You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@hbase.apache.org by Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com> on 2013/12/17 23:23:46 UTC
ANNOUNCE: hbase 0.96.1.1rc0 release candidate is available for download.
This is a quick-fix release directly off of the 0.96.1 release. It can be
downloaded here:
http://people.apache.org/~jmhsieh/hbase-0.96.1.1rc0/
The maven staging repo is here:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-056/
There is only one jira'ed patch in this release, HBASE-10188 [1]. This
fixes an API incompatibility introduced between 0.96.0 and 0.96.1. Other
changes include updates to CHANGES.txt (to include that jira), and pom.xml
(naming the release 0.96.1.1).
As such, we'll have an abridged testing and voting period. Please have a
quick look and vote +1/-1 by 12/18/13 23:59 pacific time. If this passes
we'll take down 0.96.1.
Please check the release mechanics -- this is my first attempt at an hbase
release.
Thanks!
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10188
--
// Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
// Software Engineer, Cloudera
// jon@cloudera.com
Re: ANNOUNCE: hbase 0.96.1.1rc0 release candidate is available for download.
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
bq. it would have been better to have included at that time the detailed
explanation
Will pay attention next time such situation arises.
Cheers
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> I reviewed this change. As I understand, neither the code before and after
> is incorrect, but the improved behavior after the change allows us to pass
> reliably on Hadoop 2 with its timing changes. I did fail to ask Ted to
> write up a release note for the JIRA, so I am sorry for that.
>
> Also, Ted, if you reread this email thread, consider that when you sent the
> one line email to Jon about HBASE-10142, it would have been better to have
> included at that time the detailed explanation provided only after Jon
> wrote back twice asking for it.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > I've spent some time reviewing HBASE-10142, There are some non-test
> code
> > > modifications still trying to determine if it is a serious problem or
> not
> > > on that side. Ted, is there a reason why this wasn't ported to the
> 0.96
> > > branch?
> > >
> >
> > Does the patch fix the issue? What the 'issue' is, is not described and
> > the patch is introduced with 'What about this patch ?' and nothing else.
> > St.Ack
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> - Andy
>
> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> (via Tom White)
>
Re: ANNOUNCE: hbase 0.96.1.1rc0 release candidate is available for download.
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
I reviewed this change. As I understand, neither the code before and after
is incorrect, but the improved behavior after the change allows us to pass
reliably on Hadoop 2 with its timing changes. I did fail to ask Ted to
write up a release note for the JIRA, so I am sorry for that.
Also, Ted, if you reread this email thread, consider that when you sent the
one line email to Jon about HBASE-10142, it would have been better to have
included at that time the detailed explanation provided only after Jon
wrote back twice asking for it.
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> > ...
> >
> > I've spent some time reviewing HBASE-10142, There are some non-test code
> > modifications still trying to determine if it is a serious problem or not
> > on that side. Ted, is there a reason why this wasn't ported to the 0.96
> > branch?
> >
>
> Does the patch fix the issue? What the 'issue' is, is not described and
> the patch is introduced with 'What about this patch ?' and nothing else.
> St.Ack
>
--
Best regards,
- Andy
Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)
Re: ANNOUNCE: hbase 0.96.1.1rc0 release candidate is available for download.
Posted by Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com>.
Vote passes with 5 binding +1's. ( apurtell, eclark, stack, enis, jmhsieh).
Pushing out the release and announcement to user@.
Thanks,
Jon.
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> > ...
> >
> > I've spent some time reviewing HBASE-10142, There are some non-test code
> > modifications still trying to determine if it is a serious problem or not
> > on that side. Ted, is there a reason why this wasn't ported to the 0.96
> > branch?
> >
>
> Does the patch fix the issue? What the 'issue' is, is not described and
> the patch is introduced with 'What about this patch ?' and nothing else.
> St.Ack
>
--
// Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
// Software Engineer, Cloudera
// jon@cloudera.com
Re: ANNOUNCE: hbase 0.96.1.1rc0 release candidate is available for download.
Posted by Stack <st...@duboce.net>.
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> ...
>
> I've spent some time reviewing HBASE-10142, There are some non-test code
> modifications still trying to determine if it is a serious problem or not
> on that side. Ted, is there a reason why this wasn't ported to the 0.96
> branch?
>
Does the patch fix the issue? What the 'issue' is, is not described and
the patch is introduced with 'What about this patch ?' and nothing else.
St.Ack
Re: ANNOUNCE: hbase 0.96.1.1rc0 release candidate is available for download.
Posted by Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com>.
Thanks Ted.
I'm looked at the history of that code and believe that this race and test
case only causes a perf problem (we may roll extra times) and has been
around since 0.90.5.
I'm +1'ing this for release also.
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There used to be some comment around low replication checking:
>
> // TODO: preserving the old behavior for now, but this check is
> strange. It's not // protected by any locks here, so for
> all we know rolling locks might start // as soon as we
> enter the "if". Is this best-effort optimization check? if
> (!this.logRollRunning) {
> checkLowReplication();
>
>
> This means that checkLowReplication() may be running when
> FSHLog#rollWriter() is also running - hence the race.
> That is why checkLowReplication() is now put under reentrant lock.
>
> w.r.t. rolling new RC, I would leave the decision making up to you.
>
> Low replication check has several parameters. One of which is the
> following:
>
> this.lowReplicationRollLimit = conf.getInt(
>
> "hbase.regionserver.hlog.lowreplication.rolllimit", 5);
>
> When consecutive log rolls exceeds the above conf value, lowReplicationRoll
> is disabled.
>
> If replica count goes down because of issue in Datanodes, the above limit
> would be reached ultimately.
