You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@hbase.apache.org by Sergey Soldatov <se...@gmail.com> on 2017/12/01 00:54:10 UTC
Re: Release 1.4.0 update
Andrew,
Can we include HBASE-19393 as well? Quite annoying issue and very simple
fix.
Thanks,
Sergey
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> Not too late, no
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>
> > Fix is up if it is not too late Andrew.
> > St.Ack
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Andrew, your testing has turned up an issue in HBASE-18233. It is
> present
> > > in the 1.4 candidate patch and in 1.3. The failure is intermittent. I
> am
> > > working on a fix but want to make sure I have it right. So, I withdraw
> my
> > > request that 1.4 include it.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > S
> > >
> > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> TestGlobalThrottler is a problem stemming from the revert of
> HBASE-9465
> > >> on branch-1.4. The test came in on HBASE-17314 so I'll also revert
> > that
> > >> from branch-1.4. For more on this see HBASE-19381
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > The TestEndToEndSplitTransaction failure will be fixed by
> HBASE-19379.
> > >> >
> > >> > The TestGlobalThrottler issue is a hang, which is probably why it
> > >> slipped
> > >> > through the cracks. I went back 32 commits from head and it was
> still
> > >> > stuck. 64 commits back it's good. Somewhere in between. Will get to
> > the
> > >> > offending commit shortly.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> apurtell@apache.org>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> Thanks. I'll take a look. They were passing for me before I went
> out
> > on
> > >> >> vacation.
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >>> Thanks.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> BTW, I noticed this morning that TestGlobalThrottler and
> > >> >>> TestEndToEndSplitTransaction
> > >> >>> fail locally for me and up on jenkins as part of hadoopqa runs and
> > on
> > >> >>> recent 1.4 runs.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I tried to poke at why. They seem fine in 1.2, 1.3, and 2.0. Got
> > >> >>> distracted
> > >> >>> and got no further than this....
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> S
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > apurtell@apache.org>
> > >> >>> wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> > Ok, no problem.
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> wrote:
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>> > > May I get HBASE-18233 into 1.4.0 Andrew? It is in 1.2 and 1.3.
> > >> >>> Waiting on
> > >> >>> > > hadoopqa run. Would be good to have it all up and down
> branch-1.
> > >> >>> > > Thanks Sir,
> > >> >>> > > St.Ack
> > >> >>> > >
> > >> >>> > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Peter Somogyi <
> > >> >>> psomogyi@cloudera.com>
> > >> >>> > > wrote:
> > >> >>> > >
> > >> >>> > > > HBASE-19188 was just resolved. :)
> > >> >>> > > >
> > >> >>> > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > >> >>> apurtell@apache.org>
> > >> >>> > > > wrote:
> > >> >>> > > >
> > >> >>> > > > > I come back to find HBASE-19188 is a blocker. :-/
> > >> >>> > > > > Need to resolve it
> > >> >>> > > > >
> > >> >>> > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Sean Busbey <
> > >> busbey@apache.org
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>> > > wrote:
> > >> >>> > > > >
> > >> >>> > > > > > thanks for all the work as RM on this Andrew!
> > >> >>> > > > > >
> > >> >>> > > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Andrew Purtell
> > >> >>> > > > > > <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >>> > > > > > > Everything is in and ready to go. I'm out next week
> for
> > >> the
> > >> >>> > > > > Thanksgiving
> > >> >>> > > > > > > holiday, but will be back first week in December.
> > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > >> >>> > > > > > > Here is what I anticipate:
> > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 4
> > >> >>> > > > > > > - 1.4.0 RC0 binaries will be available.
> > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting begins.
> > >> >>> > > > > > > - Preflight checks will include RAT check,
> release
> > >> >>> audits,
> > >> >>> > > and
> > >> >>> > > > 25
> > >> >>> > > > > > > iterations of the unit test suite.
> > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 5 - 8
> > >> >>> > > > > > > - 24 hours ITBLL
> > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB on cluster perf comparison with
> 1.2
> > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB single server profiling with JFR,
> > >> >>> comparison
> > >> >>> > > with
> > >> >>> > > > > 1.2
> > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 11
> > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting concludes
> > >> >>> > > > > > > - Release, or RC1 depending on testing outcome
> > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 18
> > >> >>> > > > > > > - RC1 voting concludes and release, if we need a
> > RC1
> > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > >> >>> > > > > > > From now until the 1.4.0 release, please refrain from
> > >> >>> committing
> > >> >>> > > > > > > potentially destabilizing changes or changes to public
> > >> APIs
> > >> >>> to
> > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.4.
> > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > >> >>> > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > >> >>> > > > > > > wrote:
> > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > >> >>> > > > > > >> On HBASE-19232 we discuss testing the shaded client
> > using
> > >> >>> YCSB,
> > >> >>> > so
> > >> >>> > > > > I'll
> > >> >>> > > > > > >> use it to sanity check the shaded client as well as
> > >> >>> complete a
> > >> >>> > > perf
> > >> >>> > > > > > >> comparison with 1.2.
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >> On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >> wrote:
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> I'll do a PE comparison between 1.4.0 and 1.3 and/or
> > >> 1.2.
> > >> >>> Maybe
> > >> >>> > > > YSCB
> > >> >>> > > > > > too
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> if I have time. Good idea, thanks.
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > On Nov 11, 2017, at 5:05 AM, Yu Li <
> > carp84@gmail.com>
> > >> >>> wrote:
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Great to know, really good progress!
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > It seems we don't do performance comparison with
> > >> current
> > >> >>> > stable
> > >> >>> > > > > > release
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > when releasing the first RC of a new branch, but
> > >> should
> > >> >>> we do
> > >> >>> > > to
> > >> >>> > > > > > avoid
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > issues like HBASE-14460 (write performance
> > regression
> > >> >>> from
> > >> >>> > 0.98
> > >> >>> > > > to
> > >> >>> > > > > > 1.1)?
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > This is a must-have for us to decide new version
> for
> > >> >>> product
> > >> >>> > > env
> > >> >>> > > > > > here,
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> and
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > I wonder whether this applies for most users
> (please
> > >> >>> forgive
> > >> >>> > my
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> ignorance
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > if there's any existing policy for this). Thanks.
