You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@hbase.apache.org by Sean Busbey <bu...@apache.org> on 2016/02/08 16:46:09 UTC
[VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Hi Folks!
I'm pleased to announce the second release candidate for HBase 1.2.0.
Artifacts are available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/hbase-1.2.0RC2/
As of this vote, the relevant md5 hashes are:
836f8401462b36e021a8b6bd55aff4ec hbase-1.2.0-bin.tar.gz
9b1d592a17a4c167043cb0ca8d8f308b hbase-1.2.0-src.tar.gz
Maven artifacts are available in this staging repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1128/
All artifacts are signed with my code signing key 0D80DB7C, available in
the project KEYS file:
http://www.apache.org/dist/hbase/KEYS
these artifacts correspond to commit hash
d568db8372a3fbc6b93c5854749c30276ba19ba4
which signed tag 1.2.0RC2 currently point to
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=hbase.git;a=tag;h=6a689261c76d1679c6a71bd3a0cbd87a185bff27
HBase 1.2.0 is the second minor release in the HBase 1.x line, continuing on
the theme of bringing a stable, reliable database to the Hadoop and NoSQL
communities. This release includes roughly 250 resolved issues not covered
by previous 1.x releases.
Notable new features include:
- JDK8 is now supported
- Hadoop 2.6.1+ and Hadoop 2.7.1+ are now supported
- per column-family time ranges for scan (HBASE-14355)
- daemons respond to SIGHUP to reload configs (HBASE-14529)
- region location methods added to thrift2 proxy (HBASE-13698)
- table-level sync that sends deltas (HBASE-13639)
- client side metrics via JMX (HBASE-12911)
The full list of issues can be found at:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12332062
To see the changes since the prior release candidate, you can use the
following git command on
a up-to-date checkout of the hbase repository:
git log 1.2.0RC1..1.2.0RC2
Please take a few minutes to verify the release[1] and vote on releasing it:
[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache HBase 1.2.0
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
Vote will be subject to Majority Approval[2] and will close at 4:00PM UTC
on Monday, Feb 15th, 2016[3].
[1]: http://www.apache.org/info/verification.html
[2]: https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#MajorityApproval
[3]: to find this in your local timezone see:
http://s.apache.org/hbase-1.2.0-rc2-close
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Stack <st...@duboce.net>.
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org> wrote:
> Should we kill this since Stack just removed the narrow increment ? I'm
> worried about adding a feature and removing it.
>
>
The increment 'fast path' is not needed in 1.2. Subsequent work found that
increment performance had been restored as a side-effect of HBASE-12751.
Enabling this 'feature', gets you a worst state than not enabling it; if
increments and mutation types like put or delete cross on the same Cell
coordinates, the results will be indeteminate (increments are coherent for
increment operations only).
I've tried to message this when talking about the increment regression. For
example, see the release note here [1].
HBASE-15224, the patch I just applied to branch-1.2, removes the 'fast
path' internally. If a user has set the config to turn it on for 1.2.0,
they will have increments with the above mentioned compromise. The user
should be aware since they found the option to enable the 'fast path' in
the release notes that talk of the fast paths' limitation. When they
upgrade to 1.2.1 with HBASE-15224 in place, the configuration will be just
ignored.
Maybe a note in notes that accompany the release but not a reason to sink
the RC IMO.
St.Ack
1. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14460
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Checked signature
> > Ran test suite
> > Exercised shell commands
> >
> >
> > [INFO] Apache HBase - Shaded - Server ..................... SUCCESS [
> > 0.911 s]
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] Total time: 01:47 h
> > [INFO] Finished at: 2016-02-08T10:36:45-08:00
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 7:46 AM, Sean Busbey <bu...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Folks!
> > >
> > > I'm pleased to announce the second release candidate for HBase 1.2.0.
> > >
> > > Artifacts are available here:
> > >
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/hbase-1.2.0RC2/
> > >
> > > As of this vote, the relevant md5 hashes are:
> > >
> > > 836f8401462b36e021a8b6bd55aff4ec hbase-1.2.0-bin.tar.gz
> > > 9b1d592a17a4c167043cb0ca8d8f308b hbase-1.2.0-src.tar.gz
> > >
> > > Maven artifacts are available in this staging repository:
> > >
> > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1128/
> > >
> > > All artifacts are signed with my code signing key 0D80DB7C, available
> in
> > > the project KEYS file:
> > >
> > > http://www.apache.org/dist/hbase/KEYS
> > >
> > > these artifacts correspond to commit hash
> > >
> > > d568db8372a3fbc6b93c5854749c30276ba19ba4
> > >
> > > which signed tag 1.2.0RC2 currently point to
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=hbase.git;a=tag;h=6a689261c76d1679c6a71bd3a0cbd87a185bff27
> > >
> > > HBase 1.2.0 is the second minor release in the HBase 1.x line,
> continuing
> > > on
> > > the theme of bringing a stable, reliable database to the Hadoop and
> NoSQL
> > > communities. This release includes roughly 250 resolved issues not
> > covered
> > > by previous 1.x releases.
> > >
> > > Notable new features include:
> > > - JDK8 is now supported
> > > - Hadoop 2.6.1+ and Hadoop 2.7.1+ are now supported
> > > - per column-family time ranges for scan (HBASE-14355)
> > > - daemons respond to SIGHUP to reload configs (HBASE-14529)
> > > - region location methods added to thrift2 proxy (HBASE-13698)
> > > - table-level sync that sends deltas (HBASE-13639)
> > > - client side metrics via JMX (HBASE-12911)
> > >
> > > The full list of issues can be found at:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12332062
> > >
> > > To see the changes since the prior release candidate, you can use the
> > > following git command on
> > > a up-to-date checkout of the hbase repository:
> > >
> > > git log 1.2.0RC1..1.2.0RC2
> > >
> > > Please take a few minutes to verify the release[1] and vote on
> releasing
> > > it:
> > >
> > > [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache HBase 1.2.0
> > > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > > [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> > >
> > > Vote will be subject to Majority Approval[2] and will close at 4:00PM
> UTC
> > > on Monday, Feb 15th, 2016[3].
> > >
> > > [1]: http://www.apache.org/info/verification.html
> > > [2]: https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#MajorityApproval
> > > [3]: to find this in your local timezone see:
> > > http://s.apache.org/hbase-1.2.0-rc2-close
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>.
Should we kill this since Stack just removed the narrow increment ? I'm
worried about adding a feature and removing it.
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> Checked signature
> Ran test suite
> Exercised shell commands
>
>
> [INFO] Apache HBase - Shaded - Server ..................... SUCCESS [
> 0.911 s]
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [INFO] Total time: 01:47 h
> [INFO] Finished at: 2016-02-08T10:36:45-08:00
>
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 7:46 AM, Sean Busbey <bu...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi Folks!
> >
> > I'm pleased to announce the second release candidate for HBase 1.2.0.
> >
> > Artifacts are available here:
> >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/hbase-1.2.0RC2/
> >
> > As of this vote, the relevant md5 hashes are:
> >
> > 836f8401462b36e021a8b6bd55aff4ec hbase-1.2.0-bin.tar.gz
> > 9b1d592a17a4c167043cb0ca8d8f308b hbase-1.2.0-src.tar.gz
> >
> > Maven artifacts are available in this staging repository:
> >
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1128/
> >
> > All artifacts are signed with my code signing key 0D80DB7C, available in
> > the project KEYS file:
> >
> > http://www.apache.org/dist/hbase/KEYS
> >
> > these artifacts correspond to commit hash
> >
> > d568db8372a3fbc6b93c5854749c30276ba19ba4
> >
> > which signed tag 1.2.0RC2 currently point to
> >
> >
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=hbase.git;a=tag;h=6a689261c76d1679c6a71bd3a0cbd87a185bff27
> >
> > HBase 1.2.0 is the second minor release in the HBase 1.x line, continuing
> > on
> > the theme of bringing a stable, reliable database to the Hadoop and NoSQL
> > communities. This release includes roughly 250 resolved issues not
> covered
> > by previous 1.x releases.
