You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@hbase.apache.org by "张铎 (Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com> on 2018/06/28 00:56:21 UTC
[RESULT][VOTE] Merge branch HBASE-19064 back to master
One week since we start the vote, and now we have 4 binding +1s, a 0, and
no -1s, so the vote passes. Let me close the vote.
There are still small issues for branch HBASE-19064, will merge back to
master after we fix them all.
Thanks all for voting.
2018-06-26 18:20 GMT+08:00 Ashish Singhi <as...@apache.org>:
> SGTM. +1
>
> Regards,
> Ashish
>
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 12:30 PM, 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Here is my +1.
> >
> > As the performance test shows that there is no performance downgrading if
> > we do not enable sync replication, and the feature basically works, I
> think
> > it is OK to merge it back to master branch. We will continue working on
> > polishing and optimizing it for the 3.0 release.
> >
> > 2018-06-26 14:52 GMT+08:00 OpenInx <op...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Hi guys
> > >
> > > I've tested the write performance on both master branch and
> HBASE-19064
> > > branch. Here's the JIRA [1].
> > >
> > > The conclusion(Pasted from the comment):
> > > The QPS & AVG latency are similar when comparing the master branch with
> > > async replication and HBASE-19064 with async replication.
> > > BTW the QPS of HBASE-19064 with sync replication dropped about 13%, we
> > will
> > > continue to optimize the sync replication in phrase#2 [2].
> > >
> > > 1. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20751
> > > 2. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20422
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 9:57 PM, Guanghao Zhang <zg...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > 2018-06-21 18:26 GMT+08:00 mengli721014 on 163 dot com <
> > > > mengli721014@163.com
> > > > >:
> > > >
> > > > > 0
> > > > >
> > > > > 使用AquaMail for Android发送
> > > > > http://www.aqua-mail.com
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 在 2018年6月21日 下午4:21:26 "张铎(Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com> 写道:
> > > > >
> > > > > In HBASE-19064 we aim to implement sync replication feature for
> > HBase.
> > > > You
> > > > >> can see the design doc for more details on how it works
> > > > >>
> > > > >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/193D3aOxD-muPIZuQfI4Zo3_
> > > > >> qg6-Nepeu_kraYJVQkiE/edit#
> > > > >>
> > > > >> And now the feature basically works, we have tested it on real
> > > clusters,
> > > > >> and also provide the operational documentation in the ref guide.
> You
> > > can
> > > > >> see the 'Synchronous Replication' section in the ref guide of
> branch
> > > > >> HBASE-19064.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> There are known limitations for this feature, and we have
> > > > >> created HBASE-20422 to track them.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Please vote:
> > > > >> [+1] Agree
> > > > >> [-1] Disagree
> > > > >> [0] Neutral
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thanks.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Merge branch HBASE-19064 back to master
Posted by OpenInx <op...@gmail.com>.
Nice job, I will pay attention to the UT too..
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 6:37 PM, 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Merged back to master. Will keep an eye on the nightly build and flakey
> dashboard.
>
> Thanks.
>
> 2018-06-28 8:56 GMT+08:00 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>:
>
> > One week since we start the vote, and now we have 4 binding +1s, a 0, and
> > no -1s, so the vote passes. Let me close the vote.
> >
> > There are still small issues for branch HBASE-19064, will merge back to
> > master after we fix them all.
> >
> > Thanks all for voting.
> >
> >
> > 2018-06-26 18:20 GMT+08:00 Ashish Singhi <as...@apache.org>:
> >
> >> SGTM. +1
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Ashish
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 12:30 PM, 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Here is my +1.
> >> >
> >> > As the performance test shows that there is no performance downgrading
> >> if
> >> > we do not enable sync replication, and the feature basically works, I
> >> think
> >> > it is OK to merge it back to master branch. We will continue working
> on
> >> > polishing and optimizing it for the 3.0 release.
> >> >
> >> > 2018-06-26 14:52 GMT+08:00 OpenInx <op...@gmail.com>:
> >> >
> >> > > Hi guys
> >> > >
> >> > > I've tested the write performance on both master branch and
> >> HBASE-19064
> >> > > branch. Here's the JIRA [1].
> >> > >
> >> > > The conclusion(Pasted from the comment):
> >> > > The QPS & AVG latency are similar when comparing the master branch
> >> with
> >> > > async replication and HBASE-19064 with async replication.
> >> > > BTW the QPS of HBASE-19064 with sync replication dropped about 13%,
> we
> >> > will
> >> > > continue to optimize the sync replication in phrase#2 [2].
> >> > >
> >> > > 1. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20751
> >> > > 2. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20422
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 9:57 PM, Guanghao Zhang <zghaobac@gmail.com
> >
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > +1
> >> > > >
> >> > > > 2018-06-21 18:26 GMT+08:00 mengli721014 on 163 dot com <
> >> > > > mengli721014@163.com
> >> > > > >:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > 0
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > 使用AquaMail for Android发送
> >> > > > > http://www.aqua-mail.com
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > 在 2018年6月21日 下午4:21:26 "张铎(Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>
> >> 写道:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > In HBASE-19064 we aim to implement sync replication feature for
> >> > HBase.
> >> > > > You
> >> > > > >> can see the design doc for more details on how it works
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/193D3aOxD-muPIZuQfI4Zo3_
> >> > > > >> qg6-Nepeu_kraYJVQkiE/edit#
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >> And now the feature basically works, we have tested it on real
> >> > > clusters,
> >> > > > >> and also provide the operational documentation in the ref
> guide.
> >> You
> >> > > can
> >> > > > >> see the 'Synchronous Replication' section in the ref guide of
> >> branch
> >> > > > >> HBASE-19064.
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >> There are known limitations for this feature, and we have
> >> > > > >> created HBASE-20422 to track them.
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >> Please vote:
> >> > > > >> [+1] Agree
> >> > > > >> [-1] Disagree
> >> > > > >> [0] Neutral
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >> Thanks.
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Merge branch HBASE-19064 back to master
Posted by "张铎 (Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>.
Merged back to master. Will keep an eye on the nightly build and flakey
dashboard.
Thanks.
2018-06-28 8:56 GMT+08:00 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>:
> One week since we start the vote, and now we have 4 binding +1s, a 0, and
> no -1s, so the vote passes. Let me close the vote.
>
> There are still small issues for branch HBASE-19064, will merge back to
> master after we fix them all.
>
> Thanks all for voting.
>
>
> 2018-06-26 18:20 GMT+08:00 Ashish Singhi <as...@apache.org>:
>
>> SGTM. +1
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ashish
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 12:30 PM, 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Here is my +1.
>> >
>> > As the performance test shows that there is no performance downgrading
>> if
>> > we do not enable sync replication, and the feature basically works, I
>> think
>> > it is OK to merge it back to master branch. We will continue working on
>> > polishing and optimizing it for the 3.0 release.
>> >
>> > 2018-06-26 14:52 GMT+08:00 OpenInx <op...@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> > > Hi guys
>> > >
>> > > I've tested the write performance on both master branch and
>> HBASE-19064
>> > > branch. Here's the JIRA [1].
>> > >
>> > > The conclusion(Pasted from the comment):
>> > > The QPS & AVG latency are similar when comparing the master branch
>> with
>> > > async replication and HBASE-19064 with async replication.
>> > > BTW the QPS of HBASE-19064 with sync replication dropped about 13%, we
>> > will
>> > > continue to optimize the sync replication in phrase#2 [2].
>> > >
>> > > 1. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20751
>> > > 2. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20422
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 9:57 PM, Guanghao Zhang <zg...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > +1
>> > > >
>> > > > 2018-06-21 18:26 GMT+08:00 mengli721014 on 163 dot com <
>> > > > mengli721014@163.com
>> > > > >:
>> > > >
>> > > > > 0
>> > > > >
>> > > > > 使用AquaMail for Android发送
>> > > > > http://www.aqua-mail.com
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > 在 2018年6月21日 下午4:21:26 "张铎(Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>
>> 写道:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > In HBASE-19064 we aim to implement sync replication feature for
>> > HBase.
>> > > > You
>> > > > >> can see the design doc for more details on how it works
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/193D3aOxD-muPIZuQfI4Zo3_
>> > > > >> qg6-Nepeu_kraYJVQkiE/edit#
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> And now the feature basically works, we have tested it on real
>> > > clusters,
>> > > > >> and also provide the operational documentation in the ref guide.
>> You
>> > > can
>> > > > >> see the 'Synchronous Replication' section in the ref guide of
>> branch
>> > > > >> HBASE-19064.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> There are known limitations for this feature, and we have
>> > > > >> created HBASE-20422 to track them.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> Please vote:
>> > > > >> [+1] Agree
>> > > > >> [-1] Disagree
>> > > > >> [0] Neutral
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> Thanks.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>