You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@hbase.apache.org by ramkrishna vasudevan <ra...@gmail.com> on 2014/04/01 06:49:37 UTC
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
+1 on the RC.
Checked the signature.
Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything looks
fine.
Compaction, flushes etc too.
Regards
Ram
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1
>
> Checked the hash
> Checked the tar layout.
> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> >
> > Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip of the
> > branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big linked
> list
> > test worked).
> >
> > TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> >
> > I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is too
> > occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal rig
> > running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been passing green
> > running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> >
> > St.Ack
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for download
> at
> > > http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven artifacts are
> > also
> > > available in the temporary repository
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > >
> > > Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > >
> > > The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > >
> > >
> > > Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific Time
> > (00:00
> > > PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as 0.98.1.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > - Andy
> > >
> > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
> Hein
> > > (via Tom White)
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Fabien LE GALLO <fl...@ubikod.com>.
Oh ok I just saw the announcement of 0.96.2 a few posts back. I just
couldn't find it on apache mirrors.
Sorry about that.
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Fabien LE GALLO <fl...@ubikod.com>wrote:
> What about 0.96.2 ? According to JIRA, it was supposed to be released
> yesterday.
> I want to apply HBASE-10850 patch to a stable release but it cannot be
> applied to 0.96.1.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>wrote:
>
>> (cc dev@)
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Thank you, the release of 0.98.1 will happen on time unless there is a
>> new
>> > development.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:23 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
>> > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> +1 on getting this RC3 out as the release and targetting the bug for
>> >> 0.98.2.
>> >>
>> >> Regards
>> >> Ram
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > >Phoenix 4.0 has no release it can currently run on
>> >> > >Can't we get these additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away
>> >> >
>> >> > I was thinking that for Phoenix 4.0 *release* the 98.1 is needed..
>> >> Thats
>> >> > why was in favor of correcting the bug in 98.1 itself.. Ya 98.2 can
>> >> come
>> >> > out in a month time and at that time 4.0 can upgrade to that..
>> Sounds
>> >> > good.. I am ready to again cast my +1 for this RC.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > >@Anoop - would you mind verifying whether or not
>> >> > the TestSCVFWithMiniCluster written as a Phoenix query returns the
>> >> correct
>> >> > results?
>> >> >
>> >> > I will check this James.. I think it might be there. Any way, even
>> if
>> >> the
>> >> > bug is there, there can be a work around solution in Phoenix filter
>> code
>> >> > which I can try out (If you would like to get)
>> >> >
>> >> > -Anoop-
>> >> >
>> >> > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > That is a feasible option.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > I have changed Fix Version of HBASE-10850 to 0.98.2
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Cheers
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM, lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > To be fair, Phoenix should not have relied on an unreleased
>> >> dependency.
>> >> > > (I
>> >> > > > know there are corporate timing issues, but they really should
>> not
>> >> > force
>> >> > > us
>> >> > > > into situations like these).
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > As far as I understand the issue, it not just a performance but
>> can
>> >> > lead
>> >> > > > to incorrect results.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Then again, this issue has existed in all of 0.96 and 0.98 so far
>> >> > (over 5
>> >> > > > months).
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > So, I'd be in favor of releasing 0.98.1 now, and doing 0.98.2
>> soon,
>> >> in
>> >> > 14
>> >> > > > or 20 days (that would also pull back some of the time lost in
>> the
>> >> > > 0.98.1RC
>> >> > > > cycle).
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > -- Lars
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > ________________________________
>> >> > > > From: James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>
>> >> > > > To: "user@hbase.apache.org" <us...@hbase.apache.org>
>> >> > > > Cc: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
>> >> > > > Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:57 AM
>> >> > > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3)
>> is
>> >> > > > available for download
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no
>> >> release
>> >> > it
>> >> > > > can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use
>> SingleColumnValueFilter,
>> >> so
>> >> > it
>> >> > > > seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get
>> these
>> >> > > > additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > James
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
>> >> > > > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > > Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > Regards
>> >> > > > > Ram
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > > Understood, Andy.
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > Cheers
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
>> >> > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com
>> >> > > > > > >wrote:
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am
>> the
>> >> > only
>> >> > > +1
>> >> > > > > > vote
>> >> > > > > > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So
>> >> please
>> >> > > take
>> >> > > > > the
>> >> > > > > > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98
>> branch
>> >> or
>> >> > > file
>> >> > > > > > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it
>> for
>> >> > > 0.98.1.
>> >> > > > > > > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com
>> >
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
>> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > > Cheers
>> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <
>> >> anoop.hbase@gmail.com
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix
>> >> this in
>> >> > > > 98.1
>> >> > > > > > > release
>> >> > > > > > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix
>> >> uses
>> >> > > > > essential
>> >> > > > > > > CF
>> >> > > > > > > >> optimization.
>> >> > > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
>> >> > > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
>> >> > > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > > >> -Anoop-
>> >> > > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
>> >> > > > > > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > > >>> +1 on the RC.
>> >> > > > > > > >>> Checked the signature.
>> >> > > > > > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
>> >> > > > > > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels.
>> >> > > Everything
>> >> > > > > > looks
>> >> > > > > > > >>> fine.
>> >> > > > > > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
>> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>> Regards
>> >> > > > > > > >>> Ram
>> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <
>> >> > > > eclark@apache.org>
>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>> +1
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>> Checked the hash
>> >> > > > > > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
>> >> > > > > > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good
>> after
>> >> > ITBLL
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <
>> >> stack@duboce.net>
>> >> > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> +1
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI
>> seems
>> >> > > fine.
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase
>> >> > against a
>> >> > > > tip
>> >> > > > > > of
>> >> > > > > > > >>> the
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work
>> >> (small
>> >> > > big
>> >> > > > > > linked
>> >> > > > > > > >>>> list
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> test worked).
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in
>> >> case
>> >> > he
>> >> > > is
>> >> > > > > too
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten
>> our
>> >> > > > internal
>> >> > > > > > rig
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has
>> >> been
>> >> > > > > passing
>> >> > > > > > > >>> green
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> St.Ack
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
>> >> > > > > > > apurtell@apache.org
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> wrote:
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is
>> >> available
>> >> > > for
>> >> > > > > > > >>> download
>> >> > > > > > > >>>> at
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and
>> >> Maven
>> >> > > > > artifacts
>> >> > > > > > > >>> are
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> also
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
>> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found
>> here:
>> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by
>> midnight
>> >> > > > Pacific
>> >> > > > > > Time
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> (00:00
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release
>> >> this
>> >> > as
>> >> > > > > > 0.98.1.
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> --
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Best regards,
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> - Andy
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by
>> hitting
>> >> > > back. -
>> >> > > > > > Piet
>> >> > > > > > > >>>> Hein
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
>> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Best regards,
>> >
>> > - Andy
>> >
>> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
>> > (via Tom White)
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>>
>> - Andy
>>
>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
>> (via Tom White)
>>
>
--
Fabien Le Gallo
* Software Engineer * * , * * Capptain *
------------------------------
* e. * flegallo@capptain.com
* w. * http://www.capptain.com
* a. * 18 rue Tronchet, 75008 Paris, France
<https://www.facebook.com/capptain?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
<https://twitter.com/capptain_hq?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
<http://www.capptain.com/feed/?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDowgVp4zmA?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
4 Tips to Market Your App
<http://www.capptain.com/2014/03/26/4-tips-for-marketing-your-app/?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
<http://www.capptain.com/contact/?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
IMPORTANT: The contents of this email and any attachments are
confidential. They are intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you
have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender immediately
and do not disclose the contents to anyone or make copies thereof.
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Fabien LE GALLO <fl...@ubikod.com>.
Oh ok I just saw the announcement of 0.96.2 a few posts back. I just
couldn't find it on apache mirrors.
Sorry about that.
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Fabien LE GALLO <fl...@ubikod.com>wrote:
> What about 0.96.2 ? According to JIRA, it was supposed to be released
> yesterday.
> I want to apply HBASE-10850 patch to a stable release but it cannot be
> applied to 0.96.1.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>wrote:
>
>> (cc dev@)
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Thank you, the release of 0.98.1 will happen on time unless there is a
>> new
>> > development.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:23 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
>> > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> +1 on getting this RC3 out as the release and targetting the bug for
>> >> 0.98.2.
>> >>
>> >> Regards
>> >> Ram
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > >Phoenix 4.0 has no release it can currently run on
>> >> > >Can't we get these additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away
>> >> >
>> >> > I was thinking that for Phoenix 4.0 *release* the 98.1 is needed..
>> >> Thats
>> >> > why was in favor of correcting the bug in 98.1 itself.. Ya 98.2 can
>> >> come
>> >> > out in a month time and at that time 4.0 can upgrade to that..
>> Sounds
>> >> > good.. I am ready to again cast my +1 for this RC.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > >@Anoop - would you mind verifying whether or not
>> >> > the TestSCVFWithMiniCluster written as a Phoenix query returns the
>> >> correct
>> >> > results?
>> >> >
>> >> > I will check this James.. I think it might be there. Any way, even
>> if
>> >> the
>> >> > bug is there, there can be a work around solution in Phoenix filter
>> code
>> >> > which I can try out (If you would like to get)
>> >> >
>> >> > -Anoop-
>> >> >
>> >> > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > That is a feasible option.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > I have changed Fix Version of HBASE-10850 to 0.98.2
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Cheers
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM, lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > To be fair, Phoenix should not have relied on an unreleased
>> >> dependency.
>> >> > > (I
>> >> > > > know there are corporate timing issues, but they really should
>> not
>> >> > force
>> >> > > us
>> >> > > > into situations like these).
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > As far as I understand the issue, it not just a performance but
>> can
>> >> > lead
>> >> > > > to incorrect results.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Then again, this issue has existed in all of 0.96 and 0.98 so far
>> >> > (over 5
>> >> > > > months).
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > So, I'd be in favor of releasing 0.98.1 now, and doing 0.98.2
>> soon,
>> >> in
>> >> > 14
>> >> > > > or 20 days (that would also pull back some of the time lost in
>> the
>> >> > > 0.98.1RC
>> >> > > > cycle).
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > -- Lars
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > ________________________________
>> >> > > > From: James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>
>> >> > > > To: "user@hbase.apache.org" <us...@hbase.apache.org>
>> >> > > > Cc: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
>> >> > > > Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:57 AM
>> >> > > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3)
>> is
>> >> > > > available for download
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no
>> >> release
>> >> > it
>> >> > > > can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use
>> SingleColumnValueFilter,
>> >> so
>> >> > it
>> >> > > > seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get
>> these
>> >> > > > additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > James
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
>> >> > > > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > > Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > Regards
>> >> > > > > Ram
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > > Understood, Andy.
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > Cheers
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
>> >> > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com
>> >> > > > > > >wrote:
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am
>> the
>> >> > only
>> >> > > +1
>> >> > > > > > vote
>> >> > > > > > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So
>> >> please
>> >> > > take
>> >> > > > > the
>> >> > > > > > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98
>> branch
>> >> or
>> >> > > file
>> >> > > > > > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it
>> for
>> >> > > 0.98.1.
>> >> > > > > > > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com
>> >
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
>> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > > Cheers
>> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <
>> >> anoop.hbase@gmail.com
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix
>> >> this in
>> >> > > > 98.1
>> >> > > > > > > release
>> >> > > > > > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix
>> >> uses
>> >> > > > > essential
>> >> > > > > > > CF
>> >> > > > > > > >> optimization.
>> >> > > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
>> >> > > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
>> >> > > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > > >> -Anoop-
>> >> > > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
>> >> > > > > > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > > >>> +1 on the RC.
>> >> > > > > > > >>> Checked the signature.
>> >> > > > > > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
>> >> > > > > > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels.
>> >> > > Everything
>> >> > > > > > looks
>> >> > > > > > > >>> fine.
>> >> > > > > > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
>> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>> Regards
>> >> > > > > > > >>> Ram
>> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <
>> >> > > > eclark@apache.org>
>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>> +1
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>> Checked the hash
>> >> > > > > > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
>> >> > > > > > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good
>> after
>> >> > ITBLL
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <
>> >> stack@duboce.net>
>> >> > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> +1
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI
>> seems
>> >> > > fine.
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase
>> >> > against a
>> >> > > > tip
>> >> > > > > > of
>> >> > > > > > > >>> the
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work
>> >> (small
>> >> > > big
>> >> > > > > > linked
>> >> > > > > > > >>>> list
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> test worked).
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in
>> >> case
>> >> > he
>> >> > > is
>> >> > > > > too
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten
>> our
>> >> > > > internal
>> >> > > > > > rig
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has
>> >> been
>> >> > > > > passing
>> >> > > > > > > >>> green
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> St.Ack
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
>> >> > > > > > > apurtell@apache.org
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> wrote:
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is
>> >> available
>> >> > > for
>> >> > > > > > > >>> download
>> >> > > > > > > >>>> at
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and
>> >> Maven
>> >> > > > > artifacts
>> >> > > > > > > >>> are
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> also
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
>> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found
>> here:
>> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by
>> midnight
>> >> > > > Pacific
>> >> > > > > > Time
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>> (00:00
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release
>> >> this
>> >> > as
>> >> > > > > > 0.98.1.