> >
> > Notable new features include:
> > - JDK8 is now supported
> > - Hadoop 2.6.1+ and Hadoop 2.7.1+ are now supported
> > - per column-family time ranges for scan (HBASE-14355)
> > - daemons respond to SIGHUP to reload configs (HBASE-14529)
> > - region location methods added to thrift2 proxy (HBASE-13698)
> > - table-level sync that sends deltas (HBASE-13639)
> > - client side metrics via JMX (HBASE-12911)
> >
> > The full list of issues can be found at:
> >
> >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12332062
> >
> > To see the changes since the prior release candidate, you can use the
> > following git command on
> > a up-to-date checkout of the hbase repository:
> >
> > git log 1.2.0RC1..1.2.0RC2
> >
> > Please take a few minutes to verify the release[1] and vote on releasing
> > it:
> >
> > [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache HBase 1.2.0
> > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> >
> > Vote will be subject to Majority Approval[2] and will close at 4:00PM UTC
> > on Monday, Feb 15th, 2016[3].
> >
> > [1]: http://www.apache.org/info/verification.html
> > [2]: https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#MajorityApproval
> > [3]: to find this in your local timezone see:
> > http://s.apache.org/hbase-1.2.0-rc2-close
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
+1
Checked signature
Ran test suite
Exercised shell commands
[INFO] Apache HBase - Shaded - Server ..................... SUCCESS [
0.911 s]
[INFO]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
[INFO]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[INFO] Total time: 01:47 h
[INFO] Finished at: 2016-02-08T10:36:45-08:00
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 7:46 AM, Sean Busbey <bu...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Folks!
>
> I'm pleased to announce the second release candidate for HBase 1.2.0.
>
> Artifacts are available here:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/hbase-1.2.0RC2/
>
> As of this vote, the relevant md5 hashes are:
>
> 836f8401462b36e021a8b6bd55aff4ec hbase-1.2.0-bin.tar.gz
> 9b1d592a17a4c167043cb0ca8d8f308b hbase-1.2.0-src.tar.gz
>
> Maven artifacts are available in this staging repository:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1128/
>
> All artifacts are signed with my code signing key 0D80DB7C, available in
> the project KEYS file:
>
> http://www.apache.org/dist/hbase/KEYS
>
> these artifacts correspond to commit hash
>
> d568db8372a3fbc6b93c5854749c30276ba19ba4
>
> which signed tag 1.2.0RC2 currently point to
>
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=hbase.git;a=tag;h=6a689261c76d1679c6a71bd3a0cbd87a185bff27
>
> HBase 1.2.0 is the second minor release in the HBase 1.x line, continuing
> on
> the theme of bringing a stable, reliable database to the Hadoop and NoSQL
> communities. This release includes roughly 250 resolved issues not covered
> by previous 1.x releases.
>
> Notable new features include:
> - JDK8 is now supported
> - Hadoop 2.6.1+ and Hadoop 2.7.1+ are now supported
> - per column-family time ranges for scan (HBASE-14355)
> - daemons respond to SIGHUP to reload configs (HBASE-14529)
> - region location methods added to thrift2 proxy (HBASE-13698)
> - table-level sync that sends deltas (HBASE-13639)
> - client side metrics via JMX (HBASE-12911)
>
> The full list of issues can be found at:
>
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12332062
>
> To see the changes since the prior release candidate, you can use the
> following git command on
> a up-to-date checkout of the hbase repository:
>
> git log 1.2.0RC1..1.2.0RC2
>
> Please take a few minutes to verify the release[1] and vote on releasing
> it:
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache HBase 1.2.0
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
> Vote will be subject to Majority Approval[2] and will close at 4:00PM UTC
> on Monday, Feb 15th, 2016[3].
>
> [1]: http://www.apache.org/info/verification.html
> [2]: https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#MajorityApproval
> [3]: to find this in your local timezone see:
> http://s.apache.org/hbase-1.2.0-rc2-close
>
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
If we go with shortened voting period, my assumption is that RC3 would be
RC2 + fix for HBASE-15252, right ?
Cheers
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 9:18 PM, Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 10:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey <se...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Feb 11, 2016 18:33, "张铎" <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue.
> > > >
> > >
> > > It's marked major (though perhaps that's off since it's dataloss, even
> if
> > > rare). More importantly it's been present in prior releases for some
> > time.
> > >
> > > Blocking 1.2.0 would put pressure on getting a solution faster, I
> think.
> > > Additionally, letting the fix wait for 1.2.1 will give me a good
> > incentive
> > > to keep the path releases on schedule. ;)
> > >
> > > My 2¢. Happy to roll another RC if folks see it otherwise.
> > >
> >
> > Dataloss. I think we should roll a new RC with short voting timeframe.
> > St.Ack
> >
>
>
> Alright then. Here's my
>
> -1 do not release due to dataloss bug HBASE-15252.
>
> One of Stack, Elliott, or Ted will need to change your vote to 0 or -1 to
> avoid the RC passing.
>
> I think it'd be safe to interpret your statement as a change of vote, but
> clarity please for posterity. :)
>
> --
> Sean
>
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com>.
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 10:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey <se...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 11, 2016 18:33, "张铎" <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue.
> > >
> >
> > It's marked major (though perhaps that's off since it's dataloss, even if
> > rare). More importantly it's been present in prior releases for some
> time.
> >
> > Blocking 1.2.0 would put pressure on getting a solution faster, I think.
> > Additionally, letting the fix wait for 1.2.1 will give me a good
> incentive
> > to keep the path releases on schedule. ;)
> >
> > My 2¢. Happy to roll another RC if folks see it otherwise.
> >
>
> Dataloss. I think we should roll a new RC with short voting timeframe.
> St.Ack
>
Alright then. Here's my
-1 do not release due to dataloss bug HBASE-15252.
One of Stack, Elliott, or Ted will need to change your vote to 0 or -1 to
avoid the RC passing.
I think it'd be safe to interpret your statement as a change of vote, but
clarity please for posterity. :)
--
Sean
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>.
Lets just roll what's there. The removal of fas narrow seems easy enough.
Canary fixes wouldn't sink a release even if they were incorrect.
HFileReaderv2 prefetch, rpc codec, and the data loss seems like the ones
we'll need to focus on for testing. But that seems do-able.
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> here is what has happened on branch-1.2 since RC2:
>
> * 7ed1603 - (origin/branch-1.2) HBASE-15252 Data loss when replaying wal if
> HDFS timeout (11 hours ago)
> * 19d964d - HBASE-15198 RPC client not using Codec and CellBlock for puts
> by default-addendum. (18 hours ago)
> * cc863f3 - HBASE-15224 Undo "hbase.increment.fast.but.narrow.consistency"
> option; it is not necessary since HBASE-15213 (23 hours ago)
> * 644326b - HBASE-15129 Set default value for hbase.fs.tmp.dir rather than
> fully depend on hbase-default.xml (Yu Li) (27 hours ago)
> * 7d5a158 - HBASE-15198 RPC client not using Codec and CellBlock for puts
> by default. (33 hours ago)
> * c5b6c96 - HBASE-14192 Fix REST Cluster Constructor with String List (2
> days ago)
> * 3b6c305 - HBASE-15229 Canary Tools should not call System.Exit on error
> (Vishal Khandelwal) (2 days ago)
> * 8a2cb16 - HBASE-15219 Canary tool does not return non-zero exit code when
> one of regions is in stuck state (2 days ago)
> * 7643509 - HBASE-15216 Canary does not accept config params from command
> line (Vishal Khandelwal) (3 days ago)
> * d5fd993 - HBASE-15238 HFileReaderV2 prefetch overreaches; runs off the
> end of the data; ADDENDUM (3 days ago)
> * 6f6cd66 - HBASE-15238 HFileReaderV2 prefetch overreaches; runs off
> the end of the data (3 days ago)
> * 4cb21cf - HBASE-15224 Undo "hbase.increment.fast.but.narrow.consistency"
> option; it is not necessary since HBASE-15213 (4 days ago)
> * d568db8 - (1.2.0RC2) HBASE-14025 update CHANGES.txt for 1.2 RC2 (5 days
> ago)
>
> I *could* make 1.2.0 RC3 that just cherry picks HBASE-15252 onto RC2, but
> that's going to make things a bit messy and possibly confusing for folks
> who look for the 1.2.0 tag to be an ancestor of branch-1.2's HEAD.
