. I’m hopeful it will
> > happen
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > next 2-3 months. It’s a big project for us, so not quick, but
> > > > > definitely
> > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > the roadmap.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It seems like cloudera may be closer to integrating TLS in
> > > > > production.
> > > > > > > > Balazs recently filed and fixed HBASE-27673 related to mTLS.
> > Maybe
> > > > > he can
> > > > > > > > chime in on his status, or let me know if I am totally off
> > base :)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 9:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Before we open a new code line should we discuss EOL of 2.4?
> > After
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > first 2.6 release? It’s not required of course but cuts down
> > the
> > > > > amount
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > labor to have two 2.x code lines (presumably, one as stable
> > and
> > > > > one as
> > > > > > > > > next) rather than three. Perhaps even before that, should we
> > move
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > stable pointer to the latest 2.5 release?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Mar 26, 2023, at 5:59 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Bump.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I believe the mTLS and backup related code have all been
> > > > > finished on
> > > > > > > > > > branch-2?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Are there any other things which block us making the
> > branch-2.6
> > > > > > > branch?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Mallikarjun <ma...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月17日周一
> > 02:09写道：
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> On hbase-backup, we are using in production for more then
> > 1
> > > > > year. I
> > > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > >> vouch for it to be stable enough to be in a release
> > version so
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > > more
> > > > > > > > > >> people can use it and polished it further.
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022, 11:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > > > > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > >>> My understanding is some folks evaluating and polishing
> > TLS for
> > > > > > > their
> > > > > > > > > >>> production are also considering hbase-backup in the same
> > way,
> > > > > which
> > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > >> why
> > > > > > > > > >>> I linked them together. If that is incorrect then they
> > both are
> > > > > > > still
> > > > > > > > > >> worth
> > > > > > > > > >>> considering in my opinion but would have a more tenuous
> > link.
> > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > >>> Where we are with hbase-backup is it should probably be
> > ported
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > where
> > > > > > > > > >>> more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in order
> > for it
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > make
> > > > > > > > > >> more
> > > > > > > > > >>> progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On the
> > other
> > > > > hand
> > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > >> is
> > > > > > > > > >>> too unpolished then the experience would be poor.
> > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > >>>> On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > >>>> I believe the second one is still ongoing?
> > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > >>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五
> > 05:37写道：
> > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > >>>>> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line
> > and
> > > > > as a
> > > > > > > > > >>>>> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new branch
> > > > > > > branch-2.6
> > > > > > > > > >> from
> > > > > > > > > >>>>> branch-2.
> > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > >>>>> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the
> > key
> > > > > > > features
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > >>> 2.6
> > > > > > > > > >>>>> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point.
> > Those key
> > > > > > > > > features
> > > > > > > > > >>> are:
> > > > > > > > > >>>>> - mTLS RPC
> > > > > > > > > >>>>> - hbase-backup backport
> > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > >>>>> --
> > > > > > > > > >>>>> Best regards,
> > > > > > > > > >>>>> Andrew
> > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > Andrew
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> > > > > >     It's what we’ve earned
> > > > > > Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> > > > > > Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> > > > > >    - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> > > > >
> >

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org>.

Thanks!

We're looking into one other emergent issue that we uncovered during the
rollout of server side TLS on RegionServers. It seems nettyDirectMemory has
increased substantially when under load with it enabled. Details in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27947.


