You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to notifications@accumulo.apache.org by "dlmarion (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org> on 2023/11/30 19:16:58 UTC
[PR] Partially revert 1414641 to resurrect 2.1 upgrade code [accumulo]
dlmarion opened a new pull request, #3999:
URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/3999
(no comment)
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@accumulo.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Partially revert 1414641 to resurrect 2.1 upgrade code [accumulo]
Posted by "ctubbsii (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
ctubbsii commented on PR #3999:
URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/3999#issuecomment-1834545781
I was in the middle of reviewing this when it got merged. It mostly looks okay, but there are still some differences in the changed files after things got merged that I'm trying to ensure are okay.
```
git diff main elasticity -- $(git log --name-status fc2a2e7dd32ac52da3e861c2f05b126b3b07d7b0 -n1 --oneline | tail -n+2 | cut -c2-)
```
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@accumulo.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Partially revert 1414641 to resurrect 2.1 upgrade code [accumulo]
Posted by "ctubbsii (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
ctubbsii commented on PR #3999:
URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/3999#issuecomment-1834649992
See #4003 for the fixes. The other remaining difference is the use of Ample instead of KeyExtent.isMeta in the UpgradeCoordinator code. However, that change wasn't as the result of incomplete conflict resolution, like what #4003 fixes. Rather, that difference is due some changes as part of #3904 that was only applied to the elasticity branch. Those particular changes may be able to be backported to main, as they may not be elasticity-specific. But, it's probably not critical to do so.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@accumulo.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Partially revert 1414641 to resurrect 2.1 upgrade code [accumulo]
Posted by "dlmarion (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
dlmarion commented on PR #3999:
URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/3999#issuecomment-1834554935
I think that the differences are due to the upgrader being disabled in elasticity right now. Getting the upgrade working for 4.0 is a TODO.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@accumulo.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Partially revert 1414641 to resurrect 2.1 upgrade code [accumulo]
Posted by "dlmarion (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
dlmarion merged PR #3999:
URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/3999
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@accumulo.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Partially revert 1414641 to resurrect 2.1 upgrade code [accumulo]
Posted by "ctubbsii (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
ctubbsii commented on PR #3999:
URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/3999#issuecomment-1834597673
Yeah, that's definitely the main diff, and that's fine. But, I think there's some stuff that should be sync'd with main but aren't. I'll do a follow-on PR for those things I think should be fixed. They're pretty trivial.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@accumulo.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org