>
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Same here. I have started with RC2 but can mostly carry findings to RC3
> > given only one additional change.
> >
> > > On Feb 12, 2016, at 8:56 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > -1 until the dataloss is fixed.
> > >
> > > But assuming that's fixed I would be good for a short vote cycle for
> the
> > > next RC.
> > >
> > >> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:02 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> HBASE-15252 is fixed :).
> > >>
> > >> 2016-02-12 14:00 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
> > >>
> > >>> -1
> > >>>
> > >>> The dataloss issue was just discovered. I think now we know of it,
> even
> > >>> though the incidence is rare, would be best to respin the RC.
> > >>>
> > >>> You the man Sean,
> > >>> St.Ack
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey <sean.busbey@gmail.com
> >
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>> On Feb 11, 2016 18:33, "张铎" <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> It's marked major (though perhaps that's off since it's dataloss,
> > even
> > >>> if
> > >>>>> rare). More importantly it's been present in prior releases for
> some
> > >>> time.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Blocking 1.2.0 would put pressure on getting a solution faster, I
> > >> think.
> > >>>>> Additionally, letting the fix wait for 1.2.1 will give me a good
> > >>> incentive
> > >>>>> to keep the path releases on schedule. ;)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> My 2¢. Happy to roll another RC if folks see it otherwise.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Dataloss. I think we should roll a new RC with short voting
> timeframe.
> > >>>> St.Ack
> > >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Sean
>
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
Monday is a holiday.
Wednesday seems better for end of voting period.
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 7:41 PM, Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> okay, I'll roll RC3 tomorrow.
>
> What are folks thinking on voting period? 72hrs (~tuesday)? Maybe Wednesday
> for a little extra?
>
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>
> > A longer ITBLL run passes so 1.2 HEAD is basically sound I'd say...
> > St.Ack
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >
> > > I just ran a small ITBLL against current 1.2 HEAD and it seems fine...
> > > nothing untoward in logs. Running bigger one now. Lets just go w/ tip
> of
> > > 1.2? And one of the items just got reverted:
> > >
> > > commit e52ac92b9810425cb5345121260959e4c0ad5ab3
> > > Author: tedyu <yu...@gmail.com>
> > > Date: Fri Feb 12 12:01:45 2016 -0800
> > >
> > > HBASE-15219 Revert pending verification of test result
> > >
> > > St.Ack
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> here is what has happened on branch-1.2 since RC2:
> > >>
> > >> * 7ed1603 - (origin/branch-1.2) HBASE-15252 Data loss when replaying
> wal
> > >> if
> > >> HDFS timeout (11 hours ago)
> > >> * 19d964d - HBASE-15198 RPC client not using Codec and CellBlock for
> > puts
> > >> by default-addendum. (18 hours ago)
> > >> * cc863f3 - HBASE-15224 Undo
> > "hbase.increment.fast.but.narrow.consistency"
> > >> option; it is not necessary since HBASE-15213 (23 hours ago)
> > >> * 644326b - HBASE-15129 Set default value for hbase.fs.tmp.dir rather
> > than
> > >> fully depend on hbase-default.xml (Yu Li) (27 hours ago)
> > >> * 7d5a158 - HBASE-15198 RPC client not using Codec and CellBlock for
> > puts
> > >> by default. (33 hours ago)
> > >> * c5b6c96 - HBASE-14192 Fix REST Cluster Constructor with String List
> (2
> > >> days ago)
> > >> * 3b6c305 - HBASE-15229 Canary Tools should not call System.Exit on
> > error
> > >> (Vishal Khandelwal) (2 days ago)
> > >> * 8a2cb16 - HBASE-15219 Canary tool does not return non-zero exit code
> > >> when
> > >> one of regions is in stuck state (2 days ago)
> > >> * 7643509 - HBASE-15216 Canary does not accept config params from
> > command
> > >> line (Vishal Khandelwal) (3 days ago)
> > >> * d5fd993 - HBASE-15238 HFileReaderV2 prefetch overreaches; runs off
> the
> > >> end of the data; ADDENDUM (3 days ago)
> > >> * 6f6cd66 - HBASE-15238 HFileReaderV2 prefetch overreaches; runs
> off
> > >> the end of the data (3 days ago)
> > >> * 4cb21cf - HBASE-15224 Undo
> > "hbase.increment.fast.but.narrow.consistency"
> > >> option; it is not necessary since HBASE-15213 (4 days ago)
> > >> * d568db8 - (1.2.0RC2) HBASE-14025 update CHANGES.txt for 1.2 RC2 (5
> > days
> > >> ago)
> > >>
> > >> I *could* make 1.2.0 RC3 that just cherry picks HBASE-15252 onto RC2,
> > but
> > >> that's going to make things a bit messy and possibly confusing for
> folks
> > >> who look for the 1.2.0 tag to be an ancestor of branch-1.2's HEAD.
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > >> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Same here. I have started with RC2 but can mostly carry findings to
> > RC3
> > >> > given only one additional change.
> > >> >
> > >> > > On Feb 12, 2016, at 8:56 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > -1 until the dataloss is fixed.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > But assuming that's fixed I would be good for a short vote cycle
> for
> > >> the
> > >> > > next RC.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:02 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> HBASE-15252 is fixed :).
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> 2016-02-12 14:00 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>> -1
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> The dataloss issue was just discovered. I think now we know of
> it,
> > >> even
> > >> > >>> though the incidence is rare, would be best to respin the RC.
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> You the man Sean,
> > >> > >>> St.Ack
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> wrote:
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey <
> > >> sean.busbey@gmail.com>
> > >> > >>>> wrote:
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>>>> On Feb 11, 2016 18:33, "张铎" <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>> Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue.
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>> It's marked major (though perhaps that's off since it's
> > dataloss,
> > >> > even
> > >> > >>> if
> > >> > >>>>> rare). More importantly it's been present in prior releases
> for
> > >> some
> > >> > >>> time.
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>> Blocking 1.2.0 would put pressure on getting a solution
> faster,
> > I
> > >> > >> think.
> > >> > >>>>> Additionally, letting the fix wait for 1.2.1 will give me a
> good
> > >> > >>> incentive
> > >> > >>>>> to keep the path releases on schedule. ;)
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>> My 2¢. Happy to roll another RC if folks see it otherwise.
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>> Dataloss. I think we should roll a new RC with short voting
> > >> timeframe.
> > >> > >>>> St.Ack
> > >> > >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Sean
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Sean
>
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com>.
okay, I'll roll RC3 tomorrow.
What are folks thinking on voting period? 72hrs (~tuesday)? Maybe Wednesday
for a little extra?
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> A longer ITBLL run passes so 1.2 HEAD is basically sound I'd say...
> St.Ack
>
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>
> > I just ran a small ITBLL against current 1.2 HEAD and it seems fine...
