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

Posted to user@hbase.apache.org by Xu-Feng Mao <m9...@gmail.com> on 2011/07/09 04:43:59 UTC

Upgrade from cdh3u0 to 0.90.3 + HBASE-3872

Hi,

Since we've run into HBASE-3872 issue, we're considering upgrade a
production system from cdh3u0 to 0.90.3+HBASE-3872 patched.
Is it safe to just replace the hbase directory, and restart all the
regionservers and master? We have no chance to stop the whole cluster
together, can we restarted the regionservers partly, ie., can cdh3u0 and
0.90.3 cooperate for a while?

Thanks and regards

Mao Xu-Feng

Re: Upgrade from cdh3u0 to 0.90.3 + HBASE-3872

Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.

Yes. You should analyze HBase and hadoop logs
See Stack's comments in HBASE-4058

On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Xu-Feng Mao <m9...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks Ted, I thought the patch to trunk is OK to 0.90 branch.
> So we have to wait for the patch.
>
> Another question, our observation is much like HBASE-3872, we lost the file
> on hdfs, and have a
> hole in the meta. But any other way to confirm this problem? For example,
> can we find some clues
> in the logs?
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Please direct question related to cdh to cdh-dev
>>
>> Patch of HBASE-3872 for 0.90 branch isn't posted yet. Do you have a patch
>> already ?
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 7:43 PM, Xu-Feng Mao <m9...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Since we've run into HBASE-3872 issue, we're considering upgrade a
>> > production system from cdh3u0 to 0.90.3+HBASE-3872 patched.
>> > Is it safe to just replace the hbase directory, and restart all the
>> > regionservers and master? We have no chance to stop the whole cluster
>> > together, can we restarted the regionservers partly, ie., can cdh3u0 and
>> > 0.90.3 cooperate for a while?
>> >
>> > Thanks and regards
>> >
>> > Mao Xu-Feng
>> >
>>
>
>

Re: Upgrade from cdh3u0 to 0.90.3 + HBASE-3872

Posted by Xu-Feng Mao <m9...@gmail.com>.

Thanks Ted, I thought the patch to trunk is OK to 0.90 branch.
So we have to wait for the patch.

Another question, our observation is much like HBASE-3872, we lost the file
on hdfs, and have a
hole in the meta. But any other way to confirm this problem? For example,
can we find some clues
in the logs?

On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Please direct question related to cdh to cdh-dev
>
> Patch of HBASE-3872 for 0.90 branch isn't posted yet. Do you have a patch
> already ?
>
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 7:43 PM, Xu-Feng Mao <m9...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Since we've run into HBASE-3872 issue, we're considering upgrade a
> > production system from cdh3u0 to 0.90.3+HBASE-3872 patched.
> > Is it safe to just replace the hbase directory, and restart all the
> > regionservers and master? We have no chance to stop the whole cluster
> > together, can we restarted the regionservers partly, ie., can cdh3u0 and
> > 0.90.3 cooperate for a while?
> >
> > Thanks and regards
> >
> > Mao Xu-Feng
> >
>

Re: Upgrade from cdh3u0 to 0.90.3 + HBASE-3872

Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.

Please direct question related to cdh to cdh-dev

Patch of HBASE-3872 for 0.90 branch isn't posted yet. Do you have a patch
already ?

On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 7:43 PM, Xu-Feng Mao <m9...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Since we've run into HBASE-3872 issue, we're considering upgrade a
> production system from cdh3u0 to 0.90.3+HBASE-3872 patched.
> Is it safe to just replace the hbase directory, and restart all the
> regionservers and master? We have no chance to stop the whole cluster
> together, can we restarted the regionservers partly, ie., can cdh3u0 and
> 0.90.3 cooperate for a while?
>
> Thanks and regards
>
> Mao Xu-Feng
>