>
> Cheers
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> > Ted,
> >
> > My question really boils down this this -- can we have a data loss if we
> > don't take in HBASE-10142 or not? It will take me a little more time
> > reverse engineer and convince myself one way or another. If we can
> lose
> > data, then I'll roll take the port and do another rc. If we don't (we
> are
> > just less performant) then since we have 4 binding +1's other than me
> I'll
> > release.
> >
> > I either case, I want to understand how it fixes the problem. I can see
> the
> > changes e.g. the re-entrant lock, and the shifting out of
> > checkLowReplication call, but I need to figure out why the changes were
> > necessary. The main substantive change is that the lock is taken around
> the
> > checkLowReplication call but I haven't put together why this fixes the
> > problem. Can you shed more light (and ideally lay out why the changes
> fix
> > the problem in jira? -- maybe a bad multithread trace that is fixed by
> the
> > new lock?)
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jon.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:01 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Jon:
> > > If Stack gives the greenlight, I can certainly port it to 0.96 branch.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > When I run the test standalone, and didn't have an failure in
> > > 0.96.1.1rc0
> > > > or 0.96.1. When I ran the whole suite, I ran into exactly the same
> > > failure
> > > > on 0.96.1.1 (currnetly testing full suite from 0.96.1 src tar ball)
> > > >
> > > > I've spent some time reviewing HBASE-10142, There are some non-test
> > code
> > > > modifications still trying to determine if it is a serious problem or
> > not
> > > > on that side. Ted, is there a reason why this wasn't ported to the
> > 0.96
> > > > branch?
> > > >
> > > > Jon.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
> > > > jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Typo is because I have no done a cut&past ;)
> > > > >
> > > > > With cut&past: mvn test -PrunAllTests
> > > -Dsurefire.secondPartThreadCount=8
> > > > >
> > > > > On the last run, error is:
> > > > > Failed tests:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> testLogRollOnDatanodeDeath(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.wal.TestLogRolling):
> > > > > LowReplication Roller should've been disabled, current
> replication=1
> > > > >
> > > > > I did not keep the errors from the previous runs...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 2013/12/18 Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > > What error(s) did you see ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There was a typo in this def ('s' between D and u):
> > > > > > -Dsurefire.secondPartThreadCount
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You can lower the thread count: in trunk build, value of 2 is
> used.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 8:45 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
> > > > > > jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I tried multiple times over many hours to run:
> > > > > > > mvn test -PrunallTests -Dusefire.secondPartThreadCount=8
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On a local machine using the src jar, with no success. I might
> be
> > > > > missing
> > > > > > > something... I will investigate so I will be able to provide
> > better
> > > > > > > feedback for 0.96.2...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sorry about that.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2013/12/18 Enis Söztutar <en...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > +1.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > - downloaded the artifacts
> > > > > > > > - checked checksums
> > > > > > > > - checked sigs
> > > > > > > > - checked hadoop libs in h1 / h2
> > > > > > > > - checked directory layouts
> > > > > > > > - run local cluster
> > > > > > > > - run smoke tests with shell on the artifacts
> > > > > > > > - run tests locally:
> > > > > > > > -- bin/hbase org.apache.hadoop.hbase.util.LoadTestTool
> -write
> > > > > > 10:10:100
> > > > > > > > -num_keys 1000000 -read 100:30
> > > > > > > > -- bin/hbase
> > > > > > "org.apache.hadoop.hbase.test.IntegrationTestBigLinkedList
> > > > > > > > Loop 1 1 3000000 /tmp/biglinkedlist 1"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > +1
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Downloaded, unbundled, checked layout, and ran it. Browsed
> > the
> > > > mvn
> > > > > > > > > artifacts.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > St.Ack
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <
> > > > jon@cloudera.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > This is a quick-fix release directly off of the 0.96.1
> > > release.
> > > > > > It
> > > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > > downloaded here:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > http://people.apache.org/~jmhsieh/hbase-0.96.1.1rc0/
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The maven staging repo is here:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-056/
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > There is only one jira'ed patch in this release,
> > HBASE-10188
> > > > [1].
> > > > > > > This
> > > > > > > > > > fixes an API incompatibility introduced between 0.96.0
> and
> > > > > 0.96.1.
> > > > > > > > Other
> > > > > > > > > > changes include updates to CHANGES.txt (to include that
> > > jira),
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > pom.xml
> > > > > > > > > > (naming the release 0.96.1.1).
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > As such, we'll have an abridged testing and voting
> period.
> > > > > Please
> > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > quick look and vote +1/-1 by 12/18/13 23:59 pacific time.
> > If
> > > > this
> > > > > > > > passes
> > > > > > > > > > we'll take down 0.96.1.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Please check the release mechanics -- this is my first
> > > attempt
> > > > at
> > > > > > an
> > > > > > > > > hbase
> > > > > > > > > > release.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10188
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > > > > > > > > > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > > > > > > > > > // jon@cloudera.com
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > > > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > > > // jon@cloudera.com
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > // jon@cloudera.com
> >
>
--
// Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
// Software Engineer, Cloudera
// jon@cloudera.com
Re: ANNOUNCE: hbase 0.96.1.1rc0 release candidate is available for download.
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
There used to be some comment around low replication checking:
// TODO: preserving the old behavior for now, but this check is
strange. It's not // protected by any locks here, so for
all we know rolling locks might start // as soon as we
enter the "if". Is this best-effort optimization check? if
(!this.logRollRunning) {
checkLowReplication();
This means that checkLowReplication() may be running when
FSHLog#rollWriter() is also running - hence the race.