On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 12:02 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> PR is ready
>
> https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/5305
>
> PTAL.
>
> Thanks.
>
> 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2023年6月22日周四 21:40写道：
> >
> > Ah, missed your last comment on HBASE-27782.
> >
> > Let me take a look.
> >
> > Netty has some rules about how the exceptions are passed through the
> > pipeline(especially the order, forward or backward...) but honestly I
> > always forget it just a day later after I finished the code...
> >
> > Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年6月17日周六 00:43写道：
> > >
> > > In terms of TLS:
> > >
> > > - All of our clients (many thousands) in production are using the
> > > NettyRpcConnection with TLS enabled. However, these clients are
> currently
> > > connecting to the RegionServer/HMaster through an haproxy process
> local to
> > > each server which handles SSL termination. So not quite end-to-end yet.
> > > - On the server side, most of our QA environment (a thousand
> regionservers
> > > and ~200 hmasters) are running it. So these are accepting TLS from
> clients
> > > and using TLS for intra-cluster communication.
> > >
> > > The migration is tricky for us due to the scale and the fact that we
> need
> > > to migrate off haproxy at the same time. Hopefully we should have some
> of
> > > production running end-to-end TLS within the next month or so.
> > >
> > > From what we've seen in QA so far, there have not been any major
> issues. We
> > > also couldn't discern any performance issues in testing, though we were
> > > comparing against our legacy haproxy setup and can't really compare
> against
> > > kerberos.
> > >
> > > One outstanding issue is
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27782,
> > > which we still see periodically. It doesn't seem to cause actual
> issues,
> > > since the RpcClient still handles it gracefully, but it does cause
> noise
> > > and may have implications.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 11:41 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > So any updates here?
> > > >
> > > > Do we have any good news about the TLS usage in production so we can
> > > > move forward on release 2.6.x?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2023年4月7日周五 09:37写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > Agreed, that sounds like a good plan.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> palomino219@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I think we could follow the old pattern when we cut a new release
> > > > branch.
> > > > > > That is, after the new release branch is cut and the new minor
> release
> > > > is
> > > > > > out, we will do a final release of the oldest release line and
> then
> > > > mark it
> > > > > > as EOL.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So here, I think once we cut branch-2.6 and release 2.6.0, we
> can do a
> > > > > > final release for 2.4.x and mark 2.4.x as EOL.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年3月27日周一
> 09:57写道：
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Primary development on hbase-backup and TLS is complete. There
> are a
> > > > > > couple
> > > > > > > minor things I may want to add to TLS in the future, such as
> > > > pluggable
> > > > > > cert
> > > > > > > verification. But those are not needed for initial release IMO.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We are almost ready integrating hbase-backup in production.
> We’ve
> > > > fixed a
> > > > > > > few minor things (all committed) but otherwise it’s worked
> well so
> > > > far in
> > > > > > > tests.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We are a bit delayed in integrating TLS. I’m hopeful it will
> happen
> > > > in
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > next 2-3 months. It’s a big project for us, so not quick, but
> > > > definitely
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > the roadmap.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It seems like cloudera may be closer to integrating TLS in
> > > > production.
> > > > > > > Balazs recently filed and fixed HBASE-27673 related to mTLS.
> Maybe
> > > > he can
> > > > > > > chime in on his status, or let me know if I am totally off
> base :)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 9:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Before we open a new code line should we discuss EOL of 2.4?
> After
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > first 2.6 release? It’s not required of course but cuts down
> the
> > > > amount
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > labor to have two 2.x code lines (presumably, one as stable
> and
> > > > one as
> > > > > > > > next) rather than three. Perhaps even before that, should we
> move
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > stable pointer to the latest 2.5 release?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Mar 26, 2023, at 5:59 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Bump.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I believe the mTLS and backup related code have all been
> > > > finished on
> > > > > > > > > branch-2?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Are there any other things which block us making the
> branch-2.6
> > > > > > branch?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Mallikarjun <ma...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月17日周一
> 02:09写道：
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> On hbase-backup, we are using in production for more then
> 1
> > > > year. I
> > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > >> vouch for it to be stable enough to be in a release
> version so
> > > > that
> > > > > > > more
> > > > > > > > >> people can use it and polished it further.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022, 11:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > > > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> My understanding is some folks evaluating and polishing
> TLS for
> > > > > > their
> > > > > > > > >>> production are also considering hbase-backup in the same
> way,
> > > > which
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > >> why
> > > > > > > > >>> I linked them together. If that is incorrect then they
> both are
> > > > > > still
> > > > > > > > >> worth
> > > > > > > > >>> considering in my opinion but would have a more tenuous
> link.
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> Where we are with hbase-backup is it should probably be
> ported
> > > > to
> > > > > > > where
> > > > > > > > >>> more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in order
> for it
> > > > to
> > > > > > make
> > > > > > > > >> more
> > > > > > > > >>> progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On the
> other
> > > > hand
> > > > > > if
> > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > >> is
> > > > > > > > >>> too unpolished then the experience would be poor.
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>>> On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>> I believe the second one is still ongoing?
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五
> 05:37写道：
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line
> and
> > > > as a
> > > > > > > > >>>>> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new branch
> > > > > > branch-2.6
> > > > > > > > >> from
> > > > > > > > >>>>> branch-2.
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the
> key
> > > > > > features
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > >>> 2.6
> > > > > > > > >>>>> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point.
> Those key
> > > > > > > > features
> > > > > > > > >>> are:
> > > > > > > > >>>>> - mTLS RPC
> > > > > > > > >>>>> - hbase-backup backport
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>> --
> > > > > > > > >>>>> Best regards,
> > > > > > > > >>>>> Andrew
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > Andrew
> > > > >
> > > > > Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> > > > >     It's what we’ve earned
> > > > > Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> > > > > Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> > > > >    - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> > > >
>

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by "张铎(Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>.

PR is ready

https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/5305

PTAL.

Thanks.