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > bq. Back when we first discussed branching for 1.4
> > Yu
> > >> Li
> > >> >>> > asked
> > >> >>> > > > for
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> this...
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Thanks for remembering this and keeping the
> promise
> > >> boss
> > >> >>> > > (smile).
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Best Regards,
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Yu
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> On 11 November 2017 at 03:30, Andrew Purtell <
> > >> >>> > > > apurtell@apache.org
> > >> >>> > > > > >
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> The march to 1.4.0 is progressing.
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I've run the unit test suite on a C4 class AWS
> > >> instance
> > >> >>> 25
> > >> >>> > > times
> > >> >>> > > > > and
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> there
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> are no failures. This is ongoing. I'm aiming for
> > 100
> > >> >>> runs.
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Fix versions are now set up for constructing a
> > >> >>> reasonable
> > >> >>> > > change
> > >> >>> > > > > > log.
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> With HBASE-19232 applied a build with release
> > audits
> > >> >>> enabled
> > >> >>> > > > will
> > >> >>> > > > > > pass.
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I backported error-prone support yesterday and
> will
> > >> now
> > >> >>> look
> > >> >>> > > at
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> checkstyle
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and error-prone analyses for important issues.
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I'll probably do HBASE-19238 before 1.4.0 goes
> out
> > so
> > >> >>> that
> > >> >>> > > neat
> > >> >>> > > > > > utility
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> will be available.
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Back when we first discussed branching for 1.4 Yu
> > Li
> > >> >>> asked
> > >> >>> > for
> > >> >>> > > > > this:
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> One naive question here: from the book
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> <http://hbase.apache.org/book.
> > html#hbase.versioning
> > >> >
> > >> >>> we
> > >> >>> > will
> > >> >>> > > > add
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> functionality (in a backwards-compatible manner)
> > in
> > >> >>> minor
> > >> >>> > > > > versions,
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> but
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> it
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> seems we don't have any one-line description on
> > the
> > >> >>> > > differences
> > >> >>> > > > > > (what
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> main functionalities have been added) between
> > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.1/1.2/1.3/1.4
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> so
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> user could better decide which version to
> > >> >>> choose/upgrade.
> > >> >>> > > > Should
> > >> >>> > > > > we
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> add some explicit document on this? Or release
> > note
> > >> of
> > >> >>> the
> > >> >>> > > > first
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> release
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> for each branch is enough? Thanks.
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and I still agree to do it. I'll write it up
> while
> > >> the
> > >> >>> RC is
> > >> >>> > > > under
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> evaluation.
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> ITBLL and replication testing to be performed on
> a
> > >> small
> > >> >>> > > cluster
> > >> >>> > > > > > once
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> we
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> have the RC binaries.
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Anything else? (Within reason...)
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> --
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Best regards,
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Andrew
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
> > meaning
> > >> >>> torn
> > >> >>> > from
> > >> >>> > > > > > truth's
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> decrepit hands
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >> --
> > >> >>> > > > > > >> Best regards,
> > >> >>> > > > > > >> Andrew
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning
> > torn
> > >> >>> from
> > >> >>> > > > truth's
> > >> >>> > > > > > >> decrepit hands
> > >> >>> > > > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > >> >>> > > > > > > --
> > >> >>> > > > > > > Best regards,
> > >> >>> > > > > > > Andrew
> > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > >> >>> > > > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning
> > torn
> > >> >>> from
> > >> >>> > > > truth's
> > >> >>> > > > > > > decrepit hands
> > >> >>> > > > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > >> >>> > > > > >
> > >> >>> > > > >
> > >> >>> > > > >
> > >> >>> > > > >
> > >> >>> > > > > --
> > >> >>> > > > > Best regards,
> > >> >>> > > > > Andrew
> > >> >>> > > > >
> > >> >>> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn
> > from
> > >> >>> > truth's
> > >> >>> > > > > decrepit hands
> > >> >>> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > >> >>> > > > >
> > >> >>> > > >
> > >> >>> > >
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>> > --
> > >> >>> > Best regards,
> > >> >>> > Andrew
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> > >> truth's
> > >> >>> > decrepit hands
> > >> >>> > - A23, Crosstalk
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> --
> > >> >> Best regards,
> > >> >> Andrew
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> > truth's
> > >> >> decrepit hands
> > >> >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > >> >>
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Best regards,
> > >> > Andrew
> > >> >
> > >> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> truth's
> > >> > decrepit hands
> > >> > - A23, Crosstalk
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Best regards,
> > >> Andrew
> > >>
> > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> > >> decrepit hands
> > >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> decrepit hands
> - A23, Crosstalk
>
Re: Release 1.4.0 update
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
I pushed a tag for 1.4.0RC0 as 3839a01ddc430f68ad83c6be1317a34cc16cf13d.
Feel free to commit to branch-1 and branch-1.4 as I finish with 1.4.0RC0.
Wednesday.
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> I fixed HBASE-19429 by disabling checkstyle report generation during the
> site target. There's something wrong with it. Maybe too many warnings? I
> get an inscrutable error on MacOS and a segfault in the JVM on Linux.
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 6:17 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> I am blocked on HBASE-19429. If someone could help I could really use it.
>> I'm out of time today and won't make the self-imposed timeline for release
>> today. I'm out tomorrow. Earliest will be Wednesday but I have no idea how
>> to proceed with this build failure.
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 12:46 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We need to discuss branch-1 policy regarding builds against Hadoop
>>> 3.0.0. See HBASE-19421
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I propose to eject hbase-native-client to GitHub on HBASE-19419
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> No problem, please commit it.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Guanghao Zhang <zg...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Andrew, HBASE-18626 is a document fix for the incompatible change
>>>>>> about the
>>>>>> replication TableCFs' config. Can we include it for 1.4? Thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2017-12-01 9:19 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > I pushed HBASE-18233. Thanks for finding the issue and patience
>>>>>> waiting on
>>>>>> > fix Andrew.
>>>>>> > St.Ack
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>>>> apurtell@apache.org>
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > > No problem, committing it now
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Sergey Soldatov <
>>>>>> > sergeysoldatov@gmail.com
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > wrote:
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > > Andrew,
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > Can we include HBASE-19393 as well? Quite annoying issue and
>>>>>> very
>>>>>> > simple
>>>>>> > > > fix.