That is why checkLowReplication() is now put under reentrant lock.
w.r.t. rolling new RC, I would leave the decision making up to you.
Low replication check has several parameters. One of which is the following:
this.lowReplicationRollLimit = conf.getInt(
"hbase.regionserver.hlog.lowreplication.rolllimit", 5);
When consecutive log rolls exceeds the above conf value, lowReplicationRoll
is disabled.
If replica count goes down because of issue in Datanodes, the above limit
would be reached ultimately.
Cheers
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> Ted,
>
> My question really boils down this this -- can we have a data loss if we
> don't take in HBASE-10142 or not? It will take me a little more time
> reverse engineer and convince myself one way or another. If we can lose
> data, then I'll roll take the port and do another rc. If we don't (we are
> just less performant) then since we have 4 binding +1's other than me I'll
> release.
>
> I either case, I want to understand how it fixes the problem. I can see the
> changes e.g. the re-entrant lock, and the shifting out of
> checkLowReplication call, but I need to figure out why the changes were
> necessary. The main substantive change is that the lock is taken around the
> checkLowReplication call but I haven't put together why this fixes the
> problem. Can you shed more light (and ideally lay out why the changes fix
> the problem in jira? -- maybe a bad multithread trace that is fixed by the
> new lock?)
>
> Thanks,
> Jon.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:01 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Jon:
> > If Stack gives the greenlight, I can certainly port it to 0.96 branch.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > When I run the test standalone, and didn't have an failure in
> > 0.96.1.1rc0
> > > or 0.96.1. When I ran the whole suite, I ran into exactly the same
> > failure
> > > on 0.96.1.1 (currnetly testing full suite from 0.96.1 src tar ball)
> > >
> > > I've spent some time reviewing HBASE-10142, There are some non-test
> code
> > > modifications still trying to determine if it is a serious problem or
> not
> > > on that side. Ted, is there a reason why this wasn't ported to the
> 0.96
> > > branch?
> > >
> > > Jon.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
> > > jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Typo is because I have no done a cut&past ;)
> > > >
> > > > With cut&past: mvn test -PrunAllTests
> > -Dsurefire.secondPartThreadCount=8
> > > >
> > > > On the last run, error is:
> > > > Failed tests:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> testLogRollOnDatanodeDeath(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.wal.TestLogRolling):
> > > > LowReplication Roller should've been disabled, current replication=1
> > > >
> > > > I did not keep the errors from the previous runs...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2013/12/18 Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
> > > >
> > > > > What error(s) did you see ?
> > > > >
> > > > > There was a typo in this def ('s' between D and u):
> > > > > -Dsurefire.secondPartThreadCount
> > > > >
> > > > > You can lower the thread count: in trunk build, value of 2 is used.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 8:45 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
> > > > > jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I tried multiple times over many hours to run:
> > > > > > mvn test -PrunallTests -Dusefire.secondPartThreadCount=8
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On a local machine using the src jar, with no success. I might be
> > > > missing
> > > > > > something... I will investigate so I will be able to provide
> better
> > > > > > feedback for 0.96.2...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sorry about that.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2013/12/18 Enis Söztutar <en...@gmail.com>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > +1.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - downloaded the artifacts
> > > > > > > - checked checksums
> > > > > > > - checked sigs
> > > > > > > - checked hadoop libs in h1 / h2
> > > > > > > - checked directory layouts
> > > > > > > - run local cluster
> > > > > > > - run smoke tests with shell on the artifacts
> > > > > > > - run tests locally:
> > > > > > > -- bin/hbase org.apache.hadoop.hbase.util.LoadTestTool -write
> > > > > 10:10:100
> > > > > > > -num_keys 1000000 -read 100:30
> > > > > > > -- bin/hbase
> > > > > "org.apache.hadoop.hbase.test.IntegrationTestBigLinkedList
> > > > > > > Loop 1 1 3000000 /tmp/biglinkedlist 1"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > +1
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Downloaded, unbundled, checked layout, and ran it. Browsed
> the
> > > mvn
> > > > > > > > artifacts.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > St.Ack
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <
> > > jon@cloudera.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This is a quick-fix release directly off of the 0.96.1
> > release.
> > > > > It
> > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > downloaded here:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > http://people.apache.org/~jmhsieh/hbase-0.96.1.1rc0/
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The maven staging repo is here:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-056/
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > There is only one jira'ed patch in this release,
> HBASE-10188
> > > [1].
> > > > > > This
> > > > > > > > > fixes an API incompatibility introduced between 0.96.0 and
> > > > 0.96.1.
> > > > > > > Other
> > > > > > > > > changes include updates to CHANGES.txt (to include that
> > jira),
> > > > and
> > > > > > > > pom.xml
> > > > > > > > > (naming the release 0.96.1.1).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > As such, we'll have an abridged testing and voting period.
> > > > Please
> > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > quick look and vote +1/-1 by 12/18/13 23:59 pacific time.
> If
> > > this
> > > > > > > passes
> > > > > > > > > we'll take down 0.96.1.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Please check the release mechanics -- this is my first
> > attempt
> > > at
> > > > > an
> > > > > > > > hbase
> > > > > > > > > release.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10188
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > > > > > > > > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > > > > > > > > // jon@cloudera.com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > > // jon@cloudera.com
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> // jon@cloudera.com
>
Re: ANNOUNCE: hbase 0.96.1.1rc0 release candidate is available for download.
Posted by Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com>.
Ted,
My question really boils down this this -- can we have a data loss if we
don't take in HBASE-10142 or not? It will take me a little more time
reverse engineer and convince myself one way or another. If we can lose
data, then I'll roll take the port and do another rc. If we don't (we are
just less performant) then since we have 4 binding +1's other than me I'll
release.