张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> 于2023年6月22日周四 21:40写道：
>
> Ah, missed your last comment on HBASE-27782.
>
> Let me take a look.
>
> Netty has some rules about how the exceptions are passed through the
> pipeline(especially the order, forward or backward...) but honestly I
> always forget it just a day later after I finished the code...
>
> Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年6月17日周六 00:43写道：
> >
> > In terms of TLS:
> >
> > - All of our clients (many thousands) in production are using the
> > NettyRpcConnection with TLS enabled. However, these clients are currently
> > connecting to the RegionServer/HMaster through an haproxy process local to
> > each server which handles SSL termination. So not quite end-to-end yet.
> > - On the server side, most of our QA environment (a thousand regionservers
> > and ~200 hmasters) are running it. So these are accepting TLS from clients
> > and using TLS for intra-cluster communication.
> >
> > The migration is tricky for us due to the scale and the fact that we need
> > to migrate off haproxy at the same time. Hopefully we should have some of
> > production running end-to-end TLS within the next month or so.
> >
> > From what we've seen in QA so far, there have not been any major issues. We
> > also couldn't discern any performance issues in testing, though we were
> > comparing against our legacy haproxy setup and can't really compare against
> > kerberos.
> >
> > One outstanding issue is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27782,
> > which we still see periodically. It doesn't seem to cause actual issues,
> > since the RpcClient still handles it gracefully, but it does cause noise
> > and may have implications.
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 11:41 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > So any updates here?
> > >
> > > Do we have any good news about the TLS usage in production so we can
> > > move forward on release 2.6.x?
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2023年4月7日周五 09:37写道：
> > > >
> > > > Agreed, that sounds like a good plan.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I think we could follow the old pattern when we cut a new release
> > > branch.
> > > > > That is, after the new release branch is cut and the new minor release
> > > is
> > > > > out, we will do a final release of the oldest release line and then
> > > mark it
> > > > > as EOL.
> > > > >
> > > > > So here, I think once we cut branch-2.6 and release 2.6.0, we can do a
> > > > > final release for 2.4.x and mark 2.4.x as EOL.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > > Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年3月27日周一 09:57写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > > Primary development on hbase-backup and TLS is complete. There are a
> > > > > couple
> > > > > > minor things I may want to add to TLS in the future, such as
> > > pluggable
> > > > > cert
> > > > > > verification. But those are not needed for initial release IMO.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We are almost ready integrating hbase-backup in production. We’ve
> > > fixed a
> > > > > > few minor things (all committed) but otherwise it’s worked well so
> > > far in
> > > > > > tests.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We are a bit delayed in integrating TLS. I’m hopeful it will happen
> > > in
> > > > > the
> > > > > > next 2-3 months. It’s a big project for us, so not quick, but
> > > definitely
> > > > > on
> > > > > > the roadmap.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It seems like cloudera may be closer to integrating TLS in
> > > production.
> > > > > > Balazs recently filed and fixed HBASE-27673 related to mTLS. Maybe
> > > he can
> > > > > > chime in on his status, or let me know if I am totally off base :)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 9:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Before we open a new code line should we discuss EOL of 2.4? After
> > > the
> > > > > > > first 2.6 release? It’s not required of course but cuts down the
> > > amount
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > labor to have two 2.x code lines (presumably, one as stable and
> > > one as
> > > > > > > next) rather than three. Perhaps even before that, should we move
> > > the
> > > > > > > stable pointer to the latest 2.5 release?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mar 26, 2023, at 5:59 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Bump.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I believe the mTLS and backup related code have all been
> > > finished on
> > > > > > > > branch-2?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Are there any other things which block us making the branch-2.6
> > > > > branch?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Mallikarjun <ma...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月17日周一 02:09写道：
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> On hbase-backup, we are using in production for more then 1
> > > year. I
> > > > > > can
> > > > > > > >> vouch for it to be stable enough to be in a release version so
> > > that
> > > > > > more
> > > > > > > >> people can use it and polished it further.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022, 11:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> My understanding is some folks evaluating and polishing TLS for
> > > > > their
> > > > > > > >>> production are also considering hbase-backup in the same way,
> > > which
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > >> why
> > > > > > > >>> I linked them together. If that is incorrect then they both are
> > > > > still
> > > > > > > >> worth
> > > > > > > >>> considering in my opinion but would have a more tenuous link.
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> Where we are with hbase-backup is it should probably be ported
> > > to
> > > > > > where
> > > > > > > >>> more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in order for it
> > > to
> > > > > make
> > > > > > > >> more
> > > > > > > >>> progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On the other
> > > hand
> > > > > if
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > > >> is
> > > > > > > >>> too unpolished then the experience would be poor.
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>>> On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>> I believe the second one is still ongoing?
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五 05:37写道：
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line and
> > > as a
> > > > > > > >>>>> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new branch
> > > > > branch-2.6
> > > > > > > >> from
> > > > > > > >>>>> branch-2.
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the key
> > > > > features
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > >>> 2.6
> > > > > > > >>>>> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point. Those key
> > > > > > > features
> > > > > > > >>> are:
> > > > > > > >>>>> - mTLS RPC
> > > > > > > >>>>> - hbase-backup backport
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> --
> > > > > > > >>>>> Best regards,
> > > > > > > >>>>> Andrew
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Andrew
> > > >
> > > > Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> > > >     It's what we’ve earned
> > > > Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> > > > Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> > > >    - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> > >

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by "张铎(Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>.

Ah, missed your last comment on HBASE-27782.

Let me take a look.

Netty has some rules about how the exceptions are passed through the
pipeline(especially the order, forward or backward...) but honestly I
always forget it just a day later after I finished the code...

Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年6月17日周六 00:43写道：
>
> In terms of TLS:
>
> - All of our clients (many thousands) in production are using the
> NettyRpcConnection with TLS enabled. However, these clients are currently
> connecting to the RegionServer/HMaster through an haproxy process local to
> each server which handles SSL termination. So not quite end-to-end yet.
> - On the server side, most of our QA environment (a thousand regionservers
> and ~200 hmasters) are running it. So these are accepting TLS from clients
> and using TLS for intra-cluster communication.
>
> The migration is tricky for us due to the scale and the fact that we need
> to migrate off haproxy at the same time. Hopefully we should have some of
> production running end-to-end TLS within the next month or so.
>
> From what we've seen in QA so far, there have not been any major issues. We
> also couldn't discern any performance issues in testing, though we were
> comparing against our legacy haproxy setup and can't really compare against
> kerberos.
>
> One outstanding issue is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27782,
> which we still see periodically. It doesn't seem to cause actual issues,
> since the RpcClient still handles it gracefully, but it does cause noise
> and may have implications.
>
> On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 11:41 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > So any updates here?
> >
> > Do we have any good news about the TLS usage in production so we can
> > move forward on release 2.6.x?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2023年4月7日周五 09:37写道：
> > >
> > > Agreed, that sounds like a good plan.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think we could follow the old pattern when we cut a new release
> > branch.
> > > > That is, after the new release branch is cut and the new minor release
> > is
> > > > out, we will do a final release of the oldest release line and then
> > mark it
> > > > as EOL.
> > > >
> > > > So here, I think once we cut branch-2.6 and release 2.6.0, we can do a
> > > > final release for 2.4.x and mark 2.4.x as EOL.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年3月27日周一 09:57写道：
> > > >
> > > > > Primary development on hbase-backup and TLS is complete. There are a
> > > > couple
> > > > > minor things I may want to add to TLS in the future, such as
> > pluggable
> > > > cert
> > > > > verification. But those are not needed for initial release IMO.
> > > > >
> > > > > We are almost ready integrating hbase-backup in production. We’ve
> > fixed a
> > > > > few minor things (all committed) but otherwise it’s worked well so
> > far in
> > > > > tests.
> > > > >
> > > > > We are a bit delayed in integrating TLS. I’m hopeful it will happen
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > > next 2-3 months. It’s a big project for us, so not quick, but
> > definitely
> > > > on
> > > > > the roadmap.
> > > > >
> > > > > It seems like cloudera may be closer to integrating TLS in
> > production.
> > > > > Balazs recently filed and fixed HBASE-27673 related to mTLS. Maybe
> > he can
> > > > > chime in on his status, or let me know if I am totally off base :)
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 9:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Before we open a new code line should we discuss EOL of 2.4? After
> > the
> > > > > > first 2.6 release? It’s not required of course but cuts down the
> > amount
> > > > > of
> > > > > > labor to have two 2.x code lines (presumably, one as stable and
> > one as
> > > > > > next) rather than three. Perhaps even before that, should we move
> > the
> > > > > > stable pointer to the latest 2.5 release?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mar 26, 2023, at 5:59 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Bump.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I believe the mTLS and backup related code have all been
> > finished on
> > > > > > > branch-2?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Are there any other things which block us making the branch-2.6
> > > > branch?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Mallikarjun <ma...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月17日周一 02:09写道：
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> On hbase-backup, we are using in production for more then 1
> > year. I
> > > > > can
> > > > > > >> vouch for it to be stable enough to be in a release version so
> > that
> > > > > more
> > > > > > >> people can use it and polished it further.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022, 11:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> My understanding is some folks evaluating and polishing TLS for
> > > > their
> > > > > > >>> production are also considering hbase-backup in the same way,
> > which
> > > > > is
> > > > > > >> why
> > > > > > >>> I linked them together. If that is incorrect then they both are
> > > > still
> > > > > > >> worth
> > > > > > >>> considering in my opinion but would have a more tenuous link.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Where we are with hbase-backup is it should probably be ported
> > to
> > > > > where
> > > > > > >>> more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in order for it
> > to
> > > > make
> > > > > > >> more
> > > > > > >>> progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On the other
> > hand
> > > > if
> > > > > it
> > > > > > >> is
> > > > > > >>> too unpolished then the experience would be poor.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>> On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> I believe the second one is still ongoing?
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五 05:37写道：
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line and
> > as a
> > > > > > >>>>> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new branch
> > > > branch-2.6
> > > > > > >> from
> > > > > > >>>>> branch-2.
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the key
> > > > features
> > > > > of
> > > > > > >>> 2.6
> > > > > > >>>>> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point. Those key
> > > > > > features
> > > > > > >>> are:
> > > > > > >>>>> - mTLS RPC
> > > > > > >>>>> - hbase-backup backport
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> --
> > > > > > >>>>> Best regards,
> > > > > > >>>>> Andrew
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best regards,
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > > Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> > >     It's what we’ve earned
> > > Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> > > Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> > >    - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
> >

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org>.

In terms of TLS:

- All of our clients (many thousands) in production are using the
NettyRpcConnection with TLS enabled. However, these clients are currently
connecting to the RegionServer/HMaster through an haproxy process local to
each server which handles SSL termination. So not quite end-to-end yet.
- On the server side, most of our QA environment (a thousand regionservers
and ~200 hmasters) are running it. So these are accepting TLS from clients
and using TLS for intra-cluster communication.

The migration is tricky for us due to the scale and the fact that we need
to migrate off haproxy at the same time. Hopefully we should have some of
production running end-to-end TLS within the next month or so.

From what we've seen in QA so far, there have not been any major issues. We
also couldn't discern any performance issues in testing, though we were
comparing against our legacy haproxy setup and can't really compare against
kerberos.

One outstanding issue is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-27782,
which we still see periodically. It doesn't seem to cause actual issues,
since the RpcClient still handles it gracefully, but it does cause noise
and may have implications.