> > nothing untoward in logs. Running bigger one now. Lets just go w/ tip of
> > 1.2? And one of the items just got reverted:
> >
> > commit e52ac92b9810425cb5345121260959e4c0ad5ab3
> > Author: tedyu <yu...@gmail.com>
> > Date: Fri Feb 12 12:01:45 2016 -0800
> >
> > HBASE-15219 Revert pending verification of test result
> >
> > St.Ack
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> here is what has happened on branch-1.2 since RC2:
> >>
> >> * 7ed1603 - (origin/branch-1.2) HBASE-15252 Data loss when replaying wal
> >> if
> >> HDFS timeout (11 hours ago)
> >> * 19d964d - HBASE-15198 RPC client not using Codec and CellBlock for
> puts
> >> by default-addendum. (18 hours ago)
> >> * cc863f3 - HBASE-15224 Undo
> "hbase.increment.fast.but.narrow.consistency"
> >> option; it is not necessary since HBASE-15213 (23 hours ago)
> >> * 644326b - HBASE-15129 Set default value for hbase.fs.tmp.dir rather
> than
> >> fully depend on hbase-default.xml (Yu Li) (27 hours ago)
> >> * 7d5a158 - HBASE-15198 RPC client not using Codec and CellBlock for
> puts
> >> by default. (33 hours ago)
> >> * c5b6c96 - HBASE-14192 Fix REST Cluster Constructor with String List (2
> >> days ago)
> >> * 3b6c305 - HBASE-15229 Canary Tools should not call System.Exit on
> error
> >> (Vishal Khandelwal) (2 days ago)
> >> * 8a2cb16 - HBASE-15219 Canary tool does not return non-zero exit code
> >> when
> >> one of regions is in stuck state (2 days ago)
> >> * 7643509 - HBASE-15216 Canary does not accept config params from
> command
> >> line (Vishal Khandelwal) (3 days ago)
> >> * d5fd993 - HBASE-15238 HFileReaderV2 prefetch overreaches; runs off the
> >> end of the data; ADDENDUM (3 days ago)
> >> * 6f6cd66 - HBASE-15238 HFileReaderV2 prefetch overreaches; runs off
> >> the end of the data (3 days ago)
> >> * 4cb21cf - HBASE-15224 Undo
> "hbase.increment.fast.but.narrow.consistency"
> >> option; it is not necessary since HBASE-15213 (4 days ago)
> >> * d568db8 - (1.2.0RC2) HBASE-14025 update CHANGES.txt for 1.2 RC2 (5
> days
> >> ago)
> >>
> >> I *could* make 1.2.0 RC3 that just cherry picks HBASE-15252 onto RC2,
> but
> >> that's going to make things a bit messy and possibly confusing for folks
> >> who look for the 1.2.0 tag to be an ancestor of branch-1.2's HEAD.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> >> >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Same here. I have started with RC2 but can mostly carry findings to
> RC3
> >> > given only one additional change.
> >> >
> >> > > On Feb 12, 2016, at 8:56 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > -1 until the dataloss is fixed.
> >> > >
> >> > > But assuming that's fixed I would be good for a short vote cycle for
> >> the
> >> > > next RC.
> >> > >
> >> > >> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:02 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> HBASE-15252 is fixed :).
> >> > >>
> >> > >> 2016-02-12 14:00 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
> >> > >>
> >> > >>> -1
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> The dataloss issue was just discovered. I think now we know of it,
> >> even
> >> > >>> though the incidence is rare, would be best to respin the RC.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> You the man Sean,
> >> > >>> St.Ack
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey <
> >> sean.busbey@gmail.com>
> >> > >>>> wrote:
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>>>> On Feb 11, 2016 18:33, "张铎" <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >>>>>>
> >> > >>>>>> Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue.
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>>> It's marked major (though perhaps that's off since it's
> dataloss,
> >> > even
> >> > >>> if
> >> > >>>>> rare). More importantly it's been present in prior releases for
> >> some
> >> > >>> time.
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>>> Blocking 1.2.0 would put pressure on getting a solution faster,
> I
> >> > >> think.
> >> > >>>>> Additionally, letting the fix wait for 1.2.1 will give me a good
> >> > >>> incentive
> >> > >>>>> to keep the path releases on schedule. ;)
> >> > >>>>>
> >> > >>>>> My 2¢. Happy to roll another RC if folks see it otherwise.
> >> > >>>>
> >> > >>>> Dataloss. I think we should roll a new RC with short voting
> >> timeframe.
> >> > >>>> St.Ack
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Sean
> >>
> >
> >
>
--
Sean
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Stack <st...@duboce.net>.
A longer ITBLL run passes so 1.2 HEAD is basically sound I'd say...
St.Ack
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> I just ran a small ITBLL against current 1.2 HEAD and it seems fine...
> nothing untoward in logs. Running bigger one now. Lets just go w/ tip of
> 1.2? And one of the items just got reverted:
>
> commit e52ac92b9810425cb5345121260959e4c0ad5ab3
> Author: tedyu <yu...@gmail.com>
> Date: Fri Feb 12 12:01:45 2016 -0800
>
> HBASE-15219 Revert pending verification of test result
>
> St.Ack
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
>> here is what has happened on branch-1.2 since RC2:
>>
>> * 7ed1603 - (origin/branch-1.2) HBASE-15252 Data loss when replaying wal
>> if
>> HDFS timeout (11 hours ago)
>> * 19d964d - HBASE-15198 RPC client not using Codec and CellBlock for puts
>> by default-addendum. (18 hours ago)
>> * cc863f3 - HBASE-15224 Undo "hbase.increment.fast.but.narrow.consistency"
>> option; it is not necessary since HBASE-15213 (23 hours ago)
>> * 644326b - HBASE-15129 Set default value for hbase.fs.tmp.dir rather than
>> fully depend on hbase-default.xml (Yu Li) (27 hours ago)
>> * 7d5a158 - HBASE-15198 RPC client not using Codec and CellBlock for puts
>> by default. (33 hours ago)
>> * c5b6c96 - HBASE-14192 Fix REST Cluster Constructor with String List (2
>> days ago)
>> * 3b6c305 - HBASE-15229 Canary Tools should not call System.Exit on error
>> (Vishal Khandelwal) (2 days ago)
>> * 8a2cb16 - HBASE-15219 Canary tool does not return non-zero exit code
>> when
>> one of regions is in stuck state (2 days ago)
>> * 7643509 - HBASE-15216 Canary does not accept config params from command
>> line (Vishal Khandelwal) (3 days ago)
>> * d5fd993 - HBASE-15238 HFileReaderV2 prefetch overreaches; runs off the
>> end of the data; ADDENDUM (3 days ago)
>> * 6f6cd66 - HBASE-15238 HFileReaderV2 prefetch overreaches; runs off
>> the end of the data (3 days ago)
>> * 4cb21cf - HBASE-15224 Undo "hbase.increment.fast.but.narrow.consistency"
>> option; it is not necessary since HBASE-15213 (4 days ago)
>> * d568db8 - (1.2.0RC2) HBASE-14025 update CHANGES.txt for 1.2 RC2 (5 days
>> ago)
>>
>> I *could* make 1.2.0 RC3 that just cherry picks HBASE-15252 onto RC2, but
>> that's going to make things a bit messy and possibly confusing for folks
>> who look for the 1.2.0 tag to be an ancestor of branch-1.2's HEAD.
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com
>> >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Same here. I have started with RC2 but can mostly carry findings to RC3
>> > given only one additional change.
>> >
>> > > On Feb 12, 2016, at 8:56 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > -1 until the dataloss is fixed.
>> > >
>> > > But assuming that's fixed I would be good for a short vote cycle for
>> the
>> > > next RC.
>> > >
>> > >> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:02 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> HBASE-15252 is fixed :).