I either case, I want to understand how it fixes the problem. I can see the
changes e.g. the re-entrant lock, and the shifting out of
checkLowReplication call, but I need to figure out why the changes were
necessary. The main substantive change is that the lock is taken around the
checkLowReplication call but I haven't put together why this fixes the
problem. Can you shed more light (and ideally lay out why the changes fix
the problem in jira? -- maybe a bad multithread trace that is fixed by the
new lock?)
Thanks,
Jon.
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:01 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jon:
> If Stack gives the greenlight, I can certainly port it to 0.96 branch.
>
> Cheers
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> > When I run the test standalone, and didn't have an failure in
> 0.96.1.1rc0
> > or 0.96.1. When I ran the whole suite, I ran into exactly the same
> failure
> > on 0.96.1.1 (currnetly testing full suite from 0.96.1 src tar ball)
> >
> > I've spent some time reviewing HBASE-10142, There are some non-test code
> > modifications still trying to determine if it is a serious problem or not
> > on that side. Ted, is there a reason why this wasn't ported to the 0.96
> > branch?
> >
> > Jon.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
> > jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Typo is because I have no done a cut&past ;)
> > >
> > > With cut&past: mvn test -PrunAllTests
> -Dsurefire.secondPartThreadCount=8
> > >
> > > On the last run, error is:
> > > Failed tests:
> > >
> > >
> >
> testLogRollOnDatanodeDeath(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.wal.TestLogRolling):
> > > LowReplication Roller should've been disabled, current replication=1
> > >
> > > I did not keep the errors from the previous runs...
> > >
> > >
> > > 2013/12/18 Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
> > >
> > > > What error(s) did you see ?
> > > >
> > > > There was a typo in this def ('s' between D and u):
> > > > -Dsurefire.secondPartThreadCount
> > > >
> > > > You can lower the thread count: in trunk build, value of 2 is used.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 8:45 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
> > > > jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I tried multiple times over many hours to run:
> > > > > mvn test -PrunallTests -Dusefire.secondPartThreadCount=8
> > > > >
> > > > > On a local machine using the src jar, with no success. I might be
> > > missing
> > > > > something... I will investigate so I will be able to provide better
> > > > > feedback for 0.96.2...
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry about that.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 2013/12/18 Enis Söztutar <en...@gmail.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - downloaded the artifacts
> > > > > > - checked checksums
> > > > > > - checked sigs
> > > > > > - checked hadoop libs in h1 / h2
> > > > > > - checked directory layouts
> > > > > > - run local cluster
> > > > > > - run smoke tests with shell on the artifacts
> > > > > > - run tests locally:
> > > > > > -- bin/hbase org.apache.hadoop.hbase.util.LoadTestTool -write
> > > > 10:10:100
> > > > > > -num_keys 1000000 -read 100:30
> > > > > > -- bin/hbase
> > > > "org.apache.hadoop.hbase.test.IntegrationTestBigLinkedList
> > > > > > Loop 1 1 3000000 /tmp/biglinkedlist 1"
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > +1
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Downloaded, unbundled, checked layout, and ran it. Browsed the
> > mvn
> > > > > > > artifacts.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > St.Ack
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <
> > jon@cloudera.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This is a quick-fix release directly off of the 0.96.1
> release.
> > > > It
> > > > > > can
> > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > downloaded here:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > http://people.apache.org/~jmhsieh/hbase-0.96.1.1rc0/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The maven staging repo is here:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-056/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > There is only one jira'ed patch in this release, HBASE-10188
> > [1].
> > > > > This
> > > > > > > > fixes an API incompatibility introduced between 0.96.0 and
> > > 0.96.1.
> > > > > > Other
> > > > > > > > changes include updates to CHANGES.txt (to include that
> jira),
> > > and
> > > > > > > pom.xml
> > > > > > > > (naming the release 0.96.1.1).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > As such, we'll have an abridged testing and voting period.
> > > Please
> > > > > > have
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > quick look and vote +1/-1 by 12/18/13 23:59 pacific time. If
> > this
> > > > > > passes
> > > > > > > > we'll take down 0.96.1.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Please check the release mechanics -- this is my first
> attempt
> > at
> > > > an
> > > > > > > hbase
> > > > > > > > release.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10188
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > > > > > > > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > > > > > > > // jon@cloudera.com
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > // jon@cloudera.com
> >
>
--
// Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
// Software Engineer, Cloudera
// jon@cloudera.com
Re: ANNOUNCE: hbase 0.96.1.1rc0 release candidate is available for download.
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
Jon:
If Stack gives the greenlight, I can certainly port it to 0.96 branch.
Cheers
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> When I run the test standalone, and didn't have an failure in 0.96.1.1rc0
> or 0.96.1. When I ran the whole suite, I ran into exactly the same failure
> on 0.96.1.1 (currnetly testing full suite from 0.96.1 src tar ball)
>
> I've spent some time reviewing HBASE-10142, There are some non-test code
> modifications still trying to determine if it is a serious problem or not
> on that side. Ted, is there a reason why this wasn't ported to the 0.96
> branch?
>
> Jon.
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
> jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote:
>
> > Typo is because I have no done a cut&past ;)
> >
> > With cut&past: mvn test -PrunAllTests -Dsurefire.secondPartThreadCount=8
> >
> > On the last run, error is:
> > Failed tests:
> >
> >
> testLogRollOnDatanodeDeath(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.wal.TestLogRolling):
> > LowReplication Roller should've been disabled, current replication=1
> >
> > I did not keep the errors from the previous runs...