On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 11:41 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> So any updates here?
>
> Do we have any good news about the TLS usage in production so we can
> move forward on release 2.6.x?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2023年4月7日周五 09:37写道：
> >
> > Agreed, that sounds like a good plan.
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I think we could follow the old pattern when we cut a new release
> branch.
> > > That is, after the new release branch is cut and the new minor release
> is
> > > out, we will do a final release of the oldest release line and then
> mark it
> > > as EOL.
> > >
> > > So here, I think once we cut branch-2.6 and release 2.6.0, we can do a
> > > final release for 2.4.x and mark 2.4.x as EOL.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年3月27日周一 09:57写道：
> > >
> > > > Primary development on hbase-backup and TLS is complete. There are a
> > > couple
> > > > minor things I may want to add to TLS in the future, such as
> pluggable
> > > cert
> > > > verification. But those are not needed for initial release IMO.
> > > >
> > > > We are almost ready integrating hbase-backup in production. We’ve
> fixed a
> > > > few minor things (all committed) but otherwise it’s worked well so
> far in
> > > > tests.
> > > >
> > > > We are a bit delayed in integrating TLS. I’m hopeful it will happen
> in
> > > the
> > > > next 2-3 months. It’s a big project for us, so not quick, but
> definitely
> > > on
> > > > the roadmap.
> > > >
> > > > It seems like cloudera may be closer to integrating TLS in
> production.
> > > > Balazs recently filed and fixed HBASE-27673 related to mTLS. Maybe
> he can
> > > > chime in on his status, or let me know if I am totally off base :)
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 9:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Before we open a new code line should we discuss EOL of 2.4? After
> the
> > > > > first 2.6 release? It’s not required of course but cuts down the
> amount
> > > > of
> > > > > labor to have two 2.x code lines (presumably, one as stable and
> one as
> > > > > next) rather than three. Perhaps even before that, should we move
> the
> > > > > stable pointer to the latest 2.5 release?
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mar 26, 2023, at 5:59 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Bump.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I believe the mTLS and backup related code have all been
> finished on
> > > > > > branch-2?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Are there any other things which block us making the branch-2.6
> > > branch?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Mallikarjun <ma...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月17日周一 02:09写道：
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> On hbase-backup, we are using in production for more then 1
> year. I
> > > > can
> > > > > >> vouch for it to be stable enough to be in a release version so
> that
> > > > more
> > > > > >> people can use it and polished it further.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022, 11:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> My understanding is some folks evaluating and polishing TLS for
> > > their
> > > > > >>> production are also considering hbase-backup in the same way,
> which
> > > > is
> > > > > >> why
> > > > > >>> I linked them together. If that is incorrect then they both are
> > > still
> > > > > >> worth
> > > > > >>> considering in my opinion but would have a more tenuous link.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Where we are with hbase-backup is it should probably be ported
> to
> > > > where
> > > > > >>> more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in order for it
> to
> > > make
> > > > > >> more
> > > > > >>> progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On the other
> hand
> > > if
> > > > it
> > > > > >> is
> > > > > >>> too unpolished then the experience would be poor.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>> On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> I believe the second one is still ongoing?
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五 05:37写道：
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line and
> as a
> > > > > >>>>> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new branch
> > > branch-2.6
> > > > > >> from
> > > > > >>>>> branch-2.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the key
> > > features
> > > > of
> > > > > >>> 2.6
> > > > > >>>>> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point. Those key
> > > > > features
> > > > > >>> are:
> > > > > >>>>> - mTLS RPC
> > > > > >>>>> - hbase-backup backport
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> --
> > > > > >>>>> Best regards,
> > > > > >>>>> Andrew
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Andrew
> >
> > Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
> >     It's what we’ve earned
> > Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> > Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
> >    - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
>

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by "张铎(Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>.

So any updates here?

Do we have any good news about the TLS usage in production so we can
move forward on release 2.6.x?

Thanks.

Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2023年4月7日周五 09:37写道：
>
> Agreed, that sounds like a good plan.
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I think we could follow the old pattern when we cut a new release branch.
> > That is, after the new release branch is cut and the new minor release is
> > out, we will do a final release of the oldest release line and then mark it
> > as EOL.
> >
> > So here, I think once we cut branch-2.6 and release 2.6.0, we can do a
> > final release for 2.4.x and mark 2.4.x as EOL.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年3月27日周一 09:57写道：
> >
> > > Primary development on hbase-backup and TLS is complete. There are a
> > couple
> > > minor things I may want to add to TLS in the future, such as pluggable
> > cert
> > > verification. But those are not needed for initial release IMO.
> > >
> > > We are almost ready integrating hbase-backup in production. We’ve fixed a
> > > few minor things (all committed) but otherwise it’s worked well so far in
> > > tests.
> > >
> > > We are a bit delayed in integrating TLS. I’m hopeful it will happen in
> > the
> > > next 2-3 months. It’s a big project for us, so not quick, but definitely
> > on
> > > the roadmap.
> > >
> > > It seems like cloudera may be closer to integrating TLS in production.
> > > Balazs recently filed and fixed HBASE-27673 related to mTLS. Maybe he can
> > > chime in on his status, or let me know if I am totally off base :)
> > >
> > > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 9:25 PM Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Before we open a new code line should we discuss EOL of 2.4? After the
> > > > first 2.6 release? It’s not required of course but cuts down the amount
> > > of
> > > > labor to have two 2.x code lines (presumably, one as stable and one as
> > > > next) rather than three. Perhaps even before that, should we move the
> > > > stable pointer to the latest 2.5 release?
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mar 26, 2023, at 5:59 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Bump.
> > > > >
> > > > > I believe the mTLS and backup related code have all been finished on
> > > > > branch-2?
> > > > >
> > > > > Are there any other things which block us making the branch-2.6
> > branch?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mallikarjun <ma...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月17日周一 02:09写道：
> > > > >
> > > > >> On hbase-backup, we are using in production for more then 1 year. I
> > > can
> > > > >> vouch for it to be stable enough to be in a release version so that
> > > more
> > > > >> people can use it and polished it further.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022, 11:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> My understanding is some folks evaluating and polishing TLS for
> > their
> > > > >>> production are also considering hbase-backup in the same way, which
> > > is
> > > > >> why
> > > > >>> I linked them together. If that is incorrect then they both are
> > still
> > > > >> worth
> > > > >>> considering in my opinion but would have a more tenuous link.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Where we are with hbase-backup is it should probably be ported to
> > > where
> > > > >>> more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in order for it to
> > make
> > > > >> more
> > > > >>> progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On the other hand
> > if
> > > it
> > > > >> is
> > > > >>> too unpolished then the experience would be poor.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> I believe the second one is still ongoing?
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五 05:37写道：
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line and as a
> > > > >>>>> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new branch
> > branch-2.6
> > > > >> from
> > > > >>>>> branch-2.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the key
> > features
> > > of
> > > > >>> 2.6
> > > > >>>>> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point. Those key
> > > > features
> > > > >>> are:
> > > > >>>>> - mTLS RPC
> > > > >>>>> - hbase-backup backport
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> --
> > > > >>>>> Best regards,
> > > > >>>>> Andrew
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
>     It's what we’ve earned
> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
>    - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.

Agreed, that sounds like a good plan.

On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 7:31 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think we could follow the old pattern when we cut a new release branch.
> That is, after the new release branch is cut and the new minor release is
> out, we will do a final release of the oldest release line and then mark it
> as EOL.
>
> So here, I think once we cut branch-2.6 and release 2.6.0, we can do a
> final release for 2.4.x and mark 2.4.x as EOL.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年3月27日周一 09:57写道：
>
> > Primary development on hbase-backup and TLS is complete. There are a
> couple
> > minor things I may want to add to TLS in the future, such as pluggable
> cert
> > verification. But those are not needed for initial release IMO.
> >
> > We are almost ready integrating hbase-backup in production. We’ve fixed a
> > few minor things (all committed) but otherwise it’s worked well so far in
> > tests.
> >
> > We are a bit delayed in integrating TLS. I’m hopeful it will happen in
> the
> > next 2-3 months. It’s a big project for us, so not quick, but definitely
> on
> > the roadmap.
> >
> > It seems like cloudera may be closer to integrating TLS in production.
> > Balazs recently filed and fixed HBASE-27673 related to mTLS. Maybe he can
> > chime in on his status, or let me know if I am totally off base :)
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 9:25 PM Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Before we open a new code line should we discuss EOL of 2.4? After the
> > > first 2.6 release? It’s not required of course but cuts down the amount
> > of
> > > labor to have two 2.x code lines (presumably, one as stable and one as
> > > next) rather than three. Perhaps even before that, should we move the
> > > stable pointer to the latest 2.5 release?
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mar 26, 2023, at 5:59 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Bump.
> > > >
> > > > I believe the mTLS and backup related code have all been finished on
> > > > branch-2?
> > > >
> > > > Are there any other things which block us making the branch-2.6
> branch?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Mallikarjun <ma...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月17日周一 02:09写道：
> > > >
> > > >> On hbase-backup, we are using in production for more then 1 year. I
> > can
> > > >> vouch for it to be stable enough to be in a release version so that
> > more
> > > >> people can use it and polished it further.
> > > >>
> > > >>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022, 11:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> My understanding is some folks evaluating and polishing TLS for
> their
> > > >>> production are also considering hbase-backup in the same way, which
> > is
> > > >> why
> > > >>> I linked them together. If that is incorrect then they both are
> still
> > > >> worth
> > > >>> considering in my opinion but would have a more tenuous link.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Where we are with hbase-backup is it should probably be ported to
> > where
> > > >>> more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in order for it to
> make
> > > >> more
> > > >>> progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On the other hand
> if
> > it
> > > >> is
> > > >>> too unpolished then the experience would be poor.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I believe the second one is still ongoing?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五 05:37写道：
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line and as a
> > > >>>>> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new branch
> branch-2.6
> > > >> from
> > > >>>>> branch-2.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the key
> features
> > of
> > > >>> 2.6
> > > >>>>> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point. Those key
> > > features
> > > >>> are:
> > > >>>>> - mTLS RPC
> > > >>>>> - hbase-backup backport
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> --
> > > >>>>> Best regards,
> > > >>>>> Andrew
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>


-- 
Best regards,
Andrew

Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles -
    It's what we’ve earned
Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long?
Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on
   - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by "张铎(Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>.

I think we could follow the old pattern when we cut a new release branch.
That is, after the new release branch is cut and the new minor release is
out, we will do a final release of the oldest release line and then mark it
as EOL.