>> > >>
>> > >> 2016-02-12 14:00 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
>> > >>
>> > >>> -1
>> > >>>
>> > >>> The dataloss issue was just discovered. I think now we know of it,
>> even
>> > >>> though the incidence is rare, would be best to respin the RC.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> You the man Sean,
>> > >>> St.Ack
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey <
>> sean.busbey@gmail.com>
>> > >>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>>> On Feb 11, 2016 18:33, "张铎" <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> It's marked major (though perhaps that's off since it's dataloss,
>> > even
>> > >>> if
>> > >>>>> rare). More importantly it's been present in prior releases for
>> some
>> > >>> time.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> Blocking 1.2.0 would put pressure on getting a solution faster, I
>> > >> think.
>> > >>>>> Additionally, letting the fix wait for 1.2.1 will give me a good
>> > >>> incentive
>> > >>>>> to keep the path releases on schedule. ;)
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> My 2¢. Happy to roll another RC if folks see it otherwise.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Dataloss. I think we should roll a new RC with short voting
>> timeframe.
>> > >>>> St.Ack
>> > >>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sean
>>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
I did some validation today.
See my comment at the tail of HBASE-15219.
I reverted my patch until we find out which patch caused the
-treatFailureAsError
flag not to work.
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> I just ran a small ITBLL against current 1.2 HEAD and it seems fine...
> nothing untoward in logs. Running bigger one now. Lets just go w/ tip of
> 1.2? And one of the items just got reverted:
>
> commit e52ac92b9810425cb5345121260959e4c0ad5ab3
> Author: tedyu <yu...@gmail.com>
> Date: Fri Feb 12 12:01:45 2016 -0800
>
> HBASE-15219 Revert pending verification of test result
>
> St.Ack
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> > here is what has happened on branch-1.2 since RC2:
> >
> > * 7ed1603 - (origin/branch-1.2) HBASE-15252 Data loss when replaying wal
> if
> > HDFS timeout (11 hours ago)
> > * 19d964d - HBASE-15198 RPC client not using Codec and CellBlock for puts
> > by default-addendum. (18 hours ago)
> > * cc863f3 - HBASE-15224 Undo
> "hbase.increment.fast.but.narrow.consistency"
> > option; it is not necessary since HBASE-15213 (23 hours ago)
> > * 644326b - HBASE-15129 Set default value for hbase.fs.tmp.dir rather
> than
> > fully depend on hbase-default.xml (Yu Li) (27 hours ago)
> > * 7d5a158 - HBASE-15198 RPC client not using Codec and CellBlock for puts
> > by default. (33 hours ago)
> > * c5b6c96 - HBASE-14192 Fix REST Cluster Constructor with String List (2
> > days ago)
> > * 3b6c305 - HBASE-15229 Canary Tools should not call System.Exit on error
> > (Vishal Khandelwal) (2 days ago)
> > * 8a2cb16 - HBASE-15219 Canary tool does not return non-zero exit code
> when
> > one of regions is in stuck state (2 days ago)
> > * 7643509 - HBASE-15216 Canary does not accept config params from command
> > line (Vishal Khandelwal) (3 days ago)
> > * d5fd993 - HBASE-15238 HFileReaderV2 prefetch overreaches; runs off the
> > end of the data; ADDENDUM (3 days ago)
> > * 6f6cd66 - HBASE-15238 HFileReaderV2 prefetch overreaches; runs off
> > the end of the data (3 days ago)
> > * 4cb21cf - HBASE-15224 Undo
> "hbase.increment.fast.but.narrow.consistency"
> > option; it is not necessary since HBASE-15213 (4 days ago)
> > * d568db8 - (1.2.0RC2) HBASE-14025 update CHANGES.txt for 1.2 RC2 (5 days
> > ago)
> >
> > I *could* make 1.2.0 RC3 that just cherry picks HBASE-15252 onto RC2, but
> > that's going to make things a bit messy and possibly confusing for folks
> > who look for the 1.2.0 tag to be an ancestor of branch-1.2's HEAD.
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Same here. I have started with RC2 but can mostly carry findings to RC3
> > > given only one additional change.
> > >
> > > > On Feb 12, 2016, at 8:56 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > -1 until the dataloss is fixed.
> > > >
> > > > But assuming that's fixed I would be good for a short vote cycle for
> > the
> > > > next RC.
> > > >
> > > >> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:02 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> HBASE-15252 is fixed :).
> > > >>
> > > >> 2016-02-12 14:00 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
> > > >>
> > > >>> -1
> > > >>>
> > > >>> The dataloss issue was just discovered. I think now we know of it,
> > even
> > > >>> though the incidence is rare, would be best to respin the RC.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> You the man Sean,
> > > >>> St.Ack
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey <
> sean.busbey@gmail.com
> > >
> > > >>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>>> On Feb 11, 2016 18:33, "张铎" <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> It's marked major (though perhaps that's off since it's dataloss,
> > > even
> > > >>> if
> > > >>>>> rare). More importantly it's been present in prior releases for
> > some
> > > >>> time.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Blocking 1.2.0 would put pressure on getting a solution faster, I
> > > >> think.
> > > >>>>> Additionally, letting the fix wait for 1.2.1 will give me a good
> > > >>> incentive
> > > >>>>> to keep the path releases on schedule. ;)
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> My 2¢. Happy to roll another RC if folks see it otherwise.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Dataloss. I think we should roll a new RC with short voting
> > timeframe.
> > > >>>> St.Ack
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sean
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Stack <st...@duboce.net>.
I just ran a small ITBLL against current 1.2 HEAD and it seems fine...
nothing untoward in logs. Running bigger one now. Lets just go w/ tip of
1.2? And one of the items just got reverted:
commit e52ac92b9810425cb5345121260959e4c0ad5ab3
Author: tedyu <yu...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri Feb 12 12:01:45 2016 -0800
HBASE-15219 Revert pending verification of test result
St.Ack
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> here is what has happened on branch-1.2 since RC2:
>
> * 7ed1603 - (origin/branch-1.2) HBASE-15252 Data loss when replaying wal if
> HDFS timeout (11 hours ago)
> * 19d964d - HBASE-15198 RPC client not using Codec and CellBlock for puts
> by default-addendum. (18 hours ago)
> * cc863f3 - HBASE-15224 Undo "hbase.increment.fast.but.narrow.consistency"
> option; it is not necessary since HBASE-15213 (23 hours ago)
> * 644326b - HBASE-15129 Set default value for hbase.fs.tmp.dir rather than
> fully depend on hbase-default.xml (Yu Li) (27 hours ago)
> * 7d5a158 - HBASE-15198 RPC client not using Codec and CellBlock for puts
> by default. (33 hours ago)
> * c5b6c96 - HBASE-14192 Fix REST Cluster Constructor with String List (2
> days ago)
> * 3b6c305 - HBASE-15229 Canary Tools should not call System.Exit on error
> (Vishal Khandelwal) (2 days ago)
> * 8a2cb16 - HBASE-15219 Canary tool does not return non-zero exit code when
> one of regions is in stuck state (2 days ago)
> * 7643509 - HBASE-15216 Canary does not accept config params from command
> line (Vishal Khandelwal) (3 days ago)
> * d5fd993 - HBASE-15238 HFileReaderV2 prefetch overreaches; runs off the
> end of the data; ADDENDUM (3 days ago)
> * 6f6cd66 - HBASE-15238 HFileReaderV2 prefetch overreaches; runs off
> the end of the data (3 days ago)
> * 4cb21cf - HBASE-15224 Undo "hbase.increment.fast.but.narrow.consistency"
> option; it is not necessary since HBASE-15213 (4 days ago)
> * d568db8 - (1.2.0RC2) HBASE-14025 update CHANGES.txt for 1.2 RC2 (5 days
> ago)
>
> I *could* make 1.2.0 RC3 that just cherry picks HBASE-15252 onto RC2, but
> that's going to make things a bit messy and possibly confusing for folks
> who look for the 1.2.0 tag to be an ancestor of branch-1.2's HEAD.
>
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Same here. I have started with RC2 but can mostly carry findings to RC3
> > given only one additional change.
> >
> > > On Feb 12, 2016, at 8:56 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > -1 until the dataloss is fixed.
> > >
> > > But assuming that's fixed I would be good for a short vote cycle for
> the
> > > next RC.
> > >
> > >> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:02 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> HBASE-15252 is fixed :).
> > >>
> > >> 2016-02-12 14:00 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
> > >>
> > >>> -1
> > >>>
> > >>> The dataloss issue was just discovered. I think now we know of it,
> even
> > >>> though the incidence is rare, would be best to respin the RC.
> > >>>
> > >>> You the man Sean,
> > >>> St.Ack
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey <sean.busbey@gmail.com
> >
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>> On Feb 11, 2016 18:33, "张铎" <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> It's marked major (though perhaps that's off since it's dataloss,
> > even
> > >>> if
> > >>>>> rare). More importantly it's been present in prior releases for
> some
> > >>> time.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Blocking 1.2.0 would put pressure on getting a solution faster, I
> > >> think.
> > >>>>> Additionally, letting the fix wait for 1.2.1 will give me a good
> > >>> incentive
> > >>>>> to keep the path releases on schedule. ;)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> My 2¢. Happy to roll another RC if folks see it otherwise.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Dataloss. I think we should roll a new RC with short voting
> timeframe.
> > >>>> St.Ack
> > >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Sean
>
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>.
Also in the 0.98 history.
> On Feb 12, 2016, at 12:04 PM, Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>
>> I *could* make 1.2.0 RC3 that just cherry picks HBASE-15252 onto RC2, but
>> that's going to make things a bit messy and possibly confusing for folks
>> who look for the 1.2.0 tag to be an ancestor of branch-1.2's HEAD.
>
> We have no strict requirement that a previous release is a git ancestor of
> a later release. So long as the committed set of JIRAs matches, it's fine.
> There's a precedent of this already with earlier 1.x release candidates.
>
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Same here. I have started with RC2 but can mostly carry findings to RC3
>>> given only one additional change.
>>>
>>>> On Feb 12, 2016, at 8:56 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> -1 until the dataloss is fixed.
>>>>
>>>> But assuming that's fixed I would be good for a short vote cycle for
>> the
>>>> next RC.
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:02 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> HBASE-15252 is fixed :).
>>>>>
>>>>> 2016-02-12 14:00 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> -1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The dataloss issue was just discovered. I think now we know of it,
>> even
>>>>>> though the incidence is rare, would be best to respin the RC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You the man Sean,
>>>>>> St.Ack
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey <sean.busbey@gmail.com
>>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Feb 11, 2016 18:33, "张铎" <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's marked major (though perhaps that's off since it's dataloss,
>>> even
>>>>>> if
>>>>>>>> rare). More importantly it's been present in prior releases for
>> some
>>>>>> time.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Blocking 1.2.0 would put pressure on getting a solution faster, I
>>>>> think.
>>>>>>>> Additionally, letting the fix wait for 1.2.1 will give me a good
>>>>>> incentive
>>>>>>>> to keep the path releases on schedule. ;)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My 2¢. Happy to roll another RC if folks see it otherwise.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dataloss. I think we should roll a new RC with short voting
>> timeframe.
>>>>>>> St.Ack
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sean
>>
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Nick Dimiduk <nd...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> I *could* make 1.2.0 RC3 that just cherry picks HBASE-15252 onto RC2, but
> that's going to make things a bit messy and possibly confusing for folks
> who look for the 1.2.0 tag to be an ancestor of branch-1.2's HEAD.
>
We have no strict requirement that a previous release is a git ancestor of
a later release. So long as the committed set of JIRAs matches, it's fine.
There's a precedent of this already with earlier 1.x release candidates.
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Same here. I have started with RC2 but can mostly carry findings to RC3
> > given only one additional change.
> >
> > > On Feb 12, 2016, at 8:56 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > -1 until the dataloss is fixed.
> > >
> > > But assuming that's fixed I would be good for a short vote cycle for
> the
> > > next RC.
> > >
> > >> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:02 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> HBASE-15252 is fixed :).
> > >>
> > >> 2016-02-12 14:00 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
> > >>
> > >>> -1
> > >>>
> > >>> The dataloss issue was just discovered. I think now we know of it,
> even
> > >>> though the incidence is rare, would be best to respin the RC.
> > >>>
> > >>> You the man Sean,
> > >>> St.Ack
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey <sean.busbey@gmail.com
> >
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>> On Feb 11, 2016 18:33, "张铎" <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> It's marked major (though perhaps that's off since it's dataloss,
> > even
> > >>> if
> > >>>>> rare). More importantly it's been present in prior releases for
> some
> > >>> time.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Blocking 1.2.0 would put pressure on getting a solution faster, I
> > >> think.
> > >>>>> Additionally, letting the fix wait for 1.2.1 will give me a good
> > >>> incentive
> > >>>>> to keep the path releases on schedule. ;)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> My 2¢. Happy to roll another RC if folks see it otherwise.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Dataloss. I think we should roll a new RC with short voting
> timeframe.
> > >>>> St.Ack
> > >>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Sean
>
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Sean Busbey <bu...@cloudera.com>.
here is what has happened on branch-1.2 since RC2:
* 7ed1603 - (origin/branch-1.2) HBASE-15252 Data loss when replaying wal if
HDFS timeout (11 hours ago)
* 19d964d - HBASE-15198 RPC client not using Codec and CellBlock for puts
by default-addendum. (18 hours ago)
* cc863f3 - HBASE-15224 Undo "hbase.increment.fast.but.narrow.consistency"
option; it is not necessary since HBASE-15213 (23 hours ago)
* 644326b - HBASE-15129 Set default value for hbase.fs.tmp.dir rather than
fully depend on hbase-default.xml (Yu Li) (27 hours ago)
* 7d5a158 - HBASE-15198 RPC client not using Codec and CellBlock for puts
by default. (33 hours ago)
* c5b6c96 - HBASE-14192 Fix REST Cluster Constructor with String List (2
days ago)
* 3b6c305 - HBASE-15229 Canary Tools should not call System.Exit on error
(Vishal Khandelwal) (2 days ago)
* 8a2cb16 - HBASE-15219 Canary tool does not return non-zero exit code when
one of regions is in stuck state (2 days ago)
* 7643509 - HBASE-15216 Canary does not accept config params from command
line (Vishal Khandelwal) (3 days ago)
* d5fd993 - HBASE-15238 HFileReaderV2 prefetch overreaches; runs off the
end of the data; ADDENDUM (3 days ago)
* 6f6cd66 - HBASE-15238 HFileReaderV2 prefetch overreaches; runs off
the end of the data (3 days ago)
* 4cb21cf - HBASE-15224 Undo "hbase.increment.fast.but.narrow.consistency"
option; it is not necessary since HBASE-15213 (4 days ago)
* d568db8 - (1.2.0RC2) HBASE-14025 update CHANGES.txt for 1.2 RC2 (5 days
ago)
I *could* make 1.2.0 RC3 that just cherry picks HBASE-15252 onto RC2, but
that's going to make things a bit messy and possibly confusing for folks
who look for the 1.2.0 tag to be an ancestor of branch-1.2's HEAD.
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Same here. I have started with RC2 but can mostly carry findings to RC3
> given only one additional change.
>
> > On Feb 12, 2016, at 8:56 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > -1 until the dataloss is fixed.
> >
> > But assuming that's fixed I would be good for a short vote cycle for the
> > next RC.
> >
> >> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:02 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> HBASE-15252 is fixed :).