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> --
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Best regards,
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> - Andy
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by
>> hitting
>> >> > > back. -
>> >> > > > > > Piet
>> >> > > > > > > >>>> Hein
>> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
>> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Best regards,
>> >
>> > - Andy
>> >
>> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
>> > (via Tom White)
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>>
>> - Andy
>>
>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
>> (via Tom White)
>>
>
--
Fabien Le Gallo
* Software Engineer * * , * * Capptain *
------------------------------
* e. * flegallo@capptain.com
* w. * http://www.capptain.com
* a. * 18 rue Tronchet, 75008 Paris, France
<https://www.facebook.com/capptain?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
<https://twitter.com/capptain_hq?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
<http://www.capptain.com/feed/?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDowgVp4zmA?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
4 Tips to Market Your App
<http://www.capptain.com/2014/03/26/4-tips-for-marketing-your-app/?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
<http://www.capptain.com/contact/?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
IMPORTANT: The contents of this email and any attachments are
confidential. They are intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you
have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender immediately
and do not disclose the contents to anyone or make copies thereof.
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Fabien LE GALLO <fl...@ubikod.com>.
What about 0.96.2 ? According to JIRA, it was supposed to be released
yesterday.
I want to apply HBASE-10850 patch to a stable release but it cannot be
applied to 0.96.1.
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> (cc dev@)
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Thank you, the release of 0.98.1 will happen on time unless there is a
> new
> > development.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:23 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> +1 on getting this RC3 out as the release and targetting the bug for
> >> 0.98.2.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Ram
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > >Phoenix 4.0 has no release it can currently run on
> >> > >Can't we get these additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away
> >> >
> >> > I was thinking that for Phoenix 4.0 *release* the 98.1 is needed..
> >> Thats
> >> > why was in favor of correcting the bug in 98.1 itself.. Ya 98.2 can
> >> come
> >> > out in a month time and at that time 4.0 can upgrade to that.. Sounds
> >> > good.. I am ready to again cast my +1 for this RC.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > >@Anoop - would you mind verifying whether or not
> >> > the TestSCVFWithMiniCluster written as a Phoenix query returns the
> >> correct
> >> > results?
> >> >
> >> > I will check this James.. I think it might be there. Any way, even
> if
> >> the
> >> > bug is there, there can be a work around solution in Phoenix filter
> code
> >> > which I can try out (If you would like to get)
> >> >
> >> > -Anoop-
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > That is a feasible option.
> >> > >
> >> > > I have changed Fix Version of HBASE-10850 to 0.98.2
> >> > >
> >> > > Cheers
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM, lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > To be fair, Phoenix should not have relied on an unreleased
> >> dependency.
> >> > > (I
> >> > > > know there are corporate timing issues, but they really should not
> >> > force
> >> > > us
> >> > > > into situations like these).
> >> > > >
> >> > > > As far as I understand the issue, it not just a performance but
> can
> >> > lead
> >> > > > to incorrect results.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Then again, this issue has existed in all of 0.96 and 0.98 so far
> >> > (over 5
> >> > > > months).
> >> > > >
> >> > > > So, I'd be in favor of releasing 0.98.1 now, and doing 0.98.2
> soon,
> >> in
> >> > 14
> >> > > > or 20 days (that would also pull back some of the time lost in the
> >> > > 0.98.1RC
> >> > > > cycle).
> >> > > >
> >> > > > -- Lars
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > ________________________________
> >> > > > From: James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>
> >> > > > To: "user@hbase.apache.org" <us...@hbase.apache.org>
> >> > > > Cc: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> >> > > > Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:57 AM
> >> > > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3)
> is
> >> > > > available for download
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no
> >> release
> >> > it
> >> > > > can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter,
> >> so
> >> > it
> >> > > > seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get
> these
> >> > > > additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
> >> > > >
> >> > > > James
> >> > > >
> >> > > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> >> > > > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Regards
> >> > > > > Ram
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > Understood, Andy.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Cheers
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> >> > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> >> > > > > > >wrote:
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am
> the
> >> > only
> >> > > +1
> >> > > > > > vote
> >> > > > > > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So
> >> please
> >> > > take
> >> > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98
> branch
> >> or
> >> > > file
> >> > > > > > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for
> >> > > 0.98.1.
> >> > > > > > > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Cheers
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <
> >> anoop.hbase@gmail.com
> >> > >
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix
> >> this in
> >> > > > 98.1
> >> > > > > > > release
> >> > > > > > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix
> >> uses
> >> > > > > essential
> >> > > > > > > CF
> >> > > > > > > >> optimization.
> >> > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> >> > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> >> > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > >> -Anoop-
> >> > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> >> > > > > > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > >>> +1 on the RC.
> >> > > > > > > >>> Checked the signature.
> >> > > > > > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> >> > > > > > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels.
> >> > > Everything
> >> > > > > > looks
> >> > > > > > > >>> fine.
> >> > > > > > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >>> Regards
> >> > > > > > > >>> Ram
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <
> >> > > > eclark@apache.org>
> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>> +1
> >> > > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>> Checked the hash
> >> > > > > > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> >> > > > > > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good
> after
> >> > ITBLL
> >> > > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <
> >> stack@duboce.net>
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> +1
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI
> seems
> >> > > fine.
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase
> >> > against a
> >> > > > tip
> >> > > > > > of
> >> > > > > > > >>> the
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work
> >> (small
> >> > > big
> >> > > > > > linked
> >> > > > > > > >>>> list
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> test worked).
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in
> >> case
> >> > he
> >> > > is
> >> > > > > too
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten
> our
> >> > > > internal
> >> > > > > > rig
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has
> >> been
> >> > > > > passing
> >> > > > > > > >>> green
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> St.Ack
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> >> > > > > > > apurtell@apache.org
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is
> >> available
> >> > > for
> >> > > > > > > >>> download
> >> > > > > > > >>>> at
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and
> >> Maven
> >> > > > > artifacts
> >> > > > > > > >>> are
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> also
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > >
> >> > >
> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found
> here:
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by
> midnight
> >> > > > Pacific
> >> > > > > > Time
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> (00:00
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release
> >> this
> >> > as
> >> > > > > > 0.98.1.
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> --
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Best regards,
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> - Andy
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by
> hitting
> >> > > back. -
> >> > > > > > Piet
> >> > > > > > > >>>> Hein
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >
> > - Andy
> >
> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> > (via Tom White)
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> - Andy
>
> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> (via Tom White)
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Fabien LE GALLO <fl...@ubikod.com>.
What about 0.96.2 ? According to JIRA, it was supposed to be released
yesterday.
I want to apply HBASE-10850 patch to a stable release but it cannot be
applied to 0.96.1.
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> (cc dev@)
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Thank you, the release of 0.98.1 will happen on time unless there is a
> new
> > development.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:23 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> +1 on getting this RC3 out as the release and targetting the bug for
> >> 0.98.2.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Ram
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > >Phoenix 4.0 has no release it can currently run on
> >> > >Can't we get these additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away
> >> >
> >> > I was thinking that for Phoenix 4.0 *release* the 98.1 is needed..
> >> Thats
> >> > why was in favor of correcting the bug in 98.1 itself.. Ya 98.2 can
> >> come
> >> > out in a month time and at that time 4.0 can upgrade to that.. Sounds
> >> > good.. I am ready to again cast my +1 for this RC.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > >@Anoop - would you mind verifying whether or not
> >> > the TestSCVFWithMiniCluster written as a Phoenix query returns the
> >> correct
> >> > results?
> >> >
> >> > I will check this James.. I think it might be there. Any way, even
> if
> >> the
> >> > bug is there, there can be a work around solution in Phoenix filter
> code
> >> > which I can try out (If you would like to get)
> >> >
> >> > -Anoop-
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > That is a feasible option.
> >> > >
> >> > > I have changed Fix Version of HBASE-10850 to 0.98.2
> >> > >
> >> > > Cheers
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM, lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > To be fair, Phoenix should not have relied on an unreleased
> >> dependency.
> >> > > (I
> >> > > > know there are corporate timing issues, but they really should not
> >> > force
> >> > > us
> >> > > > into situations like these).
> >> > > >
> >> > > > As far as I understand the issue, it not just a performance but
> can
> >> > lead
> >> > > > to incorrect results.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Then again, this issue has existed in all of 0.96 and 0.98 so far
> >> > (over 5
> >> > > > months).
> >> > > >
> >> > > > So, I'd be in favor of releasing 0.98.1 now, and doing 0.98.2
> soon,
> >> in
> >> > 14
> >> > > > or 20 days (that would also pull back some of the time lost in the
> >> > > 0.98.1RC
> >> > > > cycle).
> >> > > >
> >> > > > -- Lars
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > ________________________________
> >> > > > From: James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>
> >> > > > To: "user@hbase.apache.org" <us...@hbase.apache.org>
> >> > > > Cc: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> >> > > > Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:57 AM
> >> > > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3)
> is
> >> > > > available for download
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no
> >> release
> >> > it
> >> > > > can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter,
> >> so
> >> > it
> >> > > > seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get
> these
> >> > > > additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
> >> > > >
> >> > > > James
> >> > > >
> >> > > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> >> > > > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Regards
> >> > > > > Ram
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > Understood, Andy.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Cheers
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> >> > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> >> > > > > > >wrote:
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am
> the
> >> > only
> >> > > +1
> >> > > > > > vote
> >> > > > > > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So
> >> please
> >> > > take
> >> > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98
> branch
> >> or
> >> > > file
> >> > > > > > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for
> >> > > 0.98.1.
> >> > > > > > > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > Cheers
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <
> >> anoop.hbase@gmail.com
> >> > >
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix
> >> this in
> >> > > > 98.1
> >> > > > > > > release
> >> > > > > > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix
> >> uses
> >> > > > > essential
> >> > > > > > > CF
> >> > > > > > > >> optimization.
> >> > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> >> > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> >> > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > >> -Anoop-
> >> > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> >> > > > > > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > >>> +1 on the RC.
> >> > > > > > > >>> Checked the signature.
> >> > > > > > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> >> > > > > > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels.
> >> > > Everything
> >> > > > > > looks
> >> > > > > > > >>> fine.
> >> > > > > > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >>> Regards
> >> > > > > > > >>> Ram
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <
> >> > > > eclark@apache.org>
> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>> +1
> >> > > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>> Checked the hash
> >> > > > > > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> >> > > > > > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good
> after
> >> > ITBLL
> >> > > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <
> >> stack@duboce.net>
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> +1
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI
> seems
> >> > > fine.
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase
> >> > against a
> >> > > > tip
> >> > > > > > of
> >> > > > > > > >>> the
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work
> >> (small
> >> > > big
> >> > > > > > linked
> >> > > > > > > >>>> list
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> test worked).
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in
> >> case
> >> > he
> >> > > is
> >> > > > > too
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten
> our
> >> > > > internal
> >> > > > > > rig
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has
> >> been
> >> > > > > passing
> >> > > > > > > >>> green
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> St.Ack
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> >> > > > > > > apurtell@apache.org
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is
> >> available
> >> > > for
> >> > > > > > > >>> download
> >> > > > > > > >>>> at
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and
> >> Maven
> >> > > > > artifacts
> >> > > > > > > >>> are
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> also
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > >
> >> > >
> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found
> here:
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by
> midnight
> >> > > > Pacific
> >> > > > > > Time
> >> > > > > > > >>>>> (00:00
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release
> >> this
> >> > as
> >> > > > > > 0.98.1.
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> --
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Best regards,
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> - Andy
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by
> hitting
> >> > > back. -
> >> > > > > > Piet
> >> > > > > > > >>>> Hein
> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> >> > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >
> > - Andy
> >
> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> > (via Tom White)
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> - Andy
>
> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> (via Tom White)
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
(cc dev@)
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thank you, the release of 0.98.1 will happen on time unless there is a new
> development.
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:23 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 on getting this RC3 out as the release and targetting the bug for
>> 0.98.2.
>>
>> Regards
>> Ram
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >Phoenix 4.0 has no release it can currently run on
>> > >Can't we get these additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away
>> >
>> > I was thinking that for Phoenix 4.0 *release* the 98.1 is needed..
>> Thats
>> > why was in favor of correcting the bug in 98.1 itself.. Ya 98.2 can
>> come
>> > out in a month time and at that time 4.0 can upgrade to that.. Sounds
>> > good.. I am ready to again cast my +1 for this RC.
>> >
>> >
>> > >@Anoop - would you mind verifying whether or not
>> > the TestSCVFWithMiniCluster written as a Phoenix query returns the
>> correct
>> > results?
>> >
>> > I will check this James.. I think it might be there. Any way, even if
>> the
>> > bug is there, there can be a work around solution in Phoenix filter code
>> > which I can try out (If you would like to get)
>> >
>> > -Anoop-
>> >
>> > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > That is a feasible option.
>> > >
>> > > I have changed Fix Version of HBASE-10850 to 0.98.2
>> > >
>> > > Cheers
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM, lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > To be fair, Phoenix should not have relied on an unreleased
>> dependency.
>> > > (I
>> > > > know there are corporate timing issues, but they really should not
>> > force
>> > > us
>> > > > into situations like these).
>> > > >
>> > > > As far as I understand the issue, it not just a performance but can
>> > lead
>> > > > to incorrect results.
>> > > >
>> > > > Then again, this issue has existed in all of 0.96 and 0.98 so far
>> > (over 5
>> > > > months).
>> > > >
>> > > > So, I'd be in favor of releasing 0.98.1 now, and doing 0.98.2 soon,
>> in
>> > 14
>> > > > or 20 days (that would also pull back some of the time lost in the
>> > > 0.98.1RC
>> > > > cycle).
>> > > >
>> > > > -- Lars
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > ________________________________
>> > > > From: James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>
>> > > > To: "user@hbase.apache.org" <us...@hbase.apache.org>
>> > > > Cc: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
>> > > > Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:57 AM
>> > > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is
>> > > > available for download
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no
>> release
>> > it
>> > > > can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter,
>> so
>> > it
>> > > > seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
>> > > > additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
>> > > >
>> > > > James
>> > > >
>> > > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
>> > > > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Regards
>> > > > > Ram
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > Understood, Andy.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Cheers
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
>> > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com
>> > > > > > >wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the
>> > only
>> > > +1
>> > > > > > vote
>> > > > > > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So
>> please
>> > > take
>> > > > > the
>> > > > > > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch
>> or
>> > > file
>> > > > > > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for
>> > > 0.98.1.
>> > > > > > > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Cheers
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <
>> anoop.hbase@gmail.com
>> > >
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix
>> this in
>> > > > 98.1
>> > > > > > > release
>> > > > > > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix
>> uses
>> > > > > essential
>> > > > > > > CF
>> > > > > > > >> optimization.
>> > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
>> > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
>> > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > >> -Anoop-
>> > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
>> > > > > > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > >>> +1 on the RC.
>> > > > > > > >>> Checked the signature.
>> > > > > > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
>> > > > > > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels.
>> > > Everything
>> > > > > > looks
>> > > > > > > >>> fine.
>> > > > > > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
>> > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > >>> Regards
>> > > > > > > >>> Ram
>> > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <
>> > > > eclark@apache.org>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > >>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>> +1
>> > > > > > > >>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>> Checked the hash
>> > > > > > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
>> > > > > > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after
>> > ITBLL
>> > > > > > > >>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <
>> stack@duboce.net>
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>> +1
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems
>> > > fine.
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase
>> > against a
>> > > > tip
>> > > > > > of
>> > > > > > > >>> the
>> > > > > > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work
>> (small
>> > > big
>> > > > > > linked
>> > > > > > > >>>> list
>> > > > > > > >>>>> test worked).
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in
>> case
>> > he
>> > > is
>> > > > > too
>> > > > > > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our
>> > > > internal
>> > > > > > rig
>> > > > > > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has
>> been
>> > > > > passing
>> > > > > > > >>> green
>> > > > > > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>> St.Ack
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
>> > > > > > > apurtell@apache.org
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> wrote:
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is
>> available
>> > > for
>> > > > > > > >>> download
>> > > > > > > >>>> at
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and
>> Maven
>> > > > > artifacts
>> > > > > > > >>> are
>> > > > > > > >>>>> also
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
>> > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > >
>> > >
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
>> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
>> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
>> > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
>> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight
>> > > > Pacific
>> > > > > > Time
>> > > > > > > >>>>> (00:00
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release
>> this
>> > as
>> > > > > > 0.98.1.
>> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> --
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> Best regards,
>> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> - Andy
>> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting
>> > > back. -
>> > > > > > Piet
>> > > > > > > >>>> Hein
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
>> > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> - Andy
>
> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> (via Tom White)
>
--
Best regards,
- Andy
Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
(cc dev@)
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thank you, the release of 0.98.1 will happen on time unless there is a new
> development.
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:23 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 on getting this RC3 out as the release and targetting the bug for
>> 0.98.2.
>>
>> Regards
>> Ram
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >Phoenix 4.0 has no release it can currently run on
>> > >Can't we get these additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away
>> >
>> > I was thinking that for Phoenix 4.0 *release* the 98.1 is needed..
>> Thats
>> > why was in favor of correcting the bug in 98.1 itself.. Ya 98.2 can
>> come
>> > out in a month time and at that time 4.0 can upgrade to that.. Sounds
>> > good.. I am ready to again cast my +1 for this RC.
>> >
>> >
>> > >@Anoop - would you mind verifying whether or not
>> > the TestSCVFWithMiniCluster written as a Phoenix query returns the
>> correct
>> > results?
>> >
>> > I will check this James.. I think it might be there. Any way, even if
>> the
>> > bug is there, there can be a work around solution in Phoenix filter code
>> > which I can try out (If you would like to get)
>> >
>> > -Anoop-
>> >
>> > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > That is a feasible option.
>> > >
>> > > I have changed Fix Version of HBASE-10850 to 0.98.2
>> > >
>> > > Cheers
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM, lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > To be fair, Phoenix should not have relied on an unreleased
>> dependency.
>> > > (I
>> > > > know there are corporate timing issues, but they really should not
>> > force
>> > > us
>> > > > into situations like these).
>> > > >
>> > > > As far as I understand the issue, it not just a performance but can
>> > lead
>> > > > to incorrect results.
>> > > >
>> > > > Then again, this issue has existed in all of 0.96 and 0.98 so far
>> > (over 5
>> > > > months).
>> > > >
>> > > > So, I'd be in favor of releasing 0.98.1 now, and doing 0.98.2 soon,
>> in
>> > 14
>> > > > or 20 days (that would also pull back some of the time lost in the
>> > > 0.98.1RC
>> > > > cycle).
>> > > >
>> > > > -- Lars
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > ________________________________
>> > > > From: James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>
>> > > > To: "user@hbase.apache.org" <us...@hbase.apache.org>
>> > > > Cc: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
>> > > > Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:57 AM
>> > > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is
>> > > > available for download
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no
>> release
>> > it
>> > > > can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter,
>> so
>> > it
>> > > > seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
>> > > > additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
>> > > >
>> > > > James
>> > > >
>> > > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
>> > > > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Regards
>> > > > > Ram
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > Understood, Andy.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Cheers
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
>> > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com
>> > > > > > >wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the
>> > only
>> > > +1
>> > > > > > vote
>> > > > > > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So
>> please
>> > > take
>> > > > > the
>> > > > > > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch
>> or
>> > > file
>> > > > > > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for
>> > > 0.98.1.
>> > > > > > > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Cheers
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <
>> anoop.hbase@gmail.com
>> > >
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix
>> this in
>> > > > 98.1
>> > > > > > > release
>> > > > > > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix
>> uses
>> > > > > essential
>> > > > > > > CF
>> > > > > > > >> optimization.
>> > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
>> > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
>> > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > >> -Anoop-
>> > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
>> > > > > > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > >>> +1 on the RC.
>> > > > > > > >>> Checked the signature.
>> > > > > > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
>> > > > > > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels.
>> > > Everything
>> > > > > > looks
>> > > > > > > >>> fine.
>> > > > > > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
>> > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > >>> Regards
>> > > > > > > >>> Ram
>> > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <
>> > > > eclark@apache.org>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > >>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>> +1
>> > > > > > > >>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>> Checked the hash
>> > > > > > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
>> > > > > > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after
>> > ITBLL
>> > > > > > > >>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <
>> stack@duboce.net>
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>> +1
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems
>> > > fine.
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase
>> > against a
>> > > > tip
>> > > > > > of
>> > > > > > > >>> the
>> > > > > > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work
>> (small
>> > > big
>> > > > > > linked
>> > > > > > > >>>> list
>> > > > > > > >>>>> test worked).
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in
>> case
>> > he
>> > > is
>> > > > > too
>> > > > > > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our
>> > > > internal
>> > > > > > rig
>> > > > > > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has
>> been
>> > > > > passing
>> > > > > > > >>> green
>> > > > > > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>> St.Ack
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
>> > > > > > > apurtell@apache.org
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> wrote:
>> > > > > > > >>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is
>> available
>> > > for
>> > > > > > > >>> download
>> > > > > > > >>>> at
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and
>> Maven
>> > > > > artifacts
>> > > > > > > >>> are
>> > > > > > > >>>>> also
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
>> > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > >
>> > >
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
>> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
>> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
>> > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
>> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight
>> > > > Pacific
>> > > > > > Time
>> > > > > > > >>>>> (00:00
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release
>> this
>> > as
>> > > > > > 0.98.1.
>> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> --
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> Best regards,
>> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> - Andy
>> > > > > > > >>>>>>
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting
>> > > back. -
>> > > > > > Piet
>> > > > > > > >>>> Hein
>> > > > > > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
>> > > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> - Andy
>
> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> (via Tom White)
>
--
Best regards,
- Andy
Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
Thank you, the release of 0.98.1 will happen on time unless there is a new
development.
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:23 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 on getting this RC3 out as the release and targetting the bug for
> 0.98.2.
>
> Regards
> Ram
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >Phoenix 4.0 has no release it can currently run on
> > >Can't we get these additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away
> >
> > I was thinking that for Phoenix 4.0 *release* the 98.1 is needed.. Thats
> > why was in favor of correcting the bug in 98.1 itself.. Ya 98.2 can come
> > out in a month time and at that time 4.0 can upgrade to that.. Sounds
> > good.. I am ready to again cast my +1 for this RC.
> >
> >
> > >@Anoop - would you mind verifying whether or not
> > the TestSCVFWithMiniCluster written as a Phoenix query returns the
> correct
> > results?
> >
> > I will check this James.. I think it might be there. Any way, even if
> the
> > bug is there, there can be a work around solution in Phoenix filter code
> > which I can try out (If you would like to get)
> >
> > -Anoop-
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > That is a feasible option.
> > >
> > > I have changed Fix Version of HBASE-10850 to 0.98.2
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM, lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > To be fair, Phoenix should not have relied on an unreleased
> dependency.
> > > (I
> > > > know there are corporate timing issues, but they really should not
> > force
> > > us
> > > > into situations like these).
> > > >
> > > > As far as I understand the issue, it not just a performance but can
> > lead
> > > > to incorrect results.
> > > >
> > > > Then again, this issue has existed in all of 0.96 and 0.98 so far
> > (over 5
> > > > months).
> > > >
> > > > So, I'd be in favor of releasing 0.98.1 now, and doing 0.98.2 soon,
> in
> > 14
> > > > or 20 days (that would also pull back some of the time lost in the
> > > 0.98.1RC
> > > > cycle).
> > > >
> > > > -- Lars
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>
> > > > To: "user@hbase.apache.org" <us...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > > Cc: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > > Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:57 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is
> > > > available for download
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release
> > it
> > > > can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so
> > it
> > > > seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
> > > > additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
> > > >
> > > > James
> > > >
> > > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > > > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > Ram
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Understood, Andy.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > > > > > >wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the
> > only
> > > +1
> > > > > > vote
> > > > > > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please
> > > take
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch
> or
> > > file
> > > > > > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for
> > > 0.98.1.
> > > > > > > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Cheers
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <
> anoop.hbase@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this
> in
> > > > 98.1
> > > > > > > release
> > > > > > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
> > > > > essential
> > > > > > > CF
> > > > > > > >> optimization.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> -Anoop-
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > > > > > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>> +1 on the RC.
> > > > > > > >>> Checked the signature.
> > > > > > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> > > > > > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels.
> > > Everything
> > > > > > looks
> > > > > > > >>> fine.
> > > > > > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> Regards
> > > > > > > >>> Ram
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <
> > > > eclark@apache.org>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>> +1
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>> Checked the hash
> > > > > > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> > > > > > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after
> > ITBLL
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <stack@duboce.net
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> +1
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems
> > > fine.
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase
> > against a
> > > > tip
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > >>> the
> > > > > > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work
> (small
> > > big
> > > > > > linked
> > > > > > > >>>> list
> > > > > > > >>>>> test worked).
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case
> > he
> > > is
> > > > > too
> > > > > > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our
> > > > internal
> > > > > > rig
> > > > > > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has
> been
> > > > > passing
> > > > > > > >>> green
> > > > > > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> St.Ack
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > > > > apurtell@apache.org
> > > > > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is
> available
> > > for
> > > > > > > >>> download
> > > > > > > >>>> at
> > > > > > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
> > > > > artifacts
> > > > > > > >>> are
> > > > > > > >>>>> also
> > > > > > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight
> > > > Pacific
> > > > > > Time
> > > > > > > >>>>> (00:00
> > > > > > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this
> > as
> > > > > > 0.98.1.
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Best regards,
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> - Andy
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting
> > > back. -
> > > > > > Piet
> > > > > > > >>>> Hein
> > > > > > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
--
Best regards,
- Andy
Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by ramkrishna vasudevan <ra...@gmail.com>.
+1 on getting this RC3 out as the release and targetting the bug for
0.98.2.
Regards
Ram
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Phoenix 4.0 has no release it can currently run on
> >Can't we get these additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away
>
> I was thinking that for Phoenix 4.0 *release* the 98.1 is needed.. Thats
> why was in favor of correcting the bug in 98.1 itself.. Ya 98.2 can come
> out in a month time and at that time 4.0 can upgrade to that.. Sounds
> good.. I am ready to again cast my +1 for this RC.
>
>
> >@Anoop - would you mind verifying whether or not
> the TestSCVFWithMiniCluster written as a Phoenix query returns the correct
> results?
>
> I will check this James.. I think it might be there. Any way, even if the
> bug is there, there can be a work around solution in Phoenix filter code
> which I can try out (If you would like to get)
>
> -Anoop-
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > That is a feasible option.
> >
> > I have changed Fix Version of HBASE-10850 to 0.98.2
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM, lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > To be fair, Phoenix should not have relied on an unreleased dependency.
> > (I
> > > know there are corporate timing issues, but they really should not
> force
> > us
> > > into situations like these).
> > >
> > > As far as I understand the issue, it not just a performance but can
> lead
> > > to incorrect results.
> > >
> > > Then again, this issue has existed in all of 0.96 and 0.98 so far
> (over 5
> > > months).
> > >
> > > So, I'd be in favor of releasing 0.98.1 now, and doing 0.98.2 soon, in
> 14
> > > or 20 days (that would also pull back some of the time lost in the
> > 0.98.1RC
> > > cycle).
> > >
> > > -- Lars
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>
> > > To: "user@hbase.apache.org" <us...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > Cc: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:57 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is
> > > available for download
> > >
> > >
> > > I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release
> it
> > > can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so
> it
> > > seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
> > > additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
> > >
> > > James
> > >
> > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > Ram
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Understood, Andy.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > > > > >wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the
> only
> > +1
> > > > > vote
> > > > > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please
> > take
> > > > the
> > > > > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or
> > file
> > > > > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for
> > 0.98.1.
> > > > > > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cheers
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <anoop.hbase@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in
> > > 98.1
> > > > > > release
> > > > > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
> > > > essential
> > > > > > CF
> > > > > > >> optimization.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> -Anoop-
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > > > > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>> +1 on the RC.
> > > > > > >>> Checked the signature.
> > > > > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> > > > > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels.
> > Everything
> > > > > looks
> > > > > > >>> fine.
> > > > > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Regards
> > > > > > >>> Ram
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <
> > > eclark@apache.org>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> +1
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> Checked the hash
> > > > > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> > > > > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after
> ITBLL
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> +1
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems
> > fine.
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase
> against a
> > > tip
> > > > > of
> > > > > > >>> the
> > > > > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small
> > big
> > > > > linked
> > > > > > >>>> list
> > > > > > >>>>> test worked).
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case
> he
> > is
> > > > too
> > > > > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our
> > > internal
> > > > > rig
> > > > > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
> > > > passing
> > > > > > >>> green
> > > > > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> St.Ack
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > > > apurtell@apache.org
> > > > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
> > for
> > > > > > >>> download
> > > > > > >>>> at
> > > > > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
> > > > artifacts
> > > > > > >>> are
> > > > > > >>>>> also
> > > > > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > >
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight
> > > Pacific
> > > > > Time
> > > > > > >>>>> (00:00
> > > > > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this
> as
> > > > > 0.98.1.
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > > > >>>>>> Best regards,
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> - Andy
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting
> > back. -
> > > > > Piet
> > > > > > >>>> Hein
> > > > > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by ramkrishna vasudevan <ra...@gmail.com>.
+1 on getting this RC3 out as the release and targetting the bug for
0.98.2.
Regards
Ram
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Phoenix 4.0 has no release it can currently run on
> >Can't we get these additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away
>
> I was thinking that for Phoenix 4.0 *release* the 98.1 is needed.. Thats
> why was in favor of correcting the bug in 98.1 itself.. Ya 98.2 can come
> out in a month time and at that time 4.0 can upgrade to that.. Sounds
> good.. I am ready to again cast my +1 for this RC.
>
>
> >@Anoop - would you mind verifying whether or not
> the TestSCVFWithMiniCluster written as a Phoenix query returns the correct
> results?
>
> I will check this James.. I think it might be there. Any way, even if the
> bug is there, there can be a work around solution in Phoenix filter code
> which I can try out (If you would like to get)
>
> -Anoop-
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > That is a feasible option.
> >
> > I have changed Fix Version of HBASE-10850 to 0.98.2
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM, lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > To be fair, Phoenix should not have relied on an unreleased dependency.
> > (I
> > > know there are corporate timing issues, but they really should not
> force
> > us
> > > into situations like these).
> > >
> > > As far as I understand the issue, it not just a performance but can
> lead
> > > to incorrect results.
> > >
> > > Then again, this issue has existed in all of 0.96 and 0.98 so far
> (over 5
> > > months).
> > >
> > > So, I'd be in favor of releasing 0.98.1 now, and doing 0.98.2 soon, in
> 14
> > > or 20 days (that would also pull back some of the time lost in the
> > 0.98.1RC
> > > cycle).
> > >
> > > -- Lars
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>
> > > To: "user@hbase.apache.org" <us...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > Cc: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > > Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:57 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is
> > > available for download
> > >
> > >
> > > I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release
> it
> > > can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so
> it
> > > seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
> > > additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
> > >
> > > James
> > >
> > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > Ram
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Understood, Andy.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > > > > >wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the
> only
> > +1
> > > > > vote
> > > > > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please
> > take
> > > > the
> > > > > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or
> > file
> > > > > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for
> > 0.98.1.
> > > > > > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cheers
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <anoop.hbase@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in
> > > 98.1
> > > > > > release
> > > > > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
> > > > essential
> > > > > > CF
> > > > > > >> optimization.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> -Anoop-
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > > > > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>> +1 on the RC.
> > > > > > >>> Checked the signature.
> > > > > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> > > > > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels.
> > Everything
> > > > > looks
> > > > > > >>> fine.
> > > > > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Regards
> > > > > > >>> Ram
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <
> > > eclark@apache.org>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> +1
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> Checked the hash
> > > > > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> > > > > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after
> ITBLL
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> +1
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems
> > fine.
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase
> against a
> > > tip
> > > > > of
> > > > > > >>> the
> > > > > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small
> > big
> > > > > linked
> > > > > > >>>> list
> > > > > > >>>>> test worked).
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case
> he
> > is
> > > > too
> > > > > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our
> > > internal
> > > > > rig
> > > > > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
> > > > passing
> > > > > > >>> green
> > > > > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> St.Ack
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > > > apurtell@apache.org
> > > > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
> > for
> > > > > > >>> download
> > > > > > >>>> at
> > > > > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
> > > > artifacts
> > > > > > >>> are
> > > > > > >>>>> also
> > > > > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > >
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight
> > > Pacific
> > > > > Time
> > > > > > >>>>> (00:00
> > > > > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this
> as
> > > > > 0.98.1.
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > > > >>>>>> Best regards,
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> - Andy
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting
> > back. -
> > > > > Piet
> > > > > > >>>> Hein
> > > > > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>.
>Phoenix 4.0 has no release it can currently run on
>Can't we get these additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away
I was thinking that for Phoenix 4.0 *release* the 98.1 is needed.. Thats
why was in favor of correcting the bug in 98.1 itself.. Ya 98.2 can come
out in a month time and at that time 4.0 can upgrade to that.. Sounds
good.. I am ready to again cast my +1 for this RC.
>@Anoop - would you mind verifying whether or not
the TestSCVFWithMiniCluster written as a Phoenix query returns the correct
results?
I will check this James.. I think it might be there. Any way, even if the
bug is there, there can be a work around solution in Phoenix filter code
which I can try out (If you would like to get)
-Anoop-
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That is a feasible option.
>
> I have changed Fix Version of HBASE-10850 to 0.98.2
>
> Cheers
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM, lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > To be fair, Phoenix should not have relied on an unreleased dependency.
> (I
> > know there are corporate timing issues, but they really should not force
> us
> > into situations like these).
> >
> > As far as I understand the issue, it not just a performance but can lead
> > to incorrect results.
> >
> > Then again, this issue has existed in all of 0.96 and 0.98 so far (over 5
> > months).
> >
> > So, I'd be in favor of releasing 0.98.1 now, and doing 0.98.2 soon, in 14
> > or 20 days (that would also pull back some of the time lost in the
> 0.98.1RC
> > cycle).
> >
> > -- Lars
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>
> > To: "user@hbase.apache.org" <us...@hbase.apache.org>
> > Cc: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:57 AM
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is
> > available for download
> >
> >
> > I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
> > can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
> > seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
> > additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
> >
> > James
> >
> > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Ram
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Understood, Andy.
> > > >
> > > > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> > > > >
> > > > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only
> +1
> > > > vote
> > > > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please
> take
> > > the
> > > > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or
> file
> > > > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for
> 0.98.1.
> > > > > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in
> > 98.1
> > > > > release
> > > > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
> > > essential
> > > > > CF
> > > > > >> optimization.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> -Anoop-
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > > > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> +1 on the RC.
> > > > > >>> Checked the signature.
> > > > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> > > > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels.
> Everything
> > > > looks
> > > > > >>> fine.
> > > > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Regards
> > > > > >>> Ram
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <
> > eclark@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> +1
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Checked the hash
> > > > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> > > > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> > wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> +1
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems
> fine.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a
> > tip
> > > > of
> > > > > >>> the
> > > > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small
> big
> > > > linked
> > > > > >>>> list
> > > > > >>>>> test worked).
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he
> is
> > > too
> > > > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our
> > internal
> > > > rig
> > > > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
> > > passing
> > > > > >>> green
> > > > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> St.Ack
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > > apurtell@apache.org
> > > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
> for
> > > > > >>> download
> > > > > >>>> at
> > > > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
> > > artifacts
> > > > > >>> are
> > > > > >>>>> also
> > > > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> > > > > >>>
> > > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight
> > Pacific
> > > > Time
> > > > > >>>>> (00:00
> > > > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
> > > > 0.98.1.
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > > >>>>>> Best regards,
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> - Andy
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting
> back. -
> > > > Piet
> > > > > >>>> Hein
> > > > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> > > > > >>>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>.
>Phoenix 4.0 has no release it can currently run on
>Can't we get these additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away
I was thinking that for Phoenix 4.0 *release* the 98.1 is needed.. Thats
why was in favor of correcting the bug in 98.1 itself.. Ya 98.2 can come
out in a month time and at that time 4.0 can upgrade to that.. Sounds
good.. I am ready to again cast my +1 for this RC.
>@Anoop - would you mind verifying whether or not
the TestSCVFWithMiniCluster written as a Phoenix query returns the correct
results?
I will check this James.. I think it might be there. Any way, even if the
bug is there, there can be a work around solution in Phoenix filter code
which I can try out (If you would like to get)
-Anoop-
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That is a feasible option.
>
> I have changed Fix Version of HBASE-10850 to 0.98.2
>
> Cheers
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM, lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > To be fair, Phoenix should not have relied on an unreleased dependency.
> (I
> > know there are corporate timing issues, but they really should not force
> us
> > into situations like these).
> >
> > As far as I understand the issue, it not just a performance but can lead
> > to incorrect results.
> >
> > Then again, this issue has existed in all of 0.96 and 0.98 so far (over 5
> > months).
> >
> > So, I'd be in favor of releasing 0.98.1 now, and doing 0.98.2 soon, in 14
> > or 20 days (that would also pull back some of the time lost in the
> 0.98.1RC
> > cycle).
> >
> > -- Lars
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>
> > To: "user@hbase.apache.org" <us...@hbase.apache.org>
> > Cc: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:57 AM
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is
> > available for download
> >
> >
> > I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
> > can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
> > seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
> > additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
> >
> > James
> >
> > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Ram
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Understood, Andy.
> > > >
> > > > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> > > > >
> > > > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only
> +1
> > > > vote
> > > > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please
> take
> > > the
> > > > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or
> file
> > > > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for
> 0.98.1.
> > > > > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in
> > 98.1
> > > > > release
> > > > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
> > > essential
> > > > > CF
> > > > > >> optimization.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> -Anoop-
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > > > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> +1 on the RC.
> > > > > >>> Checked the signature.
> > > > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> > > > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels.
> Everything
> > > > looks
> > > > > >>> fine.
> > > > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Regards
> > > > > >>> Ram
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <
> > eclark@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> +1
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Checked the hash
> > > > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> > > > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> > wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> +1
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems
> fine.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a
> > tip
> > > > of
> > > > > >>> the
> > > > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small
> big
> > > > linked
> > > > > >>>> list
> > > > > >>>>> test worked).
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he
> is
> > > too
> > > > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our
> > internal
> > > > rig
> > > > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
> > > passing
> > > > > >>> green
> > > > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> St.Ack
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > > apurtell@apache.org
> > > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
> for
> > > > > >>> download
> > > > > >>>> at
> > > > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
> > > artifacts
> > > > > >>> are
> > > > > >>>>> also
> > > > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> > > > > >>>
> > > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight
> > Pacific
> > > > Time
> > > > > >>>>> (00:00
> > > > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
> > > > 0.98.1.
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > > >>>>>> Best regards,
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> - Andy
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting
> back. -
> > > > Piet
> > > > > >>>> Hein
> > > > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> > > > > >>>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
That is a feasible option.
I have changed Fix Version of HBASE-10850 to 0.98.2
Cheers
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM, lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org> wrote:
> To be fair, Phoenix should not have relied on an unreleased dependency. (I
> know there are corporate timing issues, but they really should not force us
> into situations like these).
>
> As far as I understand the issue, it not just a performance but can lead
> to incorrect results.
>
> Then again, this issue has existed in all of 0.96 and 0.98 so far (over 5
> months).
>
> So, I'd be in favor of releasing 0.98.1 now, and doing 0.98.2 soon, in 14
> or 20 days (that would also pull back some of the time lost in the 0.98.1RC
> cycle).
>
> -- Lars
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>
> To: "user@hbase.apache.org" <us...@hbase.apache.org>
> Cc: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:57 AM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is
> available for download
>
>
> I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
> can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
> seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
> additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
>
> James
>
> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
> >
> > Regards
> > Ram
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Understood, Andy.
> > >
> > > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> > > >
> > > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
> > > vote
> > > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take
> > the
> > > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
> > > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
> > > > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> > > >
> > > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers
> > > > >
> > > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in
> 98.1
> > > > release
> > > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
> > essential
> > > > CF
> > > > >> optimization.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> -Anoop-
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> +1 on the RC.
> > > > >>> Checked the signature.
> > > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> > > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
> > > looks
> > > > >>> fine.
> > > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Regards
> > > > >>> Ram
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <
> eclark@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> +1
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Checked the hash
> > > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> > > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> +1
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a
> tip
> > > of
> > > > >>> the
> > > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
> > > linked
> > > > >>>> list
> > > > >>>>> test worked).
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is
> > too
> > > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our
> internal
> > > rig
> > > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
> > passing
> > > > >>> green
> > > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> St.Ack
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > apurtell@apache.org
> > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> > > > >>> download
> > > > >>>> at
> > > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
> > artifacts
> > > > >>> are
> > > > >>>>> also
> > > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> > > > >>>
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight
> Pacific
> > > Time
> > > > >>>>> (00:00
> > > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
> > > 0.98.1.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > >>>>>> Best regards,
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> - Andy
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
> > > Piet
> > > > >>>> Hein
> > > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> > > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
That is a feasible option.
I have changed Fix Version of HBASE-10850 to 0.98.2
Cheers
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM, lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org> wrote:
> To be fair, Phoenix should not have relied on an unreleased dependency. (I
> know there are corporate timing issues, but they really should not force us
> into situations like these).
>
> As far as I understand the issue, it not just a performance but can lead
> to incorrect results.
>
> Then again, this issue has existed in all of 0.96 and 0.98 so far (over 5
> months).
>
> So, I'd be in favor of releasing 0.98.1 now, and doing 0.98.2 soon, in 14
> or 20 days (that would also pull back some of the time lost in the 0.98.1RC
> cycle).
>
> -- Lars
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>
> To: "user@hbase.apache.org" <us...@hbase.apache.org>
> Cc: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:57 AM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is
> available for download
>
>
> I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
> can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
> seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
> additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
>
> James
>
> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
> >
> > Regards
> > Ram
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Understood, Andy.
> > >
> > > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> > > >
> > > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
> > > vote
> > > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take
> > the
> > > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
> > > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
> > > > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> > > >
> > > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers
> > > > >
> > > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in
> 98.1
> > > > release
> > > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
> > essential
> > > > CF
> > > > >> optimization.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> -Anoop-
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> +1 on the RC.
> > > > >>> Checked the signature.
> > > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> > > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
> > > looks
> > > > >>> fine.
> > > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Regards
> > > > >>> Ram
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <
> eclark@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> +1
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Checked the hash
> > > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> > > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> +1
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a
> tip
> > > of
> > > > >>> the
> > > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
> > > linked
> > > > >>>> list
> > > > >>>>> test worked).
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is
> > too
> > > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our
> internal
> > > rig
> > > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
> > passing
> > > > >>> green
> > > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> St.Ack
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > apurtell@apache.org
> > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> > > > >>> download
> > > > >>>> at
> > > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
> > artifacts
> > > > >>> are
> > > > >>>>> also
> > > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> > > > >>>
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight
> Pacific
> > > Time
> > > > >>>>> (00:00
> > > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
> > > 0.98.1.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > >>>>>> Best regards,
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> - Andy
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
> > > Piet
> > > > >>>> Hein
> > > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> > > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for download
Posted by lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org>.
To be fair, Phoenix should not have relied on an unreleased dependency. (I know there are corporate timing issues, but they really should not force us into situations like these).
As far as I understand the issue, it not just a performance but can lead to incorrect results.
Then again, this issue has existed in all of 0.96 and 0.98 so far (over 5 months).
So, I'd be in favor of releasing 0.98.1 now, and doing 0.98.2 soon, in 14 or 20 days (that would also pull back some of the time lost in the 0.98.1RC cycle).
-- Lars
________________________________
From: James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>
To: "user@hbase.apache.org" <us...@hbase.apache.org>
Cc: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:57 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for download
I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
  James
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
>
> Regards
> Ram
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Understood, Andy.
> >
> > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> > >
> > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
> > vote
> > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take
> the
> > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
> > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
> > >Â 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> > >
> > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > >
> > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850Â I think better we can fix this in 98.1
> > > release
> > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
> essential
> > > CF
> > > >> optimization.
> > > >>
> > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> > > >>
> > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> > > >>
> > > >> -Anoop-
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> +1 on the RC.
> > > >>> Checked the signature.
> > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
> > looks
> > > >>> fine.
> > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Regards
> > > >>> Ram
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> +1
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Checked the hash
> > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> +1
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip
> > of
> > > >>> the
> > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
> > linked
> > > >>>> list
> > > >>>>> test worked).
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is
> too
> > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal
> > rig
> > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
> passing
> > > >>> green
> > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> St.Ack
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > apurtell@apache.org
> > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> > > >>> download
> > > >>>> at
> > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
> artifacts
> > > >>> are
> > > >>>>> also
> > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> > > >>>
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > > >>>
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific
> > Time
> > > >>>>> (00:00
> > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
> > 0.98.1.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>> Best regards,
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>Â - Andy
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
> > Piet
> > > >>>> Hein
> > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> > > >>>
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for download
Posted by lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org>.
To be fair, Phoenix should not have relied on an unreleased dependency. (I know there are corporate timing issues, but they really should not force us into situations like these).
As far as I understand the issue, it not just a performance but can lead to incorrect results.
Then again, this issue has existed in all of 0.96 and 0.98 so far (over 5 months).
So, I'd be in favor of releasing 0.98.1 now, and doing 0.98.2 soon, in 14 or 20 days (that would also pull back some of the time lost in the 0.98.1RC cycle).
-- Lars
________________________________
From: James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>
To: "user@hbase.apache.org" <us...@hbase.apache.org>
Cc: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:57 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for download
I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
  James
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
>
> Regards
> Ram
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Understood, Andy.
> >
> > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> > >
> > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
> > vote
> > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take
> the
> > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
> > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
> > >Â 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> > >
> > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > >
> > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850Â I think better we can fix this in 98.1
> > > release
> > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
> essential
> > > CF
> > > >> optimization.
> > > >>
> > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> > > >>
> > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> > > >>
> > > >> -Anoop-
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> +1 on the RC.
> > > >>> Checked the signature.
> > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
> > looks
> > > >>> fine.
> > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Regards
> > > >>> Ram
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> +1
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Checked the hash
> > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> +1
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip
> > of
> > > >>> the
> > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
> > linked
> > > >>>> list
> > > >>>>> test worked).
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is
> too
> > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal
> > rig
> > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
> passing
> > > >>> green
> > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> St.Ack
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > apurtell@apache.org
> > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> > > >>> download
> > > >>>> at
> > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
> artifacts
> > > >>> are
> > > >>>>> also
> > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> > > >>>
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > > >>>
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific
> > Time
> > > >>>>> (00:00
> > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
> > 0.98.1.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>> Best regards,
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>Â - Andy
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
> > Piet
> > > >>>> Hein
> > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> > > >>>
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
I don't think so.
Please take a look at the new test - TestSCVFWithMiniCluster
It exposes the defect Fabien reported. Without the fix, two of the
sub-tests in TestSCVFWithMiniCluster would fail.
Cheers
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 9:20 AM, James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com> wrote:
> It's just the optimization that's (sometimes) broken, right? The scan
> still returns the correct results, no?
>
> > On Apr 3, 2014, at 9:13 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > James:
> > HBASE-10850 is not just about SingleColumnValueFilter. See Anoop's
> comment:
> >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10850?focusedCommentId=13958668&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13958668
> >
> > The test case Fabien provided uses SingleColumnValueFilter but the defect
> > has deeper implication beyond making SingleColumnValueFilter unusable in
> > certain scenarios.
> >
> > I am find with giving the next RC a bit shorter voting period.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> >
> >> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 8:57 AM, James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
> >> can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
> >> seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
> >> additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
> >>
> >> James
> >>
> >> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>> Ram
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Understood, Andy.
> >>>>
> >>>> I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> >> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
> >>>> vote
> >>>>> and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take
> >>> the
> >>>>> time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
> >>>>> blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
> >>>>> 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Cheers
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in
> >> 98.1
> >>>>> release
> >>>>>>> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
> >>> essential
> >>>>> CF
> >>>>>>> optimization.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Considering those we need a new RC.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> -Anoop-
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> >>>>>>> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> +1 on the RC.
> >>>>>>>> Checked the signature.
> >>>>>>>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> >>>>>>>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
> >>>> looks
> >>>>>>>> fine.
> >>>>>>>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>>>> Ram
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <
> >> eclark@apache.org>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Checked the hash
> >>>>>>>>> Checked the tar layout.
> >>>>>>>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a
> >> tip
> >>>> of
> >>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
> >>>> linked
> >>>>>>>>> list
> >>>>>>>>>> test worked).
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is
> >>> too
> >>>>>>>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our
> >> internal
> >>>> rig
> >>>>>>>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
> >>> passing
> >>>>>>>> green
> >>>>>>>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> St.Ack
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> >>>>> apurtell@apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> >>>>>>>> download
> >>>>>>>>> at
> >>>>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
> >>> artifacts
> >>>>>>>> are
> >>>>>>>>>> also
> >>>>>>>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> >>>>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight
> >> Pacific
> >>>> Time
> >>>>>>>>>> (00:00
> >>>>>>>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
> >>>> 0.98.1.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> - Andy
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
> >>>> Piet
> >>>>>>>>> Hein
> >>>>>>>>>>> (via Tom White)
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
I don't think so.
Please take a look at the new test - TestSCVFWithMiniCluster
It exposes the defect Fabien reported. Without the fix, two of the
sub-tests in TestSCVFWithMiniCluster would fail.
Cheers
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 9:20 AM, James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com> wrote:
> It's just the optimization that's (sometimes) broken, right? The scan
> still returns the correct results, no?
>
> > On Apr 3, 2014, at 9:13 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > James:
> > HBASE-10850 is not just about SingleColumnValueFilter. See Anoop's
> comment:
> >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10850?focusedCommentId=13958668&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13958668
> >
> > The test case Fabien provided uses SingleColumnValueFilter but the defect
> > has deeper implication beyond making SingleColumnValueFilter unusable in
> > certain scenarios.
> >
> > I am find with giving the next RC a bit shorter voting period.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> >
> >> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 8:57 AM, James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
> >> can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
> >> seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
> >> additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
> >>
> >> James
> >>
> >> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>> Ram
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Understood, Andy.
> >>>>
> >>>> I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> >> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
> >>>> vote
> >>>>> and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take
> >>> the
> >>>>> time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
> >>>>> blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
> >>>>> 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Cheers
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in
> >> 98.1
> >>>>> release
> >>>>>>> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
> >>> essential
> >>>>> CF
> >>>>>>> optimization.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Considering those we need a new RC.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> -Anoop-
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> >>>>>>> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> +1 on the RC.
> >>>>>>>> Checked the signature.
> >>>>>>>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> >>>>>>>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
> >>>> looks
> >>>>>>>> fine.
> >>>>>>>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>>>> Ram
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <
> >> eclark@apache.org>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Checked the hash
> >>>>>>>>> Checked the tar layout.
> >>>>>>>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a
> >> tip
> >>>> of
> >>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
> >>>> linked
> >>>>>>>>> list
> >>>>>>>>>> test worked).
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is
> >>> too
> >>>>>>>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our
> >> internal
> >>>> rig
> >>>>>>>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
> >>> passing
> >>>>>>>> green
> >>>>>>>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> St.Ack
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> >>>>> apurtell@apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> >>>>>>>> download
> >>>>>>>>> at
> >>>>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
> >>> artifacts
> >>>>>>>> are
> >>>>>>>>>> also
> >>>>>>>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> >>>>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight
> >> Pacific
> >>>> Time
> >>>>>>>>>> (00:00
> >>>>>>>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
> >>>> 0.98.1.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> - Andy
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
> >>>> Piet
> >>>>>>>>> Hein
> >>>>>>>>>>> (via Tom White)
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>.
It's just the optimization that's (sometimes) broken, right? The scan
still returns the correct results, no?
> On Apr 3, 2014, at 9:13 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> James:
> HBASE-10850 is not just about SingleColumnValueFilter. See Anoop's comment:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10850?focusedCommentId=13958668&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13958668
>
> The test case Fabien provided uses SingleColumnValueFilter but the defect
> has deeper implication beyond making SingleColumnValueFilter unusable in
> certain scenarios.
>
> I am find with giving the next RC a bit shorter voting period.
>
> Cheers
>
>
>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 8:57 AM, James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com> wrote:
>>
>> I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
>> can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
>> seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
>> additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
>>
>> James
>>
>> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
>> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Ram
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Understood, Andy.
>>>>
>>>> I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
>> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
>>>> vote
>>>>> and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take
>>> the
>>>>> time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
>>>>> blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
>>>>> 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree with Anoop's assessment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in
>> 98.1
>>>>> release
>>>>>>> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
>>> essential
>>>>> CF
>>>>>>> optimization.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Considering those we need a new RC.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Anoop-
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
>>>>>>> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +1 on the RC.
>>>>>>>> Checked the signature.
>>>>>>>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
>>>>>>>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
>>>> looks
>>>>>>>> fine.
>>>>>>>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>> Ram
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <
>> eclark@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Checked the hash
>>>>>>>>> Checked the tar layout.
>>>>>>>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a
>> tip
>>>> of
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
>>>> linked
>>>>>>>>> list
>>>>>>>>>> test worked).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is
>>> too
>>>>>>>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our
>> internal
>>>> rig
>>>>>>>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
>>> passing
>>>>>>>> green
>>>>>>>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> St.Ack
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>>> apurtell@apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
>>>>>>>> download
>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
>>> artifacts
>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>>> available in the temporary repository
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight
>> Pacific
>>>> Time
>>>>>>>>>> (00:00
>>>>>>>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
>>>> 0.98.1.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> - Andy
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
>>>> Piet
>>>>>>>>> Hein
>>>>>>>>>>> (via Tom White)
>>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>.
It's just the optimization that's (sometimes) broken, right? The scan
still returns the correct results, no?
> On Apr 3, 2014, at 9:13 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> James:
> HBASE-10850 is not just about SingleColumnValueFilter. See Anoop's comment:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10850?focusedCommentId=13958668&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13958668
>
> The test case Fabien provided uses SingleColumnValueFilter but the defect
> has deeper implication beyond making SingleColumnValueFilter unusable in
> certain scenarios.
>
> I am find with giving the next RC a bit shorter voting period.
>
> Cheers
>
>
>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 8:57 AM, James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com> wrote:
>>
>> I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
>> can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
>> seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
>> additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
>>
>> James
>>
>> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
>> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Ram
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Understood, Andy.
>>>>
>>>> I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
>> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
>>>> vote
>>>>> and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take
>>> the
>>>>> time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
>>>>> blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
>>>>> 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree with Anoop's assessment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in
>> 98.1
>>>>> release
>>>>>>> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
>>> essential
>>>>> CF
>>>>>>> optimization.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Considering those we need a new RC.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Anoop-
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
>>>>>>> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +1 on the RC.
>>>>>>>> Checked the signature.
>>>>>>>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
>>>>>>>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
>>>> looks
>>>>>>>> fine.
>>>>>>>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>> Ram
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <
>> eclark@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Checked the hash
>>>>>>>>> Checked the tar layout.
>>>>>>>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a
>> tip
>>>> of
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
>>>> linked
>>>>>>>>> list
>>>>>>>>>> test worked).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is
>>> too
>>>>>>>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our
>> internal
>>>> rig
>>>>>>>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
>>> passing
>>>>>>>> green
>>>>>>>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> St.Ack
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>>> apurtell@apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
>>>>>>>> download
>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
>>> artifacts
>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>>> available in the temporary repository
>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight
>> Pacific
>>>> Time
>>>>>>>>>> (00:00
>>>>>>>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
>>>> 0.98.1.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> - Andy
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
>>>> Piet
>>>>>>>>> Hein
>>>>>>>>>>> (via Tom White)
>>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
James:
HBASE-10850 is not just about SingleColumnValueFilter. See Anoop's comment:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10850?focusedCommentId=13958668&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13958668
The test case Fabien provided uses SingleColumnValueFilter but the defect
has deeper implication beyond making SingleColumnValueFilter unusable in
certain scenarios.
I am find with giving the next RC a bit shorter voting period.
Cheers
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 8:57 AM, James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com> wrote:
> I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
> can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
> seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
> additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
>
> James
>
> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
> >
> > Regards
> > Ram
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Understood, Andy.
> > >
> > > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> > > >
> > > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
> > > vote
> > > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take
> > the
> > > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
> > > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
> > > > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> > > >
> > > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers
> > > > >
> > > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in
> 98.1
> > > > release
> > > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
> > essential
> > > > CF
> > > > >> optimization.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> -Anoop-
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> +1 on the RC.
> > > > >>> Checked the signature.
> > > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> > > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
> > > looks
> > > > >>> fine.
> > > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Regards
> > > > >>> Ram
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <
> eclark@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> +1
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Checked the hash
> > > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> > > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> +1
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a
> tip
> > > of
> > > > >>> the
> > > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
> > > linked
> > > > >>>> list
> > > > >>>>> test worked).
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is
> > too
> > > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our
> internal
> > > rig
> > > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
> > passing
> > > > >>> green
> > > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> St.Ack
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > apurtell@apache.org
> > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> > > > >>> download
> > > > >>>> at
> > > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
> > artifacts
> > > > >>> are
> > > > >>>>> also
> > > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> > > > >>>
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight
> Pacific
> > > Time
> > > > >>>>> (00:00
> > > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
> > > 0.98.1.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > >>>>>> Best regards,
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> - Andy
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
> > > Piet
> > > > >>>> Hein
> > > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> > > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
James:
HBASE-10850 is not just about SingleColumnValueFilter. See Anoop's comment:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10850?focusedCommentId=13958668&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13958668
The test case Fabien provided uses SingleColumnValueFilter but the defect
has deeper implication beyond making SingleColumnValueFilter unusable in
certain scenarios.
I am find with giving the next RC a bit shorter voting period.
Cheers
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 8:57 AM, James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com> wrote:
> I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
> can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
> seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
> additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
>
> James
>
> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
> >
> > Regards
> > Ram
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Understood, Andy.
> > >
> > > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> > > >
> > > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
> > > vote
> > > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take
> > the
> > > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
> > > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
> > > > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> > > >
> > > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers
> > > > >
> > > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in
> 98.1
> > > > release
> > > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
> > essential
> > > > CF
> > > > >> optimization.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> -Anoop-
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> +1 on the RC.
> > > > >>> Checked the signature.
> > > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> > > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
> > > looks
> > > > >>> fine.
> > > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Regards
> > > > >>> Ram
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <
> eclark@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> +1
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Checked the hash
> > > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> > > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> +1
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a
> tip
> > > of
> > > > >>> the
> > > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
> > > linked
> > > > >>>> list
> > > > >>>>> test worked).
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is
> > too
> > > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our
> internal
> > > rig
> > > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
> > passing
> > > > >>> green
> > > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> St.Ack
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > apurtell@apache.org
> > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> > > > >>> download
> > > > >>>> at
> > > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
> > artifacts
> > > > >>> are
> > > > >>>>> also
> > > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> > > > >>>
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight
> Pacific
> > > Time
> > > > >>>>> (00:00
> > > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
> > > 0.98.1.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > >>>>>> Best regards,
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> - Andy
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
> > > Piet
> > > > >>>> Hein
> > > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> > > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Stack <st...@duboce.net>.
+1 pushing out 0.96.1. HBASE-10850 is not a blocker.
St.Ack
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>wrote:
> This would be my preference also.
>
> Can someone provide a definitive statement on if a critical/blocker bug
> exists for Phoenix or not? If not, we have sufficient votes at this point
> to carry the RC and can go forward with the release at the end of the vote
> period.
>
>
> > On Apr 3, 2014, at 5:57 PM, James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com> wrote:
> >
> > I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
> > can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
> > seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
> > additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
> >
> > James
> >
> > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Ram
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Understood, Andy.
> >>>
> >>> I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> >>>
> >>> Cheers
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> >>>>
> >>>> However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
> >>> vote
> >>>> and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take
> >> the
> >>>> time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
> >>>> blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
> >>>> 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1
> >>>> release
> >>>>>> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
> >> essential
> >>>> CF
> >>>>>> optimization.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Considering those we need a new RC.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -Anoop-
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> >>>>>> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> +1 on the RC.
> >>>>>>> Checked the signature.
> >>>>>>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> >>>>>>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
> >>> looks
> >>>>>>> fine.
> >>>>>>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>>> Ram
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Checked the hash
> >>>>>>>> Checked the tar layout.
> >>>>>>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip
> >>> of
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
> >>> linked
> >>>>>>>> list
> >>>>>>>>> test worked).
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is
> >> too
> >>>>>>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal
> >>> rig
> >>>>>>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
> >> passing
> >>>>>>> green
> >>>>>>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> St.Ack
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> >>>> apurtell@apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> >>>>>>> download
> >>>>>>>> at
> >>>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
> >> artifacts
> >>>>>>> are
> >>>>>>>>> also
> >>>>>>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific
> >>> Time
> >>>>>>>>> (00:00
> >>>>>>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
> >>> 0.98.1.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> - Andy
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
> >>> Piet
> >>>>>>>> Hein
> >>>>>>>>>> (via Tom White)
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>.
+1 to Andrew's suggestion. @Anoop - would you mind verifying whether or not
the TestSCVFWithMiniCluster written as a Phoenix query returns the correct
results?
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>wrote:
> This would be my preference also.
>
> Can someone provide a definitive statement on if a critical/blocker bug
> exists for Phoenix or not? If not, we have sufficient votes at this point
> to carry the RC and can go forward with the release at the end of the vote
> period.
>
>
> > On Apr 3, 2014, at 5:57 PM, James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com> wrote:
> >
> > I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
> > can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
> > seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
> > additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
> >
> > James
> >
> > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Ram
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Understood, Andy.
> >>>
> >>> I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> >>>
> >>> Cheers
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> >>>>
> >>>> However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
> >>> vote
> >>>> and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take
> >> the
> >>>> time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
> >>>> blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
> >>>> 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1
> >>>> release
> >>>>>> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
> >> essential
> >>>> CF
> >>>>>> optimization.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Considering those we need a new RC.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -Anoop-
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> >>>>>> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> +1 on the RC.
> >>>>>>> Checked the signature.
> >>>>>>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> >>>>>>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
> >>> looks
> >>>>>>> fine.
> >>>>>>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>>> Ram
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Checked the hash
> >>>>>>>> Checked the tar layout.
> >>>>>>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip
> >>> of
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
> >>> linked
> >>>>>>>> list
> >>>>>>>>> test worked).
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is
> >> too
> >>>>>>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal
> >>> rig
> >>>>>>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
> >> passing
> >>>>>>> green
> >>>>>>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> St.Ack
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> >>>> apurtell@apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> >>>>>>> download
> >>>>>>>> at
> >>>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
> >> artifacts
> >>>>>>> are
> >>>>>>>>> also
> >>>>>>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific
> >>> Time
> >>>>>>>>> (00:00
> >>>>>>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
> >>> 0.98.1.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> - Andy
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
> >>> Piet
> >>>>>>>> Hein
> >>>>>>>>>> (via Tom White)
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>.
+1 to Andrew's suggestion. @Anoop - would you mind verifying whether or not
the TestSCVFWithMiniCluster written as a Phoenix query returns the correct
results?
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>wrote:
> This would be my preference also.
>
> Can someone provide a definitive statement on if a critical/blocker bug
> exists for Phoenix or not? If not, we have sufficient votes at this point
> to carry the RC and can go forward with the release at the end of the vote
> period.
>
>
> > On Apr 3, 2014, at 5:57 PM, James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com> wrote:
> >
> > I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
> > can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
> > seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
> > additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
> >
> > James
> >
> > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Ram
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Understood, Andy.
> >>>
> >>> I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> >>>
> >>> Cheers
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> >>>>
> >>>> However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
> >>> vote
> >>>> and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take
> >> the
> >>>> time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
> >>>> blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
> >>>> 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1
> >>>> release
> >>>>>> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
> >> essential
> >>>> CF
> >>>>>> optimization.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Considering those we need a new RC.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -Anoop-
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> >>>>>> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> +1 on the RC.
> >>>>>>> Checked the signature.
> >>>>>>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> >>>>>>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
> >>> looks
> >>>>>>> fine.
> >>>>>>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>>> Ram
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Checked the hash
> >>>>>>>> Checked the tar layout.
> >>>>>>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip
> >>> of
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
> >>> linked
> >>>>>>>> list
> >>>>>>>>> test worked).
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is
> >> too
> >>>>>>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal
> >>> rig
> >>>>>>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
> >> passing
> >>>>>>> green
> >>>>>>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> St.Ack
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> >>>> apurtell@apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> >>>>>>> download
> >>>>>>>> at
> >>>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
> >> artifacts
> >>>>>>> are
> >>>>>>>>> also
> >>>>>>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific
> >>> Time
> >>>>>>>>> (00:00
> >>>>>>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
> >>> 0.98.1.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> - Andy
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
> >>> Piet
> >>>>>>>> Hein
> >>>>>>>>>> (via Tom White)
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Stack <st...@duboce.net>.
+1 pushing out 0.96.1. HBASE-10850 is not a blocker.
St.Ack
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>wrote:
> This would be my preference also.
>
> Can someone provide a definitive statement on if a critical/blocker bug
> exists for Phoenix or not? If not, we have sufficient votes at this point
> to carry the RC and can go forward with the release at the end of the vote
> period.
>
>
> > On Apr 3, 2014, at 5:57 PM, James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com> wrote:
> >
> > I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
> > can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
> > seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
> > additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
> >
> > James
> >
> > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Ram
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Understood, Andy.
> >>>
> >>> I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> >>>
> >>> Cheers
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> >>>>
> >>>> However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
> >>> vote
> >>>> and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take
> >> the
> >>>> time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
> >>>> blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
> >>>> 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1
> >>>> release
> >>>>>> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
> >> essential
> >>>> CF
> >>>>>> optimization.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Considering those we need a new RC.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -Anoop-
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> >>>>>> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> +1 on the RC.
> >>>>>>> Checked the signature.
> >>>>>>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> >>>>>>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
> >>> looks
> >>>>>>> fine.
> >>>>>>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>>> Ram
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Checked the hash
> >>>>>>>> Checked the tar layout.
> >>>>>>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip
> >>> of
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
> >>> linked
> >>>>>>>> list
> >>>>>>>>> test worked).
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is
> >> too
> >>>>>>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal
> >>> rig
> >>>>>>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
> >> passing
> >>>>>>> green
> >>>>>>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> St.Ack
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> >>>> apurtell@apache.org
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> >>>>>>> download
> >>>>>>>> at
> >>>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
> >> artifacts
> >>>>>>> are
> >>>>>>>>> also
> >>>>>>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific
> >>> Time
> >>>>>>>>> (00:00
> >>>>>>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
> >>> 0.98.1.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> - Andy
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
> >>> Piet
> >>>>>>>> Hein
> >>>>>>>>>> (via Tom White)
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for download
Posted by Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>.
This would be my preference also.
Can someone provide a definitive statement on if a critical/blocker bug exists for Phoenix or not? If not, we have sufficient votes at this point to carry the RC and can go forward with the release at the end of the vote period.
> On Apr 3, 2014, at 5:57 PM, James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com> wrote:
>
> I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
> can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
> seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
> additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
>
> James
>
> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
>>
>> Regards
>> Ram
>>
>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Understood, Andy.
>>>
>>> I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
>>>>
>>>> However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
>>> vote
>>>> and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take
>> the
>>>> time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
>>>> blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
>>>> 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree with Anoop's assessment.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1
>>>> release
>>>>>> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
>> essential
>>>> CF
>>>>>> optimization.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Considering those we need a new RC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Anoop-
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
>>>>>> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1 on the RC.
>>>>>>> Checked the signature.
>>>>>>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
>>>>>>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
>>> looks
>>>>>>> fine.
>>>>>>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>> Ram
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Checked the hash
>>>>>>>> Checked the tar layout.
>>>>>>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip
>>> of
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
>>> linked
>>>>>>>> list
>>>>>>>>> test worked).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is
>> too
>>>>>>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal
>>> rig
>>>>>>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
>> passing
>>>>>>> green
>>>>>>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> St.Ack
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>> apurtell@apache.org
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
>>>>>>> download
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
>> artifacts
>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>> available in the temporary repository
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific
>>> Time
>>>>>>>>> (00:00
>>>>>>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
>>> 0.98.1.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> - Andy
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
>>> Piet
>>>>>>>> Hein
>>>>>>>>>> (via Tom White)
>>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for download
Posted by Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>.
This would be my preference also.
Can someone provide a definitive statement on if a critical/blocker bug exists for Phoenix or not? If not, we have sufficient votes at this point to carry the RC and can go forward with the release at the end of the vote period.
> On Apr 3, 2014, at 5:57 PM, James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com> wrote:
>
> I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
> can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
> seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
> additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
>
> James
>
> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
>>
>> Regards
>> Ram
>>
>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Understood, Andy.
>>>
>>> I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
>>>>
>>>> However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
>>> vote
>>>> and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take
>> the
>>>> time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
>>>> blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
>>>> 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree with Anoop's assessment.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1
>>>> release
>>>>>> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
>> essential
>>>> CF
>>>>>> optimization.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Considering those we need a new RC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Anoop-
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
>>>>>> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1 on the RC.
>>>>>>> Checked the signature.
>>>>>>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
>>>>>>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
>>> looks
>>>>>>> fine.
>>>>>>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>> Ram
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Checked the hash
>>>>>>>> Checked the tar layout.
>>>>>>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip
>>> of
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
>>> linked
>>>>>>>> list
>>>>>>>>> test worked).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is
>> too
>>>>>>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal
>>> rig
>>>>>>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
>> passing
>>>>>>> green
>>>>>>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> St.Ack
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>> apurtell@apache.org
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
>>>>>>> download
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
>> artifacts
>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>> available in the temporary repository
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific
>>> Time
>>>>>>>>> (00:00
>>>>>>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
>>> 0.98.1.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> - Andy
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
>>> Piet
>>>>>>>> Hein
>>>>>>>>>> (via Tom White)
>>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>.
I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
James
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
>
> Regards
> Ram
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Understood, Andy.
> >
> > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> > >
> > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
> > vote
> > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take
> the
> > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
> > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
> > > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> > >
> > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > >
> > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1
> > > release
> > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
> essential
> > > CF
> > > >> optimization.
> > > >>
> > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> > > >>
> > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> > > >>
> > > >> -Anoop-
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> +1 on the RC.
> > > >>> Checked the signature.
> > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
> > looks
> > > >>> fine.
> > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Regards
> > > >>> Ram
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> +1
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Checked the hash
> > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> +1
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip
> > of
> > > >>> the
> > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
> > linked
> > > >>>> list
> > > >>>>> test worked).
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is
> too
> > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal
> > rig
> > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
> passing
> > > >>> green
> > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> St.Ack
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > apurtell@apache.org
> > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> > > >>> download
> > > >>>> at
> > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
> artifacts
> > > >>> are
> > > >>>>> also
> > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> > > >>>
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > > >>>
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific
> > Time
> > > >>>>> (00:00
> > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
> > 0.98.1.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>> Best regards,
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> - Andy
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
> > Piet
> > > >>>> Hein
> > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> > > >>>
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by James Taylor <jt...@salesforce.com>.
I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no release it
can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, so it
seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these
additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]?
James
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
>
> Regards
> Ram
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Understood, Andy.
> >
> > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> > >
> > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
> > vote
> > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take
> the
> > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
> > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
> > > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> > >
> > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > >
> > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1
> > > release
> > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses
> essential
> > > CF
> > > >> optimization.
> > > >>
> > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> > > >>
> > > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> > > >>
> > > >> -Anoop-
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> +1 on the RC.
> > > >>> Checked the signature.
> > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
> > looks
> > > >>> fine.
> > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Regards
> > > >>> Ram
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> +1
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Checked the hash
> > > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> +1
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip
> > of
> > > >>> the
> > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
> > linked
> > > >>>> list
> > > >>>>> test worked).
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is
> too
> > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal
> > rig
> > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been
> passing
> > > >>> green
> > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> St.Ack
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > apurtell@apache.org
> > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> > > >>> download
> > > >>>> at
> > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven
> artifacts
> > > >>> are
> > > >>>>> also
> > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> > > >>>
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > > >>>
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific
> > Time
> > > >>>>> (00:00
> > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
> > 0.98.1.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>> Best regards,
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> - Andy
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
> > Piet
> > > >>>> Hein
> > > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> > > >>>
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by ramkrishna vasudevan <ra...@gmail.com>.
Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
Regards
Ram
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Understood, Andy.
>
> I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
>
> Cheers
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> >
> > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
> vote
> > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take the
> > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
> > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
> > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> >
> > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1
> > release
> > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses essential
> > CF
> > >> optimization.
> > >>
> > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> > >>
> > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> > >>
> > >> -Anoop-
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> +1 on the RC.
> > >>> Checked the signature.
> > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
> looks
> > >>> fine.
> > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> > >>>
> > >>> Regards
> > >>> Ram
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> +1
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Checked the hash
> > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> +1
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip
> of
> > >>> the
> > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
> linked
> > >>>> list
> > >>>>> test worked).
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is too
> > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal
> rig
> > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been passing
> > >>> green
> > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> St.Ack
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > apurtell@apache.org
> > >>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> > >>> download
> > >>>> at
> > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven artifacts
> > >>> are
> > >>>>> also
> > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> > >>>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > >>>
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific
> Time
> > >>>>> (00:00
> > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
> 0.98.1.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>> Best regards,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> - Andy
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
> Piet
> > >>>> Hein
> > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> > >>>
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by ramkrishna vasudevan <ra...@gmail.com>.
Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time.
Regards
Ram
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Understood, Andy.
>
> I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
>
> Cheers
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
> >
> > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1
> vote
> > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take the
> > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
> > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
> > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> >
> > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1
> > release
> > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses essential
> > CF
> > >> optimization.
> > >>
> > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> > >>
> > >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> > >>
> > >> -Anoop-
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> +1 on the RC.
> > >>> Checked the signature.
> > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
> looks
> > >>> fine.
> > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> > >>>
> > >>> Regards
> > >>> Ram
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> +1
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Checked the hash
> > >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> +1
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip
> of
> > >>> the
> > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
> linked
> > >>>> list
> > >>>>> test worked).
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is too
> > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal
> rig
> > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been passing
> > >>> green
> > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> St.Ack
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > apurtell@apache.org
> > >>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> > >>> download
> > >>>> at
> > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven artifacts
> > >>> are
> > >>>>> also
> > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> > >>>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > >>>
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific
> Time
> > >>>>> (00:00
> > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as
> 0.98.1.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>> Best regards,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> - Andy
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. -
> Piet
> > >>>> Hein
> > >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> > >>>
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
Understood, Andy.
I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
Cheers
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
>
> However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1 vote
> and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take the
> time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
> blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
> 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
>
> > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1
> release
> >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses essential
> CF
> >> optimization.
> >>
> >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> >>
> >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> >>
> >> -Anoop-
> >>
> >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1 on the RC.
> >>> Checked the signature.
> >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything looks
> >>> fine.
> >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>> Ram
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> +1
> >>>>
> >>>> Checked the hash
> >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> +1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip of
> >>> the
> >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big linked
> >>>> list
> >>>>> test worked).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is too
> >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal rig
> >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been passing
> >>> green
> >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> St.Ack
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> apurtell@apache.org
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> >>> download
> >>>> at
> >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven artifacts
> >>> are
> >>>>> also
> >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> >>>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific Time
> >>>>> (00:00
> >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as 0.98.1.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> - Andy
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
> >>>> Hein
> >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> >>>
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
Understood, Andy.
I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98
Cheers
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
>
> However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1 vote
> and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take the
> time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file
> blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1.
> 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
>
> > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1
> release
> >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses essential
> CF
> >> optimization.
> >>
> >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> >>
> >> Considering those we need a new RC.
> >>
> >> -Anoop-
> >>
> >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> >> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1 on the RC.
> >>> Checked the signature.
> >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything looks
> >>> fine.
> >>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>> Ram
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> +1
> >>>>
> >>>> Checked the hash
> >>>> Checked the tar layout.
> >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> +1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip of
> >>> the
> >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big linked
> >>>> list
> >>>>> test worked).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is too
> >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal rig
> >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been passing
> >>> green
> >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> St.Ack
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> apurtell@apache.org
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> >>> download
> >>>> at
> >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven artifacts
> >>> are
> >>>>> also
> >>>>>> available in the temporary repository
> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> >>>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific Time
> >>>>> (00:00
> >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as 0.98.1.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> - Andy
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
> >>>> Hein
> >>>>>> (via Tom White)
> >>>
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for download
Posted by Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>.
I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1 vote and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take the time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1. 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I agree with Anoop's assessment.
>
> Cheers
>
>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1 release
>> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses essential CF
>> optimization.
>>
>> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
>>
>> Considering those we need a new RC.
>>
>> -Anoop-
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
>> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 on the RC.
>>> Checked the signature.
>>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
>>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything looks
>>> fine.
>>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Ram
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> Checked the hash
>>>> Checked the tar layout.
>>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip of
>>> the
>>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big linked
>>>> list
>>>>> test worked).
>>>>>
>>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is too
>>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal rig
>>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been passing
>>> green
>>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
>>>>>
>>>>> St.Ack
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
>>> download
>>>> at
>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven artifacts
>>> are
>>>>> also
>>>>>> available in the temporary repository
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific Time
>>>>> (00:00
>>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as 0.98.1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Andy
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
>>>> Hein
>>>>>> (via Tom White)
>>>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>.
This is already committed. So if we have a new RC, this issue also will get
in.
-Anoop-
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Fabien LE GALLO <fl...@ubikod.com> wrote:
> Can we also include HBASE-10848 in 0.98.1 ?
> This is another issue related to filters, not as critical as HBASE-10850
> but it would be great to have it in this release.
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1
> > release
> > > itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses essential
> CF
> > > optimization.
> > >
> > > Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> > >
> > > Considering those we need a new RC.
> > >
> > > -Anoop-
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> +1 on the RC.
> > >> Checked the signature.
> > >> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> > >> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
> looks
> > >> fine.
> > >> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> > >>
> > >> Regards
> > >> Ram
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> +1
> > >>>
> > >>> Checked the hash
> > >>> Checked the tar layout.
> > >>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> +1
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip of
> > >> the
> > >>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
> linked
> > >>> list
> > >>>> test worked).
> > >>>>
> > >>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is too
> > >>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal rig
> > >>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been passing
> > >> green
> > >>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> St.Ack
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> apurtell@apache.org
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> > >> download
> > >>> at
> > >>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven artifacts
> > >> are
> > >>>> also
> > >>>>> available in the temporary repository
> > >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > >>
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific
> Time
> > >>>> (00:00
> > >>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as 0.98.1.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> --
> > >>>>> Best regards,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - Andy
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
> > >>> Hein
> > >>>>> (via Tom White)
> > >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Fabien Le Gallo
> * Software Engineer * * , * * Capptain *
> ------------------------------
> * e. * flegallo@capptain.com
> * w. * http://www.capptain.com
> * a. * 18 rue Tronchet, 75008 Paris, France
> <
> https://www.facebook.com/capptain?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature
> >
> <
> https://twitter.com/capptain_hq?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature
> >
> <
> http://www.capptain.com/feed/?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature
> >
> <
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDowgVp4zmA?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature
> >
> 4 Tips to Market Your App
> <
> http://www.capptain.com/2014/03/26/4-tips-for-marketing-your-app/?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature
> >
>
> <
> http://www.capptain.com/contact/?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature
> >
> IMPORTANT: The contents of this email and any attachments are
> confidential. They are intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you
> have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender immediately
> and do not disclose the contents to anyone or make copies thereof.
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>.
This is already committed. So if we have a new RC, this issue also will get
in.
-Anoop-
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Fabien LE GALLO <fl...@ubikod.com> wrote:
> Can we also include HBASE-10848 in 0.98.1 ?
> This is another issue related to filters, not as critical as HBASE-10850
> but it would be great to have it in this release.
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I agree with Anoop's assessment.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1
> > release
> > > itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses essential
> CF
> > > optimization.
> > >
> > > Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> > >
> > > Considering those we need a new RC.
> > >
> > > -Anoop-
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> +1 on the RC.
> > >> Checked the signature.
> > >> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> > >> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything
> looks
> > >> fine.
> > >> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> > >>
> > >> Regards
> > >> Ram
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> +1
> > >>>
> > >>> Checked the hash
> > >>> Checked the tar layout.
> > >>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> +1
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip of
> > >> the
> > >>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big
> linked
> > >>> list
> > >>>> test worked).
> > >>>>
> > >>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is too
> > >>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal rig
> > >>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been passing
> > >> green
> > >>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> St.Ack
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> apurtell@apache.org
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> > >> download
> > >>> at
> > >>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven artifacts
> > >> are
> > >>>> also
> > >>>>> available in the temporary repository
> > >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > >>
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific
> Time
> > >>>> (00:00
> > >>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as 0.98.1.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> --
> > >>>>> Best regards,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - Andy
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
> > >>> Hein
> > >>>>> (via Tom White)
> > >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Fabien Le Gallo
> * Software Engineer * * , * * Capptain *
> ------------------------------
> * e. * flegallo@capptain.com
> * w. * http://www.capptain.com
> * a. * 18 rue Tronchet, 75008 Paris, France
> <
> https://www.facebook.com/capptain?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature
> >
> <
> https://twitter.com/capptain_hq?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature
> >
> <
> http://www.capptain.com/feed/?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature
> >
> <
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDowgVp4zmA?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature
> >
> 4 Tips to Market Your App
> <
> http://www.capptain.com/2014/03/26/4-tips-for-marketing-your-app/?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature
> >
>
> <
> http://www.capptain.com/contact/?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature
> >
> IMPORTANT: The contents of this email and any attachments are
> confidential. They are intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you
> have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender immediately
> and do not disclose the contents to anyone or make copies thereof.
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Fabien LE GALLO <fl...@ubikod.com>.
Can we also include HBASE-10848 in 0.98.1 ?
This is another issue related to filters, not as critical as HBASE-10850
but it would be great to have it in this release.
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree with Anoop's assessment.
>
> Cheers
>
> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1
> release
> > itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses essential CF
> > optimization.
> >
> > Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> >
> > Considering those we need a new RC.
> >
> > -Anoop-
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> +1 on the RC.
> >> Checked the signature.
> >> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> >> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything looks
> >> fine.
> >> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Ram
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1
> >>>
> >>> Checked the hash
> >>> Checked the tar layout.
> >>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> +1
> >>>>
> >>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> >>>>
> >>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip of
> >> the
> >>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big linked
> >>> list
> >>>> test worked).
> >>>>
> >>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> >>>>
> >>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is too
> >>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal rig
> >>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been passing
> >> green
> >>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> >>>>
> >>>> St.Ack
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> >> download
> >>> at
> >>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven artifacts
> >> are
> >>>> also
> >>>>> available in the temporary repository
> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific Time
> >>>> (00:00
> >>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as 0.98.1.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - Andy
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
> >>> Hein
> >>>>> (via Tom White)
> >>
>
--
Fabien Le Gallo
* Software Engineer * * , * * Capptain *
------------------------------
* e. * flegallo@capptain.com
* w. * http://www.capptain.com
* a. * 18 rue Tronchet, 75008 Paris, France
<https://www.facebook.com/capptain?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
<https://twitter.com/capptain_hq?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
<http://www.capptain.com/feed/?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDowgVp4zmA?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
4 Tips to Market Your App
<http://www.capptain.com/2014/03/26/4-tips-for-marketing-your-app/?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
<http://www.capptain.com/contact/?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
IMPORTANT: The contents of this email and any attachments are
confidential. They are intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you
have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender immediately
and do not disclose the contents to anyone or make copies thereof.
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for download
Posted by Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>.
I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow.
However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1 vote and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take the time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1. 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release.
> On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I agree with Anoop's assessment.
>
> Cheers
>
>> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1 release
>> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses essential CF
>> optimization.
>>
>> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
>>
>> Considering those we need a new RC.
>>
>> -Anoop-
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
>> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 on the RC.
>>> Checked the signature.
>>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
>>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything looks
>>> fine.
>>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Ram
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> Checked the hash
>>>> Checked the tar layout.
>>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip of
>>> the
>>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big linked
>>>> list
>>>>> test worked).
>>>>>
>>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is too
>>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal rig
>>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been passing
>>> green
>>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
>>>>>
>>>>> St.Ack
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
>>> download
>>>> at
>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven artifacts
>>> are
>>>>> also
>>>>>> available in the temporary repository
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific Time
>>>>> (00:00
>>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as 0.98.1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Andy
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
>>>> Hein
>>>>>> (via Tom White)
>>>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Fabien LE GALLO <fl...@ubikod.com>.
Can we also include HBASE-10848 in 0.98.1 ?
This is another issue related to filters, not as critical as HBASE-10850
but it would be great to have it in this release.
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree with Anoop's assessment.
>
> Cheers
>
> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1
> release
> > itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses essential CF
> > optimization.
> >
> > Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
> >
> > Considering those we need a new RC.
> >
> > -Anoop-
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> +1 on the RC.
> >> Checked the signature.
> >> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> >> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything looks
> >> fine.
> >> Compaction, flushes etc too.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Ram
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1
> >>>
> >>> Checked the hash
> >>> Checked the tar layout.
> >>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> +1
> >>>>
> >>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> >>>>
> >>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip of
> >> the
> >>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big linked
> >>> list
> >>>> test worked).
> >>>>
> >>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> >>>>
> >>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is too
> >>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal rig
> >>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been passing
> >> green
> >>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> >>>>
> >>>> St.Ack
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> >> download
> >>> at
> >>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven artifacts
> >> are
> >>>> also
> >>>>> available in the temporary repository
> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific Time
> >>>> (00:00
> >>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as 0.98.1.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - Andy
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
> >>> Hein
> >>>>> (via Tom White)
> >>
>
--
Fabien Le Gallo
* Software Engineer * * , * * Capptain *
------------------------------
* e. * flegallo@capptain.com
* w. * http://www.capptain.com
* a. * 18 rue Tronchet, 75008 Paris, France
<https://www.facebook.com/capptain?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
<https://twitter.com/capptain_hq?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
<http://www.capptain.com/feed/?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDowgVp4zmA?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
4 Tips to Market Your App
<http://www.capptain.com/2014/03/26/4-tips-for-marketing-your-app/?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
<http://www.capptain.com/contact/?utm_source=WiseStamp&utm_medium=email&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign=signature>
IMPORTANT: The contents of this email and any attachments are
confidential. They are intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you
have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender immediately
and do not disclose the contents to anyone or make copies thereof.
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for download
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
I agree with Anoop's assessment.
Cheers
On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1 release
> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses essential CF
> optimization.
>
> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
>
> Considering those we need a new RC.
>
> -Anoop-
>
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 on the RC.
>> Checked the signature.
>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything looks
>> fine.
>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
>>
>> Regards
>> Ram
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Checked the hash
>>> Checked the tar layout.
>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
>>>>
>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip of
>> the
>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big linked
>>> list
>>>> test worked).
>>>>
>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
>>>>
>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is too
>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal rig
>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been passing
>> green
>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
>>>>
>>>> St.Ack
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
>> download
>>> at
>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven artifacts
>> are
>>>> also
>>>>> available in the temporary repository
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
>>>>>
>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific Time
>>>> (00:00
>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as 0.98.1.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> - Andy
>>>>>
>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
>>> Hein
>>>>> (via Tom White)
>>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for download
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
I agree with Anoop's assessment.
Cheers
On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1 release
> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses essential CF
> optimization.
>
> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
>
> Considering those we need a new RC.
>
> -Anoop-
>
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 on the RC.
>> Checked the signature.
>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything looks
>> fine.
>> Compaction, flushes etc too.
>>
>> Regards
>> Ram
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Checked the hash
>>> Checked the tar layout.
>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
>>>>
>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip of
>> the
>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big linked
>>> list
>>>> test worked).
>>>>
>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
>>>>
>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is too
>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal rig
>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been passing
>> green
>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
>>>>
>>>> St.Ack
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
>> download
>>> at
>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven artifacts
>> are
>>>> also
>>>>> available in the temporary repository
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
>>>>>
>>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific Time
>>>> (00:00
>>>>> PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as 0.98.1.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> - Andy
>>>>>
>>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
>>> Hein
>>>>> (via Tom White)
>>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>.
After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1 release
itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses essential CF
optimization.
Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
Considering those we need a new RC.
-Anoop-
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 on the RC.
> Checked the signature.
> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything looks
> fine.
> Compaction, flushes etc too.
>
> Regards
> Ram
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Checked the hash
> > Checked the tar layout.
> > Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> > >
> > > Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip of
> the
> > > branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big linked
> > list
> > > test worked).
> > >
> > > TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> > >
> > > I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is too
> > > occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal rig
> > > running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been passing
> green
> > > running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> > >
> > > St.Ack
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> download
> > at
> > > > http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven artifacts
> are
> > > also
> > > > available in the temporary repository
> > > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > > >
> > > > Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > > >
> > > > The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific Time
> > > (00:00
> > > > PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as 0.98.1.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best regards,
> > > >
> > > > - Andy
> > > >
> > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
> > Hein
> > > > (via Tom White)
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available
for download
Posted by Anoop John <an...@gmail.com>.
After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1 release
itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses essential CF
optimization.
Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case,
Considering those we need a new RC.
-Anoop-
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
ramkrishna.s.vasudevan@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 on the RC.
> Checked the signature.
> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases.
> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything looks
> fine.
> Compaction, flushes etc too.
>
> Regards
> Ram
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Checked the hash
> > Checked the tar layout.
> > Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine.
> > >
> > > Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip of
> the
> > > branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big linked
> > list
> > > test worked).
> > >
> > > TSDB seems to work fine against this RC.
> > >
> > > I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is too
> > > occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal rig
> > > running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been passing
> green
> > > running IT tests on a small cluster over hours.
> > >
> > > St.Ack
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for
> download
> > at
> > > > http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven artifacts
> are
> > > also
> > > > available in the temporary repository
> > > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016
> > > >
> > > > Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD.
> > > >
> > > > The issues resolved in this release can be found here:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific Time
> > > (00:00
> > > > PDT) on April 6 on whether or not we should release this as 0.98.1.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best regards,
> > > >
> > > > - Andy
> > > >
> > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
> > Hein
> > > > (via Tom White)
> > > >
> > >
> >
>