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > Thanks,
>>>>>> > > > Sergey
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>>>> apurtell@apache.org>
>>>>>> > > > wrote:
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > > Not too late, no
>>>>>> > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > Fix is up if it is not too late Andrew.
>>>>>> > > > > > St.Ack
>>>>>> > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > > Andrew, your testing has turned up an issue in
>>>>>> HBASE-18233. It is
>>>>>> > > > > present
>>>>>> > > > > > > in the 1.4 candidate patch and in 1.3. The failure is
>>>>>> > > intermittent. I
>>>>>> > > > > am
>>>>>> > > > > > > working on a fix but want to make sure I have it right.
>>>>>> So, I
>>>>>> > > > withdraw
>>>>>> > > > > my
>>>>>> > > > > > > request that 1.4 include it.
>>>>>> > > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > > Thanks,
>>>>>> > > > > > > S
>>>>>> > > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>>>> > > apurtell@apache.org
>>>>>> > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > > wrote:
>>>>>> > > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> TestGlobalThrottler is a problem stemming from the
>>>>>> revert of
>>>>>> > > > > HBASE-9465
>>>>>> > > > > > >> on branch-1.4. The test came in on HBASE-17314 so I'll
>>>>>> also
>>>>>> > > revert
>>>>>> > > > > > that
>>>>>> > > > > > >> from branch-1.4. For more on this see HBASE-19381
>>>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>>>> > > > apurtell@apache.org>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> wrote:
>>>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> > The TestEndToEndSplitTransaction failure will be fixed
>>>>>> by
>>>>>> > > > > HBASE-19379.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> > The TestGlobalThrottler issue is a hang, which is
>>>>>> probably why
>>>>>> > > it
>>>>>> > > > > > >> slipped
>>>>>> > > > > > >> > through the cracks. I went back 32 commits from head
>>>>>> and it
>>>>>> > was
>>>>>> > > > > still
>>>>>> > > > > > >> > stuck. 64 commits back it's good. Somewhere in
>>>>>> between. Will
>>>>>> > get
>>>>>> > > > to
>>>>>> > > > > > the
>>>>>> > > > > > >> > offending commit shortly.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>>>> > > > > apurtell@apache.org>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> > wrote:
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >> Thanks. I'll take a look. They were passing for me
>>>>>> before I
>>>>>> > > went
>>>>>> > > > > out
>>>>>> > > > > > on
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >> vacation.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Stack <
>>>>>> stack@duboce.net>
>>>>>> > > wrote:
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> Thanks.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> BTW, I noticed this morning that TestGlobalThrottler
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> TestEndToEndSplitTransaction
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> fail locally for me and up on jenkins as part of
>>>>>> hadoopqa
>>>>>> > runs
>>>>>> > > > and
>>>>>> > > > > > on
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> recent 1.4 runs.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> I tried to poke at why. They seem fine in 1.2, 1.3,
>>>>>> and 2.0.
>>>>>> > > Got
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> distracted
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> and got no further than this....
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> S
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>>>> > > > > > apurtell@apache.org>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> wrote:
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > Ok, no problem.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Stack <
>>>>>> stack@duboce.net>
>>>>>> > > > > wrote:
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > May I get HBASE-18233 into 1.4.0 Andrew? It is
>>>>>> in 1.2
>>>>>> > and
>>>>>> > > > 1.3.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> Waiting on
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > hadoopqa run. Would be good to have it all up
>>>>>> and down
>>>>>> > > > > branch-1.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > Thanks Sir,
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > St.Ack
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Peter Somogyi <
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> psomogyi@cloudera.com>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > wrote:
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > HBASE-19188 was just resolved. :)
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Andrew
>>>>>> Purtell <
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> apurtell@apache.org>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > wrote:
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > I come back to find HBASE-19188 is a
>>>>>> blocker. :-/
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Need to resolve it
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Sean
>>>>>> Busbey <
>>>>>> > > > > > >> busbey@apache.org
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > wrote:
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > thanks for all the work as RM on this
>>>>>> Andrew!
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Andrew
>>>>>> Purtell
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Everything is in and ready to go. I'm
>>>>>> out next
>>>>>> > > week
>>>>>> > > > > for
>>>>>> > > > > > >> the
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Thanksgiving
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > holiday, but will be back first week in
>>>>>> > December.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Here is what I anticipate:
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 4
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 1.4.0 RC0 binaries will be
>>>>>> available.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting begins.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Preflight checks will include
>>>>>> RAT check,
>>>>>> > > > > release
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> audits,
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > and
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > 25
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > iterations of the unit test suite.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 5 - 8
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 24 hours ITBLL
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB on cluster perf
>>>>>> comparison
>>>>>> > > with
>>>>>> > > > > 1.2
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB single server
>>>>>> profiling with
>>>>>> > > > JFR,
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> comparison
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > with
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > 1.2
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 11
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting concludes
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Release, or RC1 depending on
>>>>>> testing
>>>>>> > > outcome
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 18
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - RC1 voting concludes and
>>>>>> release, if we
>>>>>> > > > need a
>>>>>> > > > > > RC1
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > From now until the 1.4.0 release, please
>>>>>> refrain
>>>>>> > > > from
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> committing
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > potentially destabilizing changes or
>>>>>> changes to
>>>>>> > > > public
>>>>>> > > > > > >> APIs
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> to
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.4.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Andrew
>>>>>> > Purtell <
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > wrote:
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On HBASE-19232 we discuss testing the
>>>>>> shaded
>>>>>> > > client
>>>>>> > > > > > using
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> YCSB,
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > so
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > I'll
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> use it to sanity check the shaded
>>>>>> client as
>>>>>> > well
>>>>>> > > as
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> complete a
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > perf
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> comparison with 1.2.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Andrew
>>>>>> > Purtell <
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> wrote:
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> I'll do a PE comparison between 1.4.0
>>>>>> and 1.3
>>>>>> > > > and/or
>>>>>> > > > > > >> 1.2.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> Maybe
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > YSCB
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > too
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> if I have time. Good idea, thanks.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > On Nov 11, 2017, at 5:05 AM, Yu Li <
>>>>>> > > > > > carp84@gmail.com>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> wrote:
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Great to know, really good progress!