So here, I think once we cut branch-2.6 and release 2.6.0, we can do a
final release for 2.4.x and mark 2.4.x as EOL.

Thanks.

Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org> 于2023年3月27日周一 09:57写道：

> Primary development on hbase-backup and TLS is complete. There are a couple
> minor things I may want to add to TLS in the future, such as pluggable cert
> verification. But those are not needed for initial release IMO.
>
> We are almost ready integrating hbase-backup in production. We’ve fixed a
> few minor things (all committed) but otherwise it’s worked well so far in
> tests.
>
> We are a bit delayed in integrating TLS. I’m hopeful it will happen in the
> next 2-3 months. It’s a big project for us, so not quick, but definitely on
> the roadmap.
>
> It seems like cloudera may be closer to integrating TLS in production.
> Balazs recently filed and fixed HBASE-27673 related to mTLS. Maybe he can
> chime in on his status, or let me know if I am totally off base :)
>
> On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 9:25 PM Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Before we open a new code line should we discuss EOL of 2.4? After the
> > first 2.6 release? It’s not required of course but cuts down the amount
> of
> > labor to have two 2.x code lines (presumably, one as stable and one as
> > next) rather than three. Perhaps even before that, should we move the
> > stable pointer to the latest 2.5 release?
> >
> > >
> > > On Mar 26, 2023, at 5:59 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Bump.
> > >
> > > I believe the mTLS and backup related code have all been finished on
> > > branch-2?
> > >
> > > Are there any other things which block us making the branch-2.6 branch?
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > Mallikarjun <ma...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月17日周一 02:09写道：
> > >
> > >> On hbase-backup, we are using in production for more then 1 year. I
> can
> > >> vouch for it to be stable enough to be in a release version so that
> more
> > >> people can use it and polished it further.
> > >>
> > >>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022, 11:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> My understanding is some folks evaluating and polishing TLS for their
> > >>> production are also considering hbase-backup in the same way, which
> is
> > >> why
> > >>> I linked them together. If that is incorrect then they both are still
> > >> worth
> > >>> considering in my opinion but would have a more tenuous link.
> > >>>
> > >>> Where we are with hbase-backup is it should probably be ported to
> where
> > >>> more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in order for it to make
> > >> more
> > >>> progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On the other hand if
> it
> > >> is
> > >>> too unpolished then the experience would be poor.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I believe the second one is still ongoing?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五 05:37写道：
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line and as a
> > >>>>> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new branch branch-2.6
> > >> from
> > >>>>> branch-2.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the key features
> of
> > >>> 2.6
> > >>>>> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point. Those key
> > features
> > >>> are:
> > >>>>> - mTLS RPC
> > >>>>> - hbase-backup backport
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> --
> > >>>>> Best regards,
> > >>>>> Andrew
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
>

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by Bryan Beaudreault <bb...@apache.org>.

Primary development on hbase-backup and TLS is complete. There are a couple
minor things I may want to add to TLS in the future, such as pluggable cert
verification. But those are not needed for initial release IMO.

We are almost ready integrating hbase-backup in production. We’ve fixed a
few minor things (all committed) but otherwise it’s worked well so far in
tests.

We are a bit delayed in integrating TLS. I’m hopeful it will happen in the
next 2-3 months. It’s a big project for us, so not quick, but definitely on
the roadmap.

It seems like cloudera may be closer to integrating TLS in production.
Balazs recently filed and fixed HBASE-27673 related to mTLS. Maybe he can
chime in on his status, or let me know if I am totally off base :)

On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 9:25 PM Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Before we open a new code line should we discuss EOL of 2.4? After the
> first 2.6 release? It’s not required of course but cuts down the amount of
> labor to have two 2.x code lines (presumably, one as stable and one as
> next) rather than three. Perhaps even before that, should we move the
> stable pointer to the latest 2.5 release?
>
> >
> > On Mar 26, 2023, at 5:59 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Bump.
> >
> > I believe the mTLS and backup related code have all been finished on
> > branch-2?
> >
> > Are there any other things which block us making the branch-2.6 branch?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Mallikarjun <ma...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月17日周一 02:09写道：
> >
> >> On hbase-backup, we are using in production for more then 1 year. I can
> >> vouch for it to be stable enough to be in a release version so that more
> >> people can use it and polished it further.
> >>
> >>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022, 11:25 PM Andrew Purtell <
> andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> My understanding is some folks evaluating and polishing TLS for their
> >>> production are also considering hbase-backup in the same way, which is
> >> why
> >>> I linked them together. If that is incorrect then they both are still
> >> worth
> >>> considering in my opinion but would have a more tenuous link.
> >>>
> >>> Where we are with hbase-backup is it should probably be ported to where
> >>> more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in order for it to make
> >> more
> >>> progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On the other hand if it
> >> is
> >>> too unpolished then the experience would be poor.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I believe the second one is still ongoing?
> >>>>
> >>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五 05:37写道：
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line and as a
> >>>>> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new branch branch-2.6
> >> from
> >>>>> branch-2.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the key features of
> >>> 2.6
> >>>>> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point. Those key
> features
> >>> are:
> >>>>> - mTLS RPC
> >>>>> - hbase-backup backport
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>> Andrew
> >>>
> >>
>

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>.