> >>
> >> 2016-02-12 14:00 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
> >>
> >>> -1
> >>>
> >>> The dataloss issue was just discovered. I think now we know of it, even
> >>> though the incidence is rare, would be best to respin the RC.
> >>>
> >>> You the man Sean,
> >>> St.Ack
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey <se...@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>> On Feb 11, 2016 18:33, "张铎" <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It's marked major (though perhaps that's off since it's dataloss,
> even
> >>> if
> >>>>> rare). More importantly it's been present in prior releases for some
> >>> time.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Blocking 1.2.0 would put pressure on getting a solution faster, I
> >> think.
> >>>>> Additionally, letting the fix wait for 1.2.1 will give me a good
> >>> incentive
> >>>>> to keep the path releases on schedule. ;)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> My 2¢. Happy to roll another RC if folks see it otherwise.
> >>>>
> >>>> Dataloss. I think we should roll a new RC with short voting timeframe.
> >>>> St.Ack
> >>
>
--
Sean
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>.
Same here. I have started with RC2 but can mostly carry findings to RC3 given only one additional change.
> On Feb 12, 2016, at 8:56 AM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> -1 until the dataloss is fixed.
>
> But assuming that's fixed I would be good for a short vote cycle for the
> next RC.
>
>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:02 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> HBASE-15252 is fixed :).
>>
>> 2016-02-12 14:00 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
>>
>>> -1
>>>
>>> The dataloss issue was just discovered. I think now we know of it, even
>>> though the incidence is rare, would be best to respin the RC.
>>>
>>> You the man Sean,
>>> St.Ack
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey <se...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 11, 2016 18:33, "张铎" <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's marked major (though perhaps that's off since it's dataloss, even
>>> if
>>>>> rare). More importantly it's been present in prior releases for some
>>> time.
>>>>>
>>>>> Blocking 1.2.0 would put pressure on getting a solution faster, I
>> think.
>>>>> Additionally, letting the fix wait for 1.2.1 will give me a good
>>> incentive
>>>>> to keep the path releases on schedule. ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> My 2¢. Happy to roll another RC if folks see it otherwise.
>>>>
>>>> Dataloss. I think we should roll a new RC with short voting timeframe.
>>>> St.Ack
>>
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>.
-1 until the dataloss is fixed.
But assuming that's fixed I would be good for a short vote cycle for the
next RC.
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:02 AM, 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> HBASE-15252 is fixed :).
>
> 2016-02-12 14:00 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
>
> > -1
> >
> > The dataloss issue was just discovered. I think now we know of it, even
> > though the incidence is rare, would be best to respin the RC.
> >
> > You the man Sean,
> > St.Ack
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey <se...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Feb 11, 2016 18:33, "张铎" <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue.
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> It's marked major (though perhaps that's off since it's dataloss, even
> > if
> > >> rare). More importantly it's been present in prior releases for some
> > time.
> > >>
> > >> Blocking 1.2.0 would put pressure on getting a solution faster, I
> think.
> > >> Additionally, letting the fix wait for 1.2.1 will give me a good
> > incentive
> > >> to keep the path releases on schedule. ;)
> > >>
> > >> My 2¢. Happy to roll another RC if folks see it otherwise.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Dataloss. I think we should roll a new RC with short voting timeframe.
> > > St.Ack
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>.
HBASE-15252 is fixed :).
2016-02-12 14:00 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
> -1
>
> The dataloss issue was just discovered. I think now we know of it, even
> though the incidence is rare, would be best to respin the RC.
>
> You the man Sean,
> St.Ack
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey <se...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Feb 11, 2016 18:33, "张铎" <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue.
> >> >
> >>
> >> It's marked major (though perhaps that's off since it's dataloss, even
> if
> >> rare). More importantly it's been present in prior releases for some
> time.
> >>
> >> Blocking 1.2.0 would put pressure on getting a solution faster, I think.
> >> Additionally, letting the fix wait for 1.2.1 will give me a good
> incentive
> >> to keep the path releases on schedule. ;)
> >>
> >> My 2¢. Happy to roll another RC if folks see it otherwise.
> >>
> >
> > Dataloss. I think we should roll a new RC with short voting timeframe.
> > St.Ack
> >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Stack <st...@duboce.net>.
-1
The dataloss issue was just discovered. I think now we know of it, even
though the incidence is rare, would be best to respin the RC.
You the man Sean,
St.Ack
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey <se...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Feb 11, 2016 18:33, "张铎" <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue.
>> >
>>
>> It's marked major (though perhaps that's off since it's dataloss, even if
>> rare). More importantly it's been present in prior releases for some time.
>>
>> Blocking 1.2.0 would put pressure on getting a solution faster, I think.
>> Additionally, letting the fix wait for 1.2.1 will give me a good incentive
>> to keep the path releases on schedule. ;)
>>
>> My 2¢. Happy to roll another RC if folks see it otherwise.
>>
>
> Dataloss. I think we should roll a new RC with short voting timeframe.
> St.Ack
>
>
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Stack <st...@duboce.net>.
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 11, 2016 18:33, "张铎" <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue.
> >
>
> It's marked major (though perhaps that's off since it's dataloss, even if
> rare). More importantly it's been present in prior releases for some time.
>
> Blocking 1.2.0 would put pressure on getting a solution faster, I think.
> Additionally, letting the fix wait for 1.2.1 will give me a good incentive
> to keep the path releases on schedule. ;)
>
> My 2¢. Happy to roll another RC if folks see it otherwise.
>
Dataloss. I think we should roll a new RC with short voting timeframe.
St.Ack
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Sean Busbey <se...@gmail.com>.
On Feb 11, 2016 18:33, "张铎" <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue.
>
It's marked major (though perhaps that's off since it's dataloss, even if
rare). More importantly it's been present in prior releases for some time.
Blocking 1.2.0 would put pressure on getting a solution faster, I think.
Additionally, letting the fix wait for 1.2.1 will give me a good incentive
to keep the path releases on schedule. ;)
My 2¢. Happy to roll another RC if folks see it otherwise.
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by 张铎 <pa...@gmail.com>.
Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue.
2016-02-12 7:34 GMT+08:00 Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>:
> +1
>
> Been running something close to RC in production for a while now.
> Checked the layout everything looks good
> Running ITBLL in a loop and there's no data loss. ( Sometimes the master
> still gets stuck but that's not new ).
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Checked signature and hash.
> >
> > Reviewed layout.
> >
> > Ran rat check.
> >
> > Built src and site.
> >
> > Doc looks good.
> >
> > Started it all up and loaded and verified data. Nothing odd in the logs.
> >
> > I've been running RCs on a cluster doing ITBLL with monkeys over last few
> > weeks. 1.2.0 stays up and running in my runs (9-node, 1B nodes, done a
> few
> > times).
> >
> > St.Ack
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 7:46 AM, Sean Busbey <bu...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Folks!
> > >
> > > I'm pleased to announce the second release candidate for HBase 1.2.0.
> > >
> > > Artifacts are available here:
> > >
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/hbase-1.2.0RC2/
> > >
> > > As of this vote, the relevant md5 hashes are:
> > >
> > > 836f8401462b36e021a8b6bd55aff4ec hbase-1.2.0-bin.tar.gz
> > > 9b1d592a17a4c167043cb0ca8d8f308b hbase-1.2.0-src.tar.gz
> > >
> > > Maven artifacts are available in this staging repository:
> > >
> > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1128/
> > >
> > > All artifacts are signed with my code signing key 0D80DB7C, available
> in
> > > the project KEYS file:
> > >
> > > http://www.apache.org/dist/hbase/KEYS
> > >
> > > these artifacts correspond to commit hash
> > >
> > > d568db8372a3fbc6b93c5854749c30276ba19ba4
> > >
> > > which signed tag 1.2.0RC2 currently point to
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=hbase.git;a=tag;h=6a689261c76d1679c6a71bd3a0cbd87a185bff27
> > >
> > > HBase 1.2.0 is the second minor release in the HBase 1.x line,
> continuing
> > > on
> > > the theme of bringing a stable, reliable database to the Hadoop and
> NoSQL
> > > communities. This release includes roughly 250 resolved issues not
> > covered
> > > by previous 1.x releases.
> > >
> > > Notable new features include:
> > > - JDK8 is now supported
> > > - Hadoop 2.6.1+ and Hadoop 2.7.1+ are now supported
> > > - per column-family time ranges for scan (HBASE-14355)
> > > - daemons respond to SIGHUP to reload configs (HBASE-14529)
> > > - region location methods added to thrift2 proxy (HBASE-13698)
> > > - table-level sync that sends deltas (HBASE-13639)
> > > - client side metrics via JMX (HBASE-12911)
> > >
> > > The full list of issues can be found at:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12332062
> > >
> > > To see the changes since the prior release candidate, you can use the
> > > following git command on
> > > a up-to-date checkout of the hbase repository:
> > >
> > > git log 1.2.0RC1..1.2.0RC2
> > >
> > > Please take a few minutes to verify the release[1] and vote on
> releasing
> > > it:
> > >
> > > [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache HBase 1.2.0
> > > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > > [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> > >
> > > Vote will be subject to Majority Approval[2] and will close at 4:00PM
> UTC
> > > on Monday, Feb 15th, 2016[3].
> > >
> > > [1]: http://www.apache.org/info/verification.html
> > > [2]: https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#MajorityApproval
> > > [3]: to find this in your local timezone see:
> > > http://s.apache.org/hbase-1.2.0-rc2-close
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>.
+1
Been running something close to RC in production for a while now.
Checked the layout everything looks good
Running ITBLL in a loop and there's no data loss. ( Sometimes the master
still gets stuck but that's not new ).
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> +1
>
> Checked signature and hash.
>
> Reviewed layout.
>
> Ran rat check.
>
> Built src and site.
>
> Doc looks good.
>
> Started it all up and loaded and verified data. Nothing odd in the logs.
>
> I've been running RCs on a cluster doing ITBLL with monkeys over last few
> weeks. 1.2.0 stays up and running in my runs (9-node, 1B nodes, done a few
> times).
>
> St.Ack
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 7:46 AM, Sean Busbey <bu...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi Folks!
> >
> > I'm pleased to announce the second release candidate for HBase 1.2.0.
> >
> > Artifacts are available here:
> >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/hbase-1.2.0RC2/
> >
> > As of this vote, the relevant md5 hashes are:
> >
> > 836f8401462b36e021a8b6bd55aff4ec hbase-1.2.0-bin.tar.gz
> > 9b1d592a17a4c167043cb0ca8d8f308b hbase-1.2.0-src.tar.gz
> >
> > Maven artifacts are available in this staging repository:
> >
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1128/
> >
> > All artifacts are signed with my code signing key 0D80DB7C, available in
> > the project KEYS file:
> >
> > http://www.apache.org/dist/hbase/KEYS
> >
> > these artifacts correspond to commit hash
> >
> > d568db8372a3fbc6b93c5854749c30276ba19ba4
> >
> > which signed tag 1.2.0RC2 currently point to
> >
> >
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=hbase.git;a=tag;h=6a689261c76d1679c6a71bd3a0cbd87a185bff27
> >
> > HBase 1.2.0 is the second minor release in the HBase 1.x line, continuing
> > on
> > the theme of bringing a stable, reliable database to the Hadoop and NoSQL
> > communities. This release includes roughly 250 resolved issues not
> covered
> > by previous 1.x releases.
> >
> > Notable new features include:
> > - JDK8 is now supported
> > - Hadoop 2.6.1+ and Hadoop 2.7.1+ are now supported
> > - per column-family time ranges for scan (HBASE-14355)
> > - daemons respond to SIGHUP to reload configs (HBASE-14529)
> > - region location methods added to thrift2 proxy (HBASE-13698)
> > - table-level sync that sends deltas (HBASE-13639)
> > - client side metrics via JMX (HBASE-12911)
> >
> > The full list of issues can be found at:
> >
> >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12332062
> >
> > To see the changes since the prior release candidate, you can use the
> > following git command on
> > a up-to-date checkout of the hbase repository:
> >
> > git log 1.2.0RC1..1.2.0RC2
> >
> > Please take a few minutes to verify the release[1] and vote on releasing
> > it:
> >
> > [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache HBase 1.2.0
> > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
> >
> > Vote will be subject to Majority Approval[2] and will close at 4:00PM UTC
> > on Monday, Feb 15th, 2016[3].
> >
> > [1]: http://www.apache.org/info/verification.html
> > [2]: https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#MajorityApproval
> > [3]: to find this in your local timezone see:
> > http://s.apache.org/hbase-1.2.0-rc2-close
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] HBase 1.2.0 RC2
Posted by Stack <st...@duboce.net>.
+1
Checked signature and hash.
Reviewed layout.
Ran rat check.
Built src and site.
Doc looks good.
Started it all up and loaded and verified data. Nothing odd in the logs.
I've been running RCs on a cluster doing ITBLL with monkeys over last few
weeks. 1.2.0 stays up and running in my runs (9-node, 1B nodes, done a few
times).
St.Ack
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 7:46 AM, Sean Busbey <bu...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Folks!
>
> I'm pleased to announce the second release candidate for HBase 1.2.0.
>
> Artifacts are available here:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hbase/hbase-1.2.0RC2/
>
> As of this vote, the relevant md5 hashes are:
>
> 836f8401462b36e021a8b6bd55aff4ec hbase-1.2.0-bin.tar.gz
> 9b1d592a17a4c167043cb0ca8d8f308b hbase-1.2.0-src.tar.gz
>
> Maven artifacts are available in this staging repository:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1128/
>
> All artifacts are signed with my code signing key 0D80DB7C, available in
> the project KEYS file:
>
> http://www.apache.org/dist/hbase/KEYS
>
> these artifacts correspond to commit hash
>
> d568db8372a3fbc6b93c5854749c30276ba19ba4
>
> which signed tag 1.2.0RC2 currently point to
>
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=hbase.git;a=tag;h=6a689261c76d1679c6a71bd3a0cbd87a185bff27
>
> HBase 1.2.0 is the second minor release in the HBase 1.x line, continuing
> on
> the theme of bringing a stable, reliable database to the Hadoop and NoSQL
> communities. This release includes roughly 250 resolved issues not covered
> by previous 1.x releases.
>
> Notable new features include:
> - JDK8 is now supported
> - Hadoop 2.6.1+ and Hadoop 2.7.1+ are now supported
> - per column-family time ranges for scan (HBASE-14355)
> - daemons respond to SIGHUP to reload configs (HBASE-14529)
> - region location methods added to thrift2 proxy (HBASE-13698)
> - table-level sync that sends deltas (HBASE-13639)
> - client side metrics via JMX (HBASE-12911)
>
> The full list of issues can be found at:
>
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12332062
>
> To see the changes since the prior release candidate, you can use the
> following git command on
> a up-to-date checkout of the hbase repository:
>
> git log 1.2.0RC1..1.2.0RC2
>
> Please take a few minutes to verify the release[1] and vote on releasing
> it:
>
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache HBase 1.2.0
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>
> Vote will be subject to Majority Approval[2] and will close at 4:00PM UTC
> on Monday, Feb 15th, 2016[3].
>
> [1]: http://www.apache.org/info/verification.html
> [2]: https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#MajorityApproval
> [3]: to find this in your local timezone see:
> http://s.apache.org/hbase-1.2.0-rc2-close
>