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > It seems we don't do performance
>>>>>> comparison
>>>>>> > > with
>>>>>> > > > > > >> current
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > stable
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > release
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > when releasing the first RC of a new
>>>>>> branch,
>>>>>> > > but
>>>>>> > > > > > >> should
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> we do
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > to
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > avoid
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > issues like HBASE-14460 (write
>>>>>> performance
>>>>>> > > > > > regression
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> from
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > 0.98
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > to
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > 1.1)?
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > This is a must-have for us to decide
>>>>>> new
>>>>>> > > version
>>>>>> > > > > for
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> product
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > env
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > here,
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> and
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > I wonder whether this applies for
>>>>>> most users
>>>>>> > > > > (please
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> forgive
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > my
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> ignorance
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > if there's any existing policy for
>>>>>> this).
>>>>>> > > > Thanks.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > bq. Back when we first discussed
>>>>>> branching
>>>>>> > for
>>>>>> > > > 1.4
>>>>>> > > > > > Yu
>>>>>> > > > > > >> Li
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > asked
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > for
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> this...
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Thanks for remembering this and
>>>>>> keeping the
>>>>>> > > > > promise
>>>>>> > > > > > >> boss
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > (smile).
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Best Regards,
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Yu
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> On 11 November 2017 at 03:30, Andrew
>>>>>> > Purtell
>>>>>> > > <
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > apurtell@apache.org
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> wrote:
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> The march to 1.4.0 is progressing.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I've run the unit test suite on a
>>>>>> C4 class
>>>>>> > > AWS
>>>>>> > > > > > >> instance
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> 25
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > times
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > and
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> there
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> are no failures. This is ongoing.
>>>>>> I'm
>>>>>> > aiming
>>>>>> > > > for
>>>>>> > > > > > 100
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> runs.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Fix versions are now set up for
>>>>>> > constructing
>>>>>> > > a
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> reasonable
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > change
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > log.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> With HBASE-19232 applied a build
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> > release
>>>>>> > > > > > audits
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> enabled
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > will
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > pass.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I backported error-prone support
>>>>>> yesterday
>>>>>> > > and
>>>>>> > > > > will
>>>>>> > > > > > >> now
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> look
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > at
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> checkstyle
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and error-prone analyses for
>>>>>> important
>>>>>> > > issues.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I'll probably do HBASE-19238 before
>>>>>> 1.4.0
>>>>>> > > goes
>>>>>> > > > > out
>>>>>> > > > > > so
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> that
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > neat
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > utility
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> will be available.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Back when we first discussed
>>>>>> branching for
>>>>>> > > 1.4
>>>>>> > > > Yu
>>>>>> > > > > > Li
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> asked
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > for
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > this:
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> One naive question here: from the
>>>>>> book
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> <http://hbase.apache.org/book.
>>>>>> > > > > > html#hbase.versioning
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> we
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > will
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > add
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> functionality (in a
>>>>>> backwards-compatible
>>>>>> > > > manner)
>>>>>> > > > > > in
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> minor
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > versions,
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> but
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> it
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> seems we don't have any one-line
>>>>>> > description
>>>>>> > > > on
>>>>>> > > > > > the
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > differences
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > (what
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> main functionalities have been
>>>>>> added)
>>>>>> > > between
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.1/1.2/1.3/1.4
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> so
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> user could better decide which
>>>>>> version to
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> choose/upgrade.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > Should
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > we
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> add some explicit document on
>>>>>> this? Or
>>>>>> > > release
>>>>>> > > > > > note
>>>>>> > > > > > >> of
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> the
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > first
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> release
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> for each branch is enough? Thanks.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and I still agree to do it. I'll
>>>>>> write it
>>>>>> > up
>>>>>> > > > > while
>>>>>> > > > > > >> the
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> RC is
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > under
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> evaluation.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> ITBLL and replication testing to be
>>>>>> > performed
>>>>>> > > > on
>>>>>> > > > > a
>>>>>> > > > > > >> small
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > cluster
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > once
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> we
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> have the RC binaries.
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Anything else? (Within reason...)
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> --
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Best regards,
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Andrew
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Words like orphans lost among the
>>>>>> > crosstalk,
>>>>>> > > > > > meaning
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> torn
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > from
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > truth's
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> decrepit hands
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> --
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Best regards,
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Andrew
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the
>>>>>> crosstalk,
>>>>>> > > > meaning
>>>>>> > > > > > torn
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> from
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > truth's
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> decrepit hands
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > --
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Best regards,
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Andrew
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Words like orphans lost among the
>>>>>> crosstalk,
>>>>>> > > meaning
>>>>>> > > > > > torn
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> from
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > truth's
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > decrepit hands
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > --
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Best regards,
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Andrew
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
>>>>>> meaning
>>>>>> > > > torn
>>>>>> > > > > > from
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > truth's
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > decrepit hands
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > --
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > Best regards,
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > Andrew
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
>>>>>> meaning torn
>>>>>> > > from
>>>>>> > > > > > >> truth's
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > decrepit hands
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >> --
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >> Best regards,
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >> Andrew
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning
>>>>>> torn
>>>>>> > from
>>>>>> > > > > > truth's
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >> decrepit hands
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >> - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> > --
>>>>>> > > > > > >> > Best regards,
>>>>>> > > > > > >> > Andrew
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning
>>>>>> torn from
>>>>>> > > > > truth's
>>>>>> > > > > > >> > decrepit hands
>>>>>> > > > > > >> > - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> --
>>>>>> > > > > > >> Best regards,
>>>>>> > > > > > >> Andrew
>>>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning
>>>>>> torn from
>>>>>> > > > truth's
>>>>>> > > > > > >> decrepit hands
>>>>>> > > > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>>>> > > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > >
>>>>>> > > > >
>>>>>> > > > >
>>>>>> > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > --
>>>>>> > > > > Best regards,
>>>>>> > > > > Andrew
>>>>>> > > > >
>>>>>> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
>>>>>> > truth's
>>>>>> > > > > decrepit hands
>>>>>> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>>> > > > >
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > --
>>>>>> > > Best regards,
>>>>>> > > Andrew
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
>>>>>> truth's
>>>>>> > > decrepit hands
>>>>>> > > - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>>> > >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Andrew
>>>>>
>>>>> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
>>>>> decrepit hands
>>>>> - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Andrew
>>>>
>>>> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
>>>> decrepit hands
>>>> - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best regards,
>>> Andrew
>>>
>>> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
>>> decrepit hands
>>> - A23, Crosstalk
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Andrew
>>
>> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
>> decrepit hands
>> - A23, Crosstalk
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> decrepit hands
> - A23, Crosstalk
>
--
Best regards,
Andrew
Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
decrepit hands
- A23, Crosstalk
Re: Release 1.4.0 update
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
I fixed HBASE-19429 by disabling checkstyle report generation during the
site target. There's something wrong with it. Maybe too many warnings? I
get an inscrutable error on MacOS and a segfault in the JVM on Linux.
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 6:17 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> I am blocked on HBASE-19429. If someone could help I could really use it.
> I'm out of time today and won't make the self-imposed timeline for release
> today. I'm out tomorrow. Earliest will be Wednesday but I have no idea how
> to proceed with this build failure.
>
> On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 12:46 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> We need to discuss branch-1 policy regarding builds against Hadoop 3.0.0.
>> See HBASE-19421
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I propose to eject hbase-native-client to GitHub on HBASE-19419
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> No problem, please commit it.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Guanghao Zhang <zg...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Andrew, HBASE-18626 is a document fix for the incompatible change
>>>>> about the
>>>>> replication TableCFs' config. Can we include it for 1.4? Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2017-12-01 9:19 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
>>>>>
>>>>> > I pushed HBASE-18233. Thanks for finding the issue and patience
>>>>> waiting on
>>>>> > fix Andrew.
>>>>> > St.Ack
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
>>>>> >
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > > No problem, committing it now
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Sergey Soldatov <
>>>>> > sergeysoldatov@gmail.com
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > wrote:
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > > Andrew,
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > > Can we include HBASE-19393 as well? Quite annoying issue and very
>>>>> > simple
>>>>> > > > fix.
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > > Thanks,
>>>>> > > > Sergey
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>>> apurtell@apache.org>
>>>>> > > > wrote:
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > > > Not too late, no
>>>>> > > > >
>>>>> > > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > Fix is up if it is not too late Andrew.
>>>>> > > > > > St.Ack
>>>>> > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > > Andrew, your testing has turned up an issue in
>>>>> HBASE-18233. It is
>>>>> > > > > present
>>>>> > > > > > > in the 1.4 candidate patch and in 1.3. The failure is
>>>>> > > intermittent. I
>>>>> > > > > am
>>>>> > > > > > > working on a fix but want to make sure I have it right.
>>>>> So, I
>>>>> > > > withdraw
>>>>> > > > > my
>>>>> > > > > > > request that 1.4 include it.
>>>>> > > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > > Thanks,
>>>>> > > > > > > S
>>>>> > > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>>> > > apurtell@apache.org
>>>>> > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > > wrote:
>>>>> > > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> TestGlobalThrottler is a problem stemming from the revert
>>>>> of
>>>>> > > > > HBASE-9465
>>>>> > > > > > >> on branch-1.4. The test came in on HBASE-17314 so I'll
>>>>> also
>>>>> > > revert
>>>>> > > > > > that
>>>>> > > > > > >> from branch-1.4. For more on this see HBASE-19381
>>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>>> > > > apurtell@apache.org>
>>>>> > > > > > >> wrote:
>>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> > The TestEndToEndSplitTransaction failure will be fixed
>>>>> by
>>>>> > > > > HBASE-19379.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> > The TestGlobalThrottler issue is a hang, which is
>>>>> probably why
>>>>> > > it
>>>>> > > > > > >> slipped
>>>>> > > > > > >> > through the cracks. I went back 32 commits from head
>>>>> and it
>>>>> > was
>>>>> > > > > still
>>>>> > > > > > >> > stuck. 64 commits back it's good. Somewhere in between.
>>>>> Will
>>>>> > get
>>>>> > > > to
>>>>> > > > > > the
>>>>> > > > > > >> > offending commit shortly.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>>> > > > > apurtell@apache.org>
>>>>> > > > > > >> > wrote:
>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >> Thanks. I'll take a look. They were passing for me
>>>>> before I
>>>>> > > went
>>>>> > > > > out
>>>>> > > > > > on
>>>>> > > > > > >> >> vacation.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Stack <
>>>>> stack@duboce.net>
>>>>> > > wrote:
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> Thanks.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> BTW, I noticed this morning that TestGlobalThrottler
>>>>> and
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> TestEndToEndSplitTransaction
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> fail locally for me and up on jenkins as part of
>>>>> hadoopqa
>>>>> > runs
>>>>> > > > and
>>>>> > > > > > on
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> recent 1.4 runs.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> I tried to poke at why. They seem fine in 1.2, 1.3,
>>>>> and 2.0.
>>>>> > > Got
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> distracted
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> and got no further than this....
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> S
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>>> > > > > > apurtell@apache.org>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> wrote:
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > Ok, no problem.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Stack <
>>>>> stack@duboce.net>
>>>>> > > > > wrote:
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > May I get HBASE-18233 into 1.4.0 Andrew? It is in
>>>>> 1.2
>>>>> > and
>>>>> > > > 1.3.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> Waiting on
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > hadoopqa run. Would be good to have it all up and
>>>>> down
>>>>> > > > > branch-1.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > Thanks Sir,
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > St.Ack
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Peter Somogyi <
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> psomogyi@cloudera.com>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > wrote:
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > HBASE-19188 was just resolved. :)
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Andrew Purtell
>>>>> <
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> apurtell@apache.org>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > wrote:
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > I come back to find HBASE-19188 is a blocker.
>>>>> :-/
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Need to resolve it
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Sean Busbey
>>>>> <
>>>>> > > > > > >> busbey@apache.org
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > wrote:
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > thanks for all the work as RM on this
>>>>> Andrew!
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Andrew
>>>>> Purtell
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Everything is in and ready to go. I'm out
>>>>> next
>>>>> > > week
>>>>> > > > > for
>>>>> > > > > > >> the
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Thanksgiving
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > holiday, but will be back first week in
>>>>> > December.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Here is what I anticipate:
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 4
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 1.4.0 RC0 binaries will be
>>>>> available.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting begins.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Preflight checks will include RAT
>>>>> check,
>>>>> > > > > release
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> audits,
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > and
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > 25
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > iterations of the unit test suite.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 5 - 8
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 24 hours ITBLL
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB on cluster perf
>>>>> comparison
>>>>> > > with
>>>>> > > > > 1.2
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB single server
>>>>> profiling with
>>>>> > > > JFR,
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> comparison
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > with
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > 1.2
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 11
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting concludes
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Release, or RC1 depending on
>>>>> testing
>>>>> > > outcome
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 18
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - RC1 voting concludes and release,
>>>>> if we
>>>>> > > > need a
>>>>> > > > > > RC1
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > From now until the 1.4.0 release, please
>>>>> refrain
>>>>> > > > from
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> committing
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > potentially destabilizing changes or
>>>>> changes to
>>>>> > > > public
>>>>> > > > > > >> APIs
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> to
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.4.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Andrew
>>>>> > Purtell <
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > wrote:
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On HBASE-19232 we discuss testing the
>>>>> shaded
>>>>> > > client
>>>>> > > > > > using
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> YCSB,
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > so
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > I'll
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> use it to sanity check the shaded client
>>>>> as
>>>>> > well
>>>>> > > as
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> complete a
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > perf
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> comparison with 1.2.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Andrew
>>>>> > Purtell <
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> wrote:
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> I'll do a PE comparison between 1.4.0
>>>>> and 1.3
>>>>> > > > and/or
>>>>> > > > > > >> 1.2.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> Maybe
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > YSCB
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > too
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> if I have time. Good idea, thanks.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > On Nov 11, 2017, at 5:05 AM, Yu Li <
>>>>> > > > > > carp84@gmail.com>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> wrote:
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Great to know, really good progress!
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > It seems we don't do performance
>>>>> comparison
>>>>> > > with
>>>>> > > > > > >> current
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > stable
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > release
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > when releasing the first RC of a new
>>>>> branch,
>>>>> > > but
>>>>> > > > > > >> should
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> we do
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > to
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > avoid
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > issues like HBASE-14460 (write
>>>>> performance
>>>>> > > > > > regression
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> from
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > 0.98
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > to
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > 1.1)?
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > This is a must-have for us to decide
>>>>> new
>>>>> > > version
>>>>> > > > > for
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> product
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > env
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > here,
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> and
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > I wonder whether this applies for
>>>>> most users
>>>>> > > > > (please
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> forgive
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > my
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> ignorance
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > if there's any existing policy for
>>>>> this).
>>>>> > > > Thanks.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > bq. Back when we first discussed
>>>>> branching
>>>>> > for
>>>>> > > > 1.4
>>>>> > > > > > Yu
>>>>> > > > > > >> Li
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > asked
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > for
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> this...
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Thanks for remembering this and
>>>>> keeping the
>>>>> > > > > promise
>>>>> > > > > > >> boss
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > (smile).
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Best Regards,
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Yu
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> On 11 November 2017 at 03:30, Andrew
>>>>> > Purtell
>>>>> > > <
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > apurtell@apache.org
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> wrote:
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> The march to 1.4.0 is progressing.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I've run the unit test suite on a C4
>>>>> class
>>>>> > > AWS
>>>>> > > > > > >> instance
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> 25
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > times
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > and
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> there
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> are no failures. This is ongoing. I'm
>>>>> > aiming
>>>>> > > > for
>>>>> > > > > > 100
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> runs.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Fix versions are now set up for
>>>>> > constructing
>>>>> > > a
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> reasonable
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > change
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > log.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> With HBASE-19232 applied a build with
>>>>> > release
>>>>> > > > > > audits
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> enabled
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > will
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > pass.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I backported error-prone support
>>>>> yesterday
>>>>> > > and
>>>>> > > > > will
>>>>> > > > > > >> now
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> look
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > at
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> checkstyle
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and error-prone analyses for
>>>>> important
>>>>> > > issues.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I'll probably do HBASE-19238 before
>>>>> 1.4.0
>>>>> > > goes
>>>>> > > > > out
>>>>> > > > > > so
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> that
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > neat
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > utility
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> will be available.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Back when we first discussed
>>>>> branching for
>>>>> > > 1.4
>>>>> > > > Yu
>>>>> > > > > > Li
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> asked
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > for
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > this:
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> One naive question here: from the
>>>>> book
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> <http://hbase.apache.org/book.
>>>>> > > > > > html#hbase.versioning
>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> we
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > will
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > add
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> functionality (in a
>>>>> backwards-compatible
>>>>> > > > manner)
>>>>> > > > > > in
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> minor
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > versions,
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> but
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> it
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> seems we don't have any one-line
>>>>> > description
>>>>> > > > on
>>>>> > > > > > the
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > differences
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > (what
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> main functionalities have been
>>>>> added)
>>>>> > > between
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.1/1.2/1.3/1.4
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> so
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> user could better decide which
>>>>> version to
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> choose/upgrade.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > Should
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > we
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> add some explicit document on this?
>>>>> Or
>>>>> > > release
>>>>> > > > > > note
>>>>> > > > > > >> of
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> the
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > first
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> release
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> for each branch is enough? Thanks.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and I still agree to do it. I'll
>>>>> write it
>>>>> > up
>>>>> > > > > while
>>>>> > > > > > >> the
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> RC is
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > under
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> evaluation.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> ITBLL and replication testing to be
>>>>> > performed
>>>>> > > > on
>>>>> > > > > a
>>>>> > > > > > >> small
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > cluster
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > once
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> we
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> have the RC binaries.
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Anything else? (Within reason...)