> >
> >
> > 2013/12/18 Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
> >
> > > What error(s) did you see ?
> > >
> > > There was a typo in this def ('s' between D and u):
> > > -Dsurefire.secondPartThreadCount
> > >
> > > You can lower the thread count: in trunk build, value of 2 is used.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 8:45 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
> > > jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I tried multiple times over many hours to run:
> > > > mvn test -PrunallTests -Dusefire.secondPartThreadCount=8
> > > >
> > > > On a local machine using the src jar, with no success. I might be
> > missing
> > > > something... I will investigate so I will be able to provide better
> > > > feedback for 0.96.2...
> > > >
> > > > Sorry about that.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2013/12/18 Enis Söztutar <en...@gmail.com>
> > > >
> > > > > +1.
> > > > >
> > > > > - downloaded the artifacts
> > > > > - checked checksums
> > > > > - checked sigs
> > > > > - checked hadoop libs in h1 / h2
> > > > > - checked directory layouts
> > > > > - run local cluster
> > > > > - run smoke tests with shell on the artifacts
> > > > > - run tests locally:
> > > > > -- bin/hbase org.apache.hadoop.hbase.util.LoadTestTool -write
> > > 10:10:100
> > > > > -num_keys 1000000 -read 100:30
> > > > > -- bin/hbase
> > > "org.apache.hadoop.hbase.test.IntegrationTestBigLinkedList
> > > > > Loop 1 1 3000000 /tmp/biglinkedlist 1"
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Downloaded, unbundled, checked layout, and ran it. Browsed the
> mvn
> > > > > > artifacts.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > St.Ack
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <
> jon@cloudera.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > This is a quick-fix release directly off of the 0.96.1 release.
> > > It
> > > > > can
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > > downloaded here:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://people.apache.org/~jmhsieh/hbase-0.96.1.1rc0/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The maven staging repo is here:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-056/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There is only one jira'ed patch in this release, HBASE-10188
> [1].
> > > > This
> > > > > > > fixes an API incompatibility introduced between 0.96.0 and
> > 0.96.1.
> > > > > Other
> > > > > > > changes include updates to CHANGES.txt (to include that jira),
> > and
> > > > > > pom.xml
> > > > > > > (naming the release 0.96.1.1).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As such, we'll have an abridged testing and voting period.
> > Please
> > > > > have
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > quick look and vote +1/-1 by 12/18/13 23:59 pacific time. If
> this
> > > > > passes
> > > > > > > we'll take down 0.96.1.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please check the release mechanics -- this is my first attempt
> at
> > > an
> > > > > > hbase
> > > > > > > release.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10188
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > > > > > > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > > > > > > // jon@cloudera.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> // jon@cloudera.com
>
Re: ANNOUNCE: hbase 0.96.1.1rc0 release candidate is available for download.
Posted by Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com>.
When I run the test standalone, and didn't have an failure in 0.96.1.1rc0
or 0.96.1. When I ran the whole suite, I ran into exactly the same failure
on 0.96.1.1 (currnetly testing full suite from 0.96.1 src tar ball)
I've spent some time reviewing HBASE-10142, There are some non-test code
modifications still trying to determine if it is a serious problem or not
on that side. Ted, is there a reason why this wasn't ported to the 0.96
branch?
Jon.
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote:
> Typo is because I have no done a cut&past ;)
>
> With cut&past: mvn test -PrunAllTests -Dsurefire.secondPartThreadCount=8
>
> On the last run, error is:
> Failed tests:
>
> testLogRollOnDatanodeDeath(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.wal.TestLogRolling):
> LowReplication Roller should've been disabled, current replication=1
>
> I did not keep the errors from the previous runs...
>
>
> 2013/12/18 Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
>
> > What error(s) did you see ?
> >
> > There was a typo in this def ('s' between D and u):
> > -Dsurefire.secondPartThreadCount
> >
> > You can lower the thread count: in trunk build, value of 2 is used.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 8:45 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
> > jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I tried multiple times over many hours to run:
> > > mvn test -PrunallTests -Dusefire.secondPartThreadCount=8
> > >
> > > On a local machine using the src jar, with no success. I might be
> missing
> > > something... I will investigate so I will be able to provide better
> > > feedback for 0.96.2...
> > >
> > > Sorry about that.
> > >
> > >
> > > 2013/12/18 Enis Söztutar <en...@gmail.com>
> > >
> > > > +1.
> > > >
> > > > - downloaded the artifacts
> > > > - checked checksums
> > > > - checked sigs
> > > > - checked hadoop libs in h1 / h2
> > > > - checked directory layouts
> > > > - run local cluster
> > > > - run smoke tests with shell on the artifacts
> > > > - run tests locally:
> > > > -- bin/hbase org.apache.hadoop.hbase.util.LoadTestTool -write
> > 10:10:100
> > > > -num_keys 1000000 -read 100:30
> > > > -- bin/hbase
> > "org.apache.hadoop.hbase.test.IntegrationTestBigLinkedList
> > > > Loop 1 1 3000000 /tmp/biglinkedlist 1"
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > Downloaded, unbundled, checked layout, and ran it. Browsed the mvn
> > > > > artifacts.
> > > > >
> > > > > St.Ack
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > This is a quick-fix release directly off of the 0.96.1 release.
> > It
> > > > can
> > > > > be
> > > > > > downloaded here:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://people.apache.org/~jmhsieh/hbase-0.96.1.1rc0/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The maven staging repo is here:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-056/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There is only one jira'ed patch in this release, HBASE-10188 [1].
> > > This
> > > > > > fixes an API incompatibility introduced between 0.96.0 and
> 0.96.1.
> > > > Other
> > > > > > changes include updates to CHANGES.txt (to include that jira),
> and
> > > > > pom.xml
> > > > > > (naming the release 0.96.1.1).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As such, we'll have an abridged testing and voting period.
> Please
> > > > have
> > > > > a
> > > > > > quick look and vote +1/-1 by 12/18/13 23:59 pacific time. If this
> > > > passes
> > > > > > we'll take down 0.96.1.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please check the release mechanics -- this is my first attempt at
> > an
> > > > > hbase
> > > > > > release.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10188
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > > > > > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > > > > > // jon@cloudera.com
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
--
// Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
// Software Engineer, Cloudera
// jon@cloudera.com
Re: ANNOUNCE: hbase 0.96.1.1rc0 release candidate is available for download.
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
The test failure you mentioned has been fixed by HBASE-10142.
Cheers
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote:
> Typo is because I have no done a cut&past ;)
>
> With cut&past: mvn test -PrunAllTests -Dsurefire.secondPartThreadCount=8
>
> On the last run, error is:
> Failed tests:
>
> testLogRollOnDatanodeDeath(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.wal.TestLogRolling):
> LowReplication Roller should've been disabled, current replication=1
>
> I did not keep the errors from the previous runs...
>
>
> 2013/12/18 Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
>
> > What error(s) did you see ?
> >
> > There was a typo in this def ('s' between D and u):
> > -Dsurefire.secondPartThreadCount
> >
> > You can lower the thread count: in trunk build, value of 2 is used.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 8:45 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
> > jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I tried multiple times over many hours to run:
> > > mvn test -PrunallTests -Dusefire.secondPartThreadCount=8
> > >
> > > On a local machine using the src jar, with no success. I might be
> missing
> > > something... I will investigate so I will be able to provide better
> > > feedback for 0.96.2...
> > >
> > > Sorry about that.
> > >
> > >
> > > 2013/12/18 Enis Söztutar <en...@gmail.com>
> > >
> > > > +1.
> > > >
> > > > - downloaded the artifacts
> > > > - checked checksums
> > > > - checked sigs
> > > > - checked hadoop libs in h1 / h2
> > > > - checked directory layouts
> > > > - run local cluster
> > > > - run smoke tests with shell on the artifacts
> > > > - run tests locally:
> > > > -- bin/hbase org.apache.hadoop.hbase.util.LoadTestTool -write
> > 10:10:100
> > > > -num_keys 1000000 -read 100:30
> > > > -- bin/hbase
> > "org.apache.hadoop.hbase.test.IntegrationTestBigLinkedList
> > > > Loop 1 1 3000000 /tmp/biglinkedlist 1"
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > Downloaded, unbundled, checked layout, and ran it. Browsed the mvn
> > > > > artifacts.
> > > > >
> > > > > St.Ack
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > This is a quick-fix release directly off of the 0.96.1 release.
> > It
> > > > can
> > > > > be
> > > > > > downloaded here:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://people.apache.org/~jmhsieh/hbase-0.96.1.1rc0/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The maven staging repo is here:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-056/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There is only one jira'ed patch in this release, HBASE-10188 [1].
> > > This
> > > > > > fixes an API incompatibility introduced between 0.96.0 and
> 0.96.1.
> > > > Other
> > > > > > changes include updates to CHANGES.txt (to include that jira),
> and
> > > > > pom.xml
> > > > > > (naming the release 0.96.1.1).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As such, we'll have an abridged testing and voting period.
> Please
> > > > have
> > > > > a
> > > > > > quick look and vote +1/-1 by 12/18/13 23:59 pacific time. If this
> > > > passes
> > > > > > we'll take down 0.96.1.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please check the release mechanics -- this is my first attempt at
> > an
> > > > > hbase
> > > > > > release.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10188
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > > > > > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > > > > > // jon@cloudera.com
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: ANNOUNCE: hbase 0.96.1.1rc0 release candidate is available for download.
Posted by Jean-Marc Spaggiari <je...@spaggiari.org>.
Typo is because I have no done a cut&past ;)
With cut&past: mvn test -PrunAllTests -Dsurefire.secondPartThreadCount=8
On the last run, error is:
Failed tests:
testLogRollOnDatanodeDeath(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.wal.TestLogRolling):
LowReplication Roller should've been disabled, current replication=1
I did not keep the errors from the previous runs...
2013/12/18 Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>
> What error(s) did you see ?
>
> There was a typo in this def ('s' between D and u):
> -Dsurefire.secondPartThreadCount
>
> You can lower the thread count: in trunk build, value of 2 is used.
>
> Cheers
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 8:45 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
> jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote:
>
> > I tried multiple times over many hours to run:
> > mvn test -PrunallTests -Dusefire.secondPartThreadCount=8
> >
> > On a local machine using the src jar, with no success. I might be missing
> > something... I will investigate so I will be able to provide better
> > feedback for 0.96.2...
> >
> > Sorry about that.
> >
> >
> > 2013/12/18 Enis Söztutar <en...@gmail.com>
> >
> > > +1.
> > >
> > > - downloaded the artifacts
> > > - checked checksums
> > > - checked sigs
> > > - checked hadoop libs in h1 / h2
> > > - checked directory layouts
> > > - run local cluster
> > > - run smoke tests with shell on the artifacts
> > > - run tests locally:
> > > -- bin/hbase org.apache.hadoop.hbase.util.LoadTestTool -write
> 10:10:100
> > > -num_keys 1000000 -read 100:30
> > > -- bin/hbase
> "org.apache.hadoop.hbase.test.IntegrationTestBigLinkedList
> > > Loop 1 1 3000000 /tmp/biglinkedlist 1"
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > Downloaded, unbundled, checked layout, and ran it. Browsed the mvn
> > > > artifacts.