Before we open a new code line should we discuss EOL of 2.4? After the first 2.6 release? It’s not required of course but cuts down the amount of labor to have two 2.x code lines (presumably, one as stable and one as next) rather than three. Perhaps even before that, should we move the stable pointer to the latest 2.5 release? 

> 
> On Mar 26, 2023, at 5:59 PM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Bump.
> 
> I believe the mTLS and backup related code have all been finished on
> branch-2?
> 
> Are there any other things which block us making the branch-2.6 branch?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Mallikarjun <ma...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月17日周一 02:09写道：
> 
>> On hbase-backup, we are using in production for more then 1 year. I can
>> vouch for it to be stable enough to be in a release version so that more
>> people can use it and polished it further.
>> 
>>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022, 11:25 PM Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> My understanding is some folks evaluating and polishing TLS for their
>>> production are also considering hbase-backup in the same way, which is
>> why
>>> I linked them together. If that is incorrect then they both are still
>> worth
>>> considering in my opinion but would have a more tenuous link.
>>> 
>>> Where we are with hbase-backup is it should probably be ported to where
>>> more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in order for it to make
>> more
>>> progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On the other hand if it
>> is
>>> too unpolished then the experience would be poor.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I believe the second one is still ongoing?
>>>> 
>>>> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五 05:37写道：
>>>>> 
>>>>> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line and as a
>>>>> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new branch branch-2.6
>> from
>>>>> branch-2.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the key features of
>>> 2.6
>>>>> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point. Those key features
>>> are:
>>>>> - mTLS RPC
>>>>> - hbase-backup backport
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Andrew
>>> 
>>

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by "张铎(Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>.

Bump.

I believe the mTLS and backup related code have all been finished on
branch-2?

Are there any other things which block us making the branch-2.6 branch?

Thanks.

Mallikarjun <ma...@gmail.com> 于2022年10月17日周一 02:09写道：

> On hbase-backup, we are using in production for more then 1 year. I can
> vouch for it to be stable enough to be in a release version so that more
> people can use it and polished it further.
>
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2022, 11:25 PM Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > My understanding is some folks evaluating and polishing TLS for their
> > production are also considering hbase-backup in the same way, which is
> why
> > I linked them together. If that is incorrect then they both are still
> worth
> > considering in my opinion but would have a more tenuous link.
> >
> > Where we are with hbase-backup is it should probably be ported to where
> > more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in order for it to make
> more
> > progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On the other hand if it
> is
> > too unpolished then the experience would be poor.
> >
> >
> > > On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I believe the second one is still ongoing?
> > >
> > > Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五 05:37写道：
> > >>
> > >> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line and as a
> > >> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new branch branch-2.6
> from
> > >> branch-2.
> > >>
> > >> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the key features of
> > 2.6
> > >> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point. Those key features
> > are:
> > >> - mTLS RPC
> > >> - hbase-backup backport
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Best regards,
> > >> Andrew
> >
>

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by Mallikarjun <ma...@gmail.com>.

On hbase-backup, we are using in production for more then 1 year. I can
vouch for it to be stable enough to be in a release version so that more
people can use it and polished it further.

On Sun, Oct 16, 2022, 11:25 PM Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> My understanding is some folks evaluating and polishing TLS for their
> production are also considering hbase-backup in the same way, which is why
> I linked them together. If that is incorrect then they both are still worth
> considering in my opinion but would have a more tenuous link.
>
> Where we are with hbase-backup is it should probably be ported to where
> more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in order for it to make more
> progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On the other hand if it is
> too unpolished then the experience would be poor.
>
>
> > On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I believe the second one is still ongoing?
> >
> > Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五 05:37写道：
> >>
> >> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line and as a
> >> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new branch branch-2.6 from
> >> branch-2.
> >>
> >> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the key features of
> 2.6
> >> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point. Those key features
> are:
> >> - mTLS RPC
> >> - hbase-backup backport
> >>
> >> --
> >> Best regards,
> >> Andrew
>

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>.

My understanding is some folks evaluating and polishing TLS for their production are also considering hbase-backup in the same way, which is why I linked them together. If that is incorrect then they both are still worth considering in my opinion but would have a more tenuous link. 

Where we are with hbase-backup is it should probably be ported to where more people would be inclined to evaluate it, in order for it to make more progress. A new minor releasing line would fit. On the other hand if it is too unpolished then the experience would be poor. 

> On Oct 16, 2022, at 5:35 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I believe the second one is still ongoing?
> 
> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五 05:37写道：
>> 
>> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line and as a
>> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new branch branch-2.6 from
>> branch-2.
>> 
>> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the key features of 2.6
>> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point. Those key features are:
>> - mTLS RPC
>> - hbase-backup backport
>> 
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Andrew

Re: Branching for 2.6 code line (branch-2.6)

Posted by "张铎(Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>.

I believe the second one is still ongoing?

Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2022年10月14日周五 05:37写道：
>
> We will begin releasing activity for the 2.6 code line and as a
> prerequisite to that we shall need to make a new branch branch-2.6 from
> branch-2.
>
> Before we do that let's make sure all commits for the key features of 2.6
> are settled in branch-2 before the branching point. Those key features are:
> - mTLS RPC
> - hbase-backup backport
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew