You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@hbase.apache.org by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> on 2011/10/20 05:51:56 UTC
review request: HBASE-4508 Backport HBASE-3777 (connection sharing)
to 0.90 branch
Hi,
I have reviewed latest patch for HBASE-4508 and run test suite.
Jonathan has made good progress in his offline .META. builder whose 0.90
patch is blocked by the integration of HBASE-4508.
rocketfuel has been running 0.90 with HBASE-4508 for 5 months. I feel we
should integrate HBASE-4508 into 0.90.5 soon.
Please provide your comments.
Thanks
Re: review request: HBASE-4508 Backport HBASE-3777 (connection
sharing) to 0.90 branch
Posted by Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com>.
Sounds good to me. That's basically why I posted separate versions.
Thanks,
Jon.
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Joanthan:
> Your patch for 0.90 was submitted when I wrote my first email.
> Actually Bright's patch for HBASE-4508 fixes the bug you mentioned by
> adding the following:
> HBASE_INSTANCES.clear();
>
> I think we should fix this bug instead of circumventing it.
>
> Cheers
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
>> Ted,
>>
>> I've posted a version of the 0.90 .META. rebuild that doesn't require
>> HBASE-4508/HBASE-3777. The failure I encountered had to do with a cached
>> HConnection and a what I think is a bug in deleteAllConnections in the 0.90
>> branch. Specifically in 0.90 HConnectionManager.deleteConnection closes a
>> specific connection and removes it self from HBASE_INSTANCES, a singleton
>> map of instances. The aggregate version,
>> HConnectionManager.deleteAllConnections, closes all the connections but does
>> *not* remove the HConnections from HBASE_INSTANCES.
>>
>> When the running a full shutdown and restart of a minicluster, we have the
>> same configuration and get a stale closed connection and get failures from
>> that.
>>
>> Jon.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 8:51 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> I have reviewed latest patch for HBASE-4508 and run test suite.
>>>
>>> Jonathan has made good progress in his offline .META. builder whose 0.90
>>> patch is blocked by the integration of HBASE-4508.
>>>
>>> rocketfuel has been running 0.90 with HBASE-4508 for 5 months. I feel we
>>> should integrate HBASE-4508 into 0.90.5 soon.
>>>
>>> Please provide your comments.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
>> // Software Engineer, Cloudera
>> // jon@cloudera.com
>>
>>
>>
>
--
// Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
// Software Engineer, Cloudera
// jon@cloudera.com
Re: review request: HBASE-4508 Backport HBASE-3777 (connection
sharing) to 0.90 branch
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
I plan to integrate latest patch to 0.90 branch this weekend.
Pleas share your comments if you haven't done so.
Cheers
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Joanthan:
> Your patch for 0.90 was submitted when I wrote my first email.
> Actually Bright's patch for HBASE-4508 fixes the bug you mentioned by
> adding the following:
> HBASE_INSTANCES.clear();
>
> I think we should fix this bug instead of circumventing it.
>
> Cheers
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
>> Ted,
>>
>> I've posted a version of the 0.90 .META. rebuild that doesn't require
>> HBASE-4508/HBASE-3777. The failure I encountered had to do with a cached
>> HConnection and a what I think is a bug in deleteAllConnections in the 0.90
>> branch. Specifically in 0.90 HConnectionManager.deleteConnection closes a
>> specific connection and removes it self from HBASE_INSTANCES, a singleton
>> map of instances. The aggregate version,
>> HConnectionManager.deleteAllConnections, closes all the connections but does
>> *not* remove the HConnections from HBASE_INSTANCES.
>>
>> When the running a full shutdown and restart of a minicluster, we have the
>> same configuration and get a stale closed connection and get failures from
>> that.
>>
>> Jon.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 8:51 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> I have reviewed latest patch for HBASE-4508 and run test suite.
>>>
>>> Jonathan has made good progress in his offline .META. builder whose 0.90
>>> patch is blocked by the integration of HBASE-4508.
>>>
>>> rocketfuel has been running 0.90 with HBASE-4508 for 5 months. I feel we
>>> should integrate HBASE-4508 into 0.90.5 soon.
>>>
>>> Please provide your comments.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
>> // Software Engineer, Cloudera
>> // jon@cloudera.com
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: review request: HBASE-4508 Backport HBASE-3777 (connection
sharing) to 0.90 branch
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
Joanthan:
Your patch for 0.90 was submitted when I wrote my first email.
Actually Bright's patch for HBASE-4508 fixes the bug you mentioned by adding
the following:
HBASE_INSTANCES.clear();
I think we should fix this bug instead of circumventing it.
Cheers
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> Ted,
>
> I've posted a version of the 0.90 .META. rebuild that doesn't require
> HBASE-4508/HBASE-3777. The failure I encountered had to do with a cached
> HConnection and a what I think is a bug in deleteAllConnections in the 0.90
> branch. Specifically in 0.90 HConnectionManager.deleteConnection closes a
> specific connection and removes it self from HBASE_INSTANCES, a singleton
> map of instances. The aggregate version,
> HConnectionManager.deleteAllConnections, closes all the connections but does
> *not* remove the HConnections from HBASE_INSTANCES.
>
> When the running a full shutdown and restart of a minicluster, we have the
> same configuration and get a stale closed connection and get failures from
> that.
>
> Jon.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 8:51 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I have reviewed latest patch for HBASE-4508 and run test suite.
>>
>> Jonathan has made good progress in his offline .META. builder whose 0.90
>> patch is blocked by the integration of HBASE-4508.
>>
>> rocketfuel has been running 0.90 with HBASE-4508 for 5 months. I feel we
>> should integrate HBASE-4508 into 0.90.5 soon.
>>
>> Please provide your comments.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>
>
>
> --
> // Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
> // Software Engineer, Cloudera
> // jon@cloudera.com
>
>
>
Re: review request: HBASE-4508 Backport HBASE-3777 (connection
sharing) to 0.90 branch
Posted by Jonathan Hsieh <jo...@cloudera.com>.
Ted,
I've posted a version of the 0.90 .META. rebuild that doesn't require
HBASE-4508/HBASE-3777. The failure I encountered had to do with a cached
HConnection and a what I think is a bug in deleteAllConnections in the 0.90
branch. Specifically in 0.90 HConnectionManager.deleteConnection closes a
specific connection and removes it self from HBASE_INSTANCES, a singleton
map of instances. The aggregate version,
HConnectionManager.deleteAllConnections, closes all the connections but does
*not* remove the HConnections from HBASE_INSTANCES.
When the running a full shutdown and restart of a minicluster, we have the
same configuration and get a stale closed connection and get failures from
that.
Jon.
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 8:51 PM, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> I have reviewed latest patch for HBASE-4508 and run test suite.
>
> Jonathan has made good progress in his offline .META. builder whose 0.90
> patch is blocked by the integration of HBASE-4508.
>
> rocketfuel has been running 0.90 with HBASE-4508 for 5 months. I feel we
> should integrate HBASE-4508 into 0.90.5 soon.
>
> Please provide your comments.
>
> Thanks
>
--
// Jonathan Hsieh (shay)
// Software Engineer, Cloudera
// jon@cloudera.com