> > > >
> > > > St.Ack
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > This is a quick-fix release directly off of the 0.96.1 release.
> It
> > > can
> > > > be
> > > > > downloaded here:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://people.apache.org/~jmhsieh/hbase-0.96.1.1rc0/
> > > > >
> > > > > The maven staging repo is here:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-056/
> > > > >
> > > > > There is only one jira'ed patch in this release, HBASE-10188 [1].
> > This
> > > > > fixes an API incompatibility introduced between 0.96.0 and 0.96.1.
> > > Other
> > > > > changes include updates to CHANGES.txt (to include that jira), and
> > > > pom.xml
> > > > > (naming the release 0.96.1.1).
> > > > >
> > > > > As such, we'll have an abridged testing and voting period. Please
> > > have
> > > > a
> > > > > quick look and vote +1/-1 by 12/18/13 23:59 pacific time. If this
> > > passes
> > > > > we'll take down 0.96.1.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please check the release mechanics -- this is my first attempt at
> an
> > > > hbase
> > > > > release.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks!
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10188
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > > > > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > > > > // jon@cloudera.com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: ANNOUNCE: hbase 0.96.1.1rc0 release candidate is available for download.
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
What error(s) did you see ?
There was a typo in this def ('s' between D and u):
-Dsurefire.secondPartThreadCount
You can lower the thread count: in trunk build, value of 2 is used.
Cheers
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 8:45 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote:
> I tried multiple times over many hours to run:
> mvn test -PrunallTests -Dusefire.secondPartThreadCount=8
>
> On a local machine using the src jar, with no success. I might be missing
> something... I will investigate so I will be able to provide better
> feedback for 0.96.2...
>
> Sorry about that.
>
>
> 2013/12/18 Enis Söztutar <en...@gmail.com>
>
> > +1.
> >
> > - downloaded the artifacts
> > - checked checksums
> > - checked sigs
> > - checked hadoop libs in h1 / h2
> > - checked directory layouts
> > - run local cluster
> > - run smoke tests with shell on the artifacts
> > - run tests locally:
> > -- bin/hbase org.apache.hadoop.hbase.util.LoadTestTool -write 10:10:100
> > -num_keys 1000000 -read 100:30
> > -- bin/hbase "org.apache.hadoop.hbase.test.IntegrationTestBigLinkedList
> > Loop 1 1 3000000 /tmp/biglinkedlist 1"
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > Downloaded, unbundled, checked layout, and ran it. Browsed the mvn
> > > artifacts.
> > >
> > > St.Ack
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > This is a quick-fix release directly off of the 0.96.1 release. It
> > can
> > > be
> > > > downloaded here:
> > > >
> > > > http://people.apache.org/~jmhsieh/hbase-0.96.1.1rc0/
> > > >
> > > > The maven staging repo is here:
> > > >
> > > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-056/
> > > >
> > > > There is only one jira'ed patch in this release, HBASE-10188 [1].
> This
> > > > fixes an API incompatibility introduced between 0.96.0 and 0.96.1.
> > Other
> > > > changes include updates to CHANGES.txt (to include that jira), and
> > > pom.xml
> > > > (naming the release 0.96.1.1).
> > > >
> > > > As such, we'll have an abridged testing and voting period. Please
> > have
> > > a
> > > > quick look and vote +1/-1 by 12/18/13 23:59 pacific time. If this
> > passes
> > > > we'll take down 0.96.1.
> > > >
> > > > Please check the release mechanics -- this is my first attempt at an
> > > hbase
> > > > release.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10188
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > > > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > > > // jon@cloudera.com
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: ANNOUNCE: hbase 0.96.1.1rc0 release candidate is available for download.
Posted by Jean-Marc Spaggiari <je...@spaggiari.org>.
I tried multiple times over many hours to run:
mvn test -PrunallTests -Dusefire.secondPartThreadCount=8
On a local machine using the src jar, with no success. I might be missing
something... I will investigate so I will be able to provide better
feedback for 0.96.2...
Sorry about that.
2013/12/18 Enis Söztutar <en...@gmail.com>
> +1.
>
> - downloaded the artifacts
> - checked checksums
> - checked sigs
> - checked hadoop libs in h1 / h2
> - checked directory layouts
> - run local cluster
> - run smoke tests with shell on the artifacts
> - run tests locally:
> -- bin/hbase org.apache.hadoop.hbase.util.LoadTestTool -write 10:10:100
> -num_keys 1000000 -read 100:30
> -- bin/hbase "org.apache.hadoop.hbase.test.IntegrationTestBigLinkedList
> Loop 1 1 3000000 /tmp/biglinkedlist 1"
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Downloaded, unbundled, checked layout, and ran it. Browsed the mvn
> > artifacts.
> >
> > St.Ack
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > This is a quick-fix release directly off of the 0.96.1 release. It
> can
> > be
> > > downloaded here:
> > >
> > > http://people.apache.org/~jmhsieh/hbase-0.96.1.1rc0/
> > >
> > > The maven staging repo is here:
> > >
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-056/
> > >
> > > There is only one jira'ed patch in this release, HBASE-10188 [1]. This
> > > fixes an API incompatibility introduced between 0.96.0 and 0.96.1.
> Other
> > > changes include updates to CHANGES.txt (to include that jira), and
> > pom.xml
> > > (naming the release 0.96.1.1).
> > >
> > > As such, we'll have an abridged testing and voting period. Please
> have
> > a
> > > quick look and vote +1/-1 by 12/18/13 23:59 pacific time. If this
> passes
> > > we'll take down 0.96.1.
> > >
> > > Please check the release mechanics -- this is my first attempt at an
> > hbase
> > > release.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10188
> > >
> > > --
> > > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > > // jon@cloudera.com
> > >
> >
>
Re: ANNOUNCE: hbase 0.96.1.1rc0 release candidate is available for download.
Posted by Enis Söztutar <en...@gmail.com>.
+1.
- downloaded the artifacts
- checked checksums
- checked sigs
- checked hadoop libs in h1 / h2
- checked directory layouts
- run local cluster
- run smoke tests with shell on the artifacts
- run tests locally:
-- bin/hbase org.apache.hadoop.hbase.util.LoadTestTool -write 10:10:100
-num_keys 1000000 -read 100:30
-- bin/hbase "org.apache.hadoop.hbase.test.IntegrationTestBigLinkedList
Loop 1 1 3000000 /tmp/biglinkedlist 1"
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> +1
>
> Downloaded, unbundled, checked layout, and ran it. Browsed the mvn
> artifacts.
>
> St.Ack
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> > This is a quick-fix release directly off of the 0.96.1 release. It can
> be
> > downloaded here:
> >
> > http://people.apache.org/~jmhsieh/hbase-0.96.1.1rc0/
> >
> > The maven staging repo is here:
> >
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-056/
> >
> > There is only one jira'ed patch in this release, HBASE-10188 [1]. This
> > fixes an API incompatibility introduced between 0.96.0 and 0.96.1. Other
> > changes include updates to CHANGES.txt (to include that jira), and
> pom.xml
> > (naming the release 0.96.1.1).
> >
> > As such, we'll have an abridged testing and voting period. Please have
> a
> > quick look and vote +1/-1 by 12/18/13 23:59 pacific time. If this passes
> > we'll take down 0.96.1.
> >
> > Please check the release mechanics -- this is my first attempt at an
> hbase
> > release.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10188
> >
> > --
> > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > // jon@cloudera.com
> >
>
Re: ANNOUNCE: hbase 0.96.1.1rc0 release candidate is available for download.
Posted by Stack <st...@duboce.net>.
+1
Downloaded, unbundled, checked layout, and ran it. Browsed the mvn
artifacts.
St.Ack
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> This is a quick-fix release directly off of the 0.96.1 release. It can be
> downloaded here:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~jmhsieh/hbase-0.96.1.1rc0/
>
> The maven staging repo is here:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-056/
>
> There is only one jira'ed patch in this release, HBASE-10188 [1]. This
> fixes an API incompatibility introduced between 0.96.0 and 0.96.1. Other
> changes include updates to CHANGES.txt (to include that jira), and pom.xml
> (naming the release 0.96.1.1).
>
> As such, we'll have an abridged testing and voting period. Please have a
> quick look and vote +1/-1 by 12/18/13 23:59 pacific time. If this passes
> we'll take down 0.96.1.
>
> Please check the release mechanics -- this is my first attempt at an hbase
> release.
>
> Thanks!
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10188
>
> --
> // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> // jon@cloudera.com
>
Re: ANNOUNCE: hbase 0.96.1.1rc0 release candidate is available for download.
Posted by Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>.
+1 Check signature
Unpacked tar
Checked structure.
ran rat check.
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1
>
> Checked signatures and file sums
> Unpacked tarballs - Contents and directory structure look good
> Started up miniclusters out of unpacked directories
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> > This is a quick-fix release directly off of the 0.96.1 release. It can
> be
> > downloaded here:
> >
> > http://people.apache.org/~jmhsieh/hbase-0.96.1.1rc0/
> >
> > The maven staging repo is here:
> >
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-056/
> >
> > There is only one jira'ed patch in this release, HBASE-10188 [1]. This
> > fixes an API incompatibility introduced between 0.96.0 and 0.96.1. Other
> > changes include updates to CHANGES.txt (to include that jira), and
> pom.xml
> > (naming the release 0.96.1.1).
> >
> > As such, we'll have an abridged testing and voting period. Please have
> a
> > quick look and vote +1/-1 by 12/18/13 23:59 pacific time. If this passes
> > we'll take down 0.96.1.
> >
> > Please check the release mechanics -- this is my first attempt at an
> hbase
> > release.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10188
> >
> > --
> > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> > // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> > // jon@cloudera.com
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> - Andy
>
> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> (via Tom White)
>
Re: ANNOUNCE: hbase 0.96.1.1rc0 release candidate is available for download.
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
+1
Checked signatures and file sums
Unpacked tarballs - Contents and directory structure look good
Started up miniclusters out of unpacked directories
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> This is a quick-fix release directly off of the 0.96.1 release. It can be
> downloaded here:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~jmhsieh/hbase-0.96.1.1rc0/
>
> The maven staging repo is here:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-056/
>
> There is only one jira'ed patch in this release, HBASE-10188 [1]. This
> fixes an API incompatibility introduced between 0.96.0 and 0.96.1. Other
> changes include updates to CHANGES.txt (to include that jira), and pom.xml
> (naming the release 0.96.1.1).
>
> As such, we'll have an abridged testing and voting period. Please have a
> quick look and vote +1/-1 by 12/18/13 23:59 pacific time. If this passes
> we'll take down 0.96.1.
>
> Please check the release mechanics -- this is my first attempt at an hbase
> release.
>
> Thanks!
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10188
>
> --
> // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> // jon@cloudera.com
>
--
Best regards,
- Andy
Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)