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> --
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Best regards,
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Andrew
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Words like orphans lost among the
>>>>> > crosstalk,
>>>>> > > > > > meaning
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> torn
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > from
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > truth's
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> decrepit hands
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> --
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Best regards,
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Andrew
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the
>>>>> crosstalk,
>>>>> > > > meaning
>>>>> > > > > > torn
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> from
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > truth's
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> decrepit hands
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > --
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Best regards,
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Andrew
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Words like orphans lost among the
>>>>> crosstalk,
>>>>> > > meaning
>>>>> > > > > > torn
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> from
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > truth's
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > decrepit hands
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > --
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Best regards,
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Andrew
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
>>>>> meaning
>>>>> > > > torn
>>>>> > > > > > from
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > truth's
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > decrepit hands
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > --
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > Best regards,
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > Andrew
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
>>>>> meaning torn
>>>>> > > from
>>>>> > > > > > >> truth's
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > decrepit hands
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >> --
>>>>> > > > > > >> >> Best regards,
>>>>> > > > > > >> >> Andrew
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning
>>>>> torn
>>>>> > from
>>>>> > > > > > truth's
>>>>> > > > > > >> >> decrepit hands
>>>>> > > > > > >> >> - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> > --
>>>>> > > > > > >> > Best regards,
>>>>> > > > > > >> > Andrew
>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>> > > > > > >> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning
>>>>> torn from
>>>>> > > > > truth's
>>>>> > > > > > >> > decrepit hands
>>>>> > > > > > >> > - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> --
>>>>> > > > > > >> Best regards,
>>>>> > > > > > >> Andrew
>>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>>> > > > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn
>>>>> from
>>>>> > > > truth's
>>>>> > > > > > >> decrepit hands
>>>>> > > > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>>> > > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > > >
>>>>> > > > > >
>>>>> > > > >
>>>>> > > > >
>>>>> > > > >
>>>>> > > > > --
>>>>> > > > > Best regards,
>>>>> > > > > Andrew
>>>>> > > > >
>>>>> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
>>>>> > truth's
>>>>> > > > > decrepit hands
>>>>> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>> > > > >
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > --
>>>>> > > Best regards,
>>>>> > > Andrew
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
>>>>> truth's
>>>>> > > decrepit hands
>>>>> > > - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>> > >
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Andrew
>>>>
>>>> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
>>>> decrepit hands
>>>> - A23, Crosstalk
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best regards,
>>> Andrew
>>>
>>> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
>>> decrepit hands
>>> - A23, Crosstalk
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Andrew
>>
>> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
>> decrepit hands
>> - A23, Crosstalk
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> decrepit hands
> - A23, Crosstalk
>
--
Best regards,
Andrew
Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
decrepit hands
- A23, Crosstalk
Re: Release 1.4.0 update
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
I am blocked on HBASE-19429. If someone could help I could really use it.
I'm out of time today and won't make the self-imposed timeline for release
today. I'm out tomorrow. Earliest will be Wednesday but I have no idea how
to proceed with this build failure.
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 12:46 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> We need to discuss branch-1 policy regarding builds against Hadoop 3.0.0.
> See HBASE-19421
>
> On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> I propose to eject hbase-native-client to GitHub on HBASE-19419
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> No problem, please commit it.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Guanghao Zhang <zg...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Andrew, HBASE-18626 is a document fix for the incompatible change about
>>>> the
>>>> replication TableCFs' config. Can we include it for 1.4? Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> 2017-12-01 9:19 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
>>>>
>>>> > I pushed HBASE-18233. Thanks for finding the issue and patience
>>>> waiting on
>>>> > fix Andrew.
>>>> > St.Ack
>>>> >
>>>> > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > No problem, committing it now
>>>> > >
>>>> > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Sergey Soldatov <
>>>> > sergeysoldatov@gmail.com
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > > Andrew,
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Can we include HBASE-19393 as well? Quite annoying issue and very
>>>> > simple
>>>> > > > fix.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Thanks,
>>>> > > > Sergey
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>> apurtell@apache.org>
>>>> > > > wrote:
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > > Not too late, no
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > > Fix is up if it is not too late Andrew.
>>>> > > > > > St.Ack
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > Andrew, your testing has turned up an issue in HBASE-18233.
>>>> It is
>>>> > > > > present
>>>> > > > > > > in the 1.4 candidate patch and in 1.3. The failure is
>>>> > > intermittent. I
>>>> > > > > am
>>>> > > > > > > working on a fix but want to make sure I have it right. So,
>>>> I
>>>> > > > withdraw
>>>> > > > > my
>>>> > > > > > > request that 1.4 include it.
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > Thanks,
>>>> > > > > > > S
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>> > > apurtell@apache.org
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > > > wrote:
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> TestGlobalThrottler is a problem stemming from the revert
>>>> of
>>>> > > > > HBASE-9465
>>>> > > > > > >> on branch-1.4. The test came in on HBASE-17314 so I'll
>>>> also
>>>> > > revert
>>>> > > > > > that
>>>> > > > > > >> from branch-1.4. For more on this see HBASE-19381
>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>> > > > > > >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>> > > > apurtell@apache.org>
>>>> > > > > > >> wrote:
>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>> > > > > > >> > The TestEndToEndSplitTransaction failure will be fixed by
>>>> > > > > HBASE-19379.
>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>> > > > > > >> > The TestGlobalThrottler issue is a hang, which is
>>>> probably why
>>>> > > it
>>>> > > > > > >> slipped
>>>> > > > > > >> > through the cracks. I went back 32 commits from head and
>>>> it
>>>> > was
>>>> > > > > still
>>>> > > > > > >> > stuck. 64 commits back it's good. Somewhere in between.
>>>> Will
>>>> > get
>>>> > > > to
>>>> > > > > > the
>>>> > > > > > >> > offending commit shortly.
>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>> > > > > > >> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>> > > > > apurtell@apache.org>
>>>> > > > > > >> > wrote:
>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>> > > > > > >> >> Thanks. I'll take a look. They were passing for me
>>>> before I
>>>> > > went
>>>> > > > > out
>>>> > > > > > on
>>>> > > > > > >> >> vacation.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Stack <
>>>> stack@duboce.net>
>>>> > > wrote:
>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> Thanks.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> BTW, I noticed this morning that TestGlobalThrottler
>>>> and
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> TestEndToEndSplitTransaction
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> fail locally for me and up on jenkins as part of
>>>> hadoopqa
>>>> > runs
>>>> > > > and
>>>> > > > > > on
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> recent 1.4 runs.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> I tried to poke at why. They seem fine in 1.2, 1.3,
>>>> and 2.0.
>>>> > > Got
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> distracted
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> and got no further than this....
>>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> S
>>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>> > > > > > apurtell@apache.org>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> wrote:
>>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > Ok, no problem.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Stack <
>>>> stack@duboce.net>
>>>> > > > > wrote:
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > May I get HBASE-18233 into 1.4.0 Andrew? It is in
>>>> 1.2
>>>> > and
>>>> > > > 1.3.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> Waiting on
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > hadoopqa run. Would be good to have it all up and
>>>> down
>>>> > > > > branch-1.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > Thanks Sir,
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > St.Ack
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Peter Somogyi <
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> psomogyi@cloudera.com>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > wrote:
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > HBASE-19188 was just resolved. :)
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> apurtell@apache.org>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > wrote:
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > I come back to find HBASE-19188 is a blocker.
>>>> :-/
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Need to resolve it
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Sean Busbey <
>>>> > > > > > >> busbey@apache.org
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > wrote:
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > thanks for all the work as RM on this Andrew!
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Andrew
>>>> Purtell
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Everything is in and ready to go. I'm out
>>>> next
>>>> > > week
>>>> > > > > for
>>>> > > > > > >> the
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Thanksgiving
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > holiday, but will be back first week in
>>>> > December.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Here is what I anticipate:
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 4
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 1.4.0 RC0 binaries will be
>>>> available.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting begins.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Preflight checks will include RAT
>>>> check,
>>>> > > > > release
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> audits,
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > and
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > 25
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > iterations of the unit test suite.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 5 - 8
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 24 hours ITBLL
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB on cluster perf
>>>> comparison
>>>> > > with
>>>> > > > > 1.2
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB single server
>>>> profiling with
>>>> > > > JFR,
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> comparison
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > with
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > 1.2
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 11
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting concludes
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Release, or RC1 depending on
>>>> testing
>>>> > > outcome
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 18
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - RC1 voting concludes and release,
>>>> if we
>>>> > > > need a
>>>> > > > > > RC1
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > From now until the 1.4.0 release, please
>>>> refrain
>>>> > > > from
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> committing
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > potentially destabilizing changes or
>>>> changes to
>>>> > > > public
>>>> > > > > > >> APIs
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> to
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.4.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Andrew
>>>> > Purtell <
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > wrote:
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On HBASE-19232 we discuss testing the
>>>> shaded
>>>> > > client
>>>> > > > > > using
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> YCSB,
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > so
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > I'll
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> use it to sanity check the shaded client
>>>> as
>>>> > well
>>>> > > as
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> complete a
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > perf
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> comparison with 1.2.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Andrew
>>>> > Purtell <
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> wrote:
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> I'll do a PE comparison between 1.4.0
>>>> and 1.3
>>>> > > > and/or
>>>> > > > > > >> 1.2.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> Maybe
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > YSCB
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > too
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> if I have time. Good idea, thanks.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > On Nov 11, 2017, at 5:05 AM, Yu Li <
>>>> > > > > > carp84@gmail.com>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> wrote:
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Great to know, really good progress!
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > It seems we don't do performance
>>>> comparison
>>>> > > with
>>>> > > > > > >> current
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > stable
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > release
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > when releasing the first RC of a new
>>>> branch,
>>>> > > but
>>>> > > > > > >> should
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> we do
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > to
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > avoid
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > issues like HBASE-14460 (write
>>>> performance
>>>> > > > > > regression
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> from
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > 0.98
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > to
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > 1.1)?
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > This is a must-have for us to decide
>>>> new
>>>> > > version
>>>> > > > > for
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> product
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > env
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > here,
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> and
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > I wonder whether this applies for most
>>>> users
>>>> > > > > (please
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> forgive
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > my
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> ignorance
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > if there's any existing policy for
>>>> this).
>>>> > > > Thanks.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > bq. Back when we first discussed
>>>> branching
>>>> > for
>>>> > > > 1.4
>>>> > > > > > Yu
>>>> > > > > > >> Li
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > asked
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > for
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> this...
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Thanks for remembering this and
>>>> keeping the
>>>> > > > > promise
>>>> > > > > > >> boss
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > (smile).
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Best Regards,
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Yu
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> On 11 November 2017 at 03:30, Andrew
>>>> > Purtell
>>>> > > <
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > apurtell@apache.org
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> wrote:
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> The march to 1.4.0 is progressing.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I've run the unit test suite on a C4
>>>> class
>>>> > > AWS
>>>> > > > > > >> instance
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> 25
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > times
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > and
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> there
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> are no failures. This is ongoing. I'm
>>>> > aiming
>>>> > > > for
>>>> > > > > > 100
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> runs.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Fix versions are now set up for
>>>> > constructing
>>>> > > a
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> reasonable
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > change
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > log.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> With HBASE-19232 applied a build with
>>>> > release
>>>> > > > > > audits
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> enabled
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > will
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > pass.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I backported error-prone support
>>>> yesterday
>>>> > > and
>>>> > > > > will
>>>> > > > > > >> now
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> look
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > at
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> checkstyle
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and error-prone analyses for important
>>>> > > issues.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I'll probably do HBASE-19238 before
>>>> 1.4.0
>>>> > > goes
>>>> > > > > out
>>>> > > > > > so
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> that
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > neat
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > utility
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> will be available.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Back when we first discussed
>>>> branching for
>>>> > > 1.4
>>>> > > > Yu
>>>> > > > > > Li
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> asked
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > for
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > this:
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> One naive question here: from the
>>>> book
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> <http://hbase.apache.org/book.
>>>> > > > > > html#hbase.versioning
>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> we
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > will
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > add
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> functionality (in a
>>>> backwards-compatible
>>>> > > > manner)
>>>> > > > > > in
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> minor
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > versions,
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> but
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> it
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> seems we don't have any one-line
>>>> > description
>>>> > > > on
>>>> > > > > > the
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > differences
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > (what
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> main functionalities have been added)
>>>> > > between
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.1/1.2/1.3/1.4
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> so
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> user could better decide which
>>>> version to
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> choose/upgrade.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > Should
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > we
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> add some explicit document on this?
>>>> Or
>>>> > > release
>>>> > > > > > note
>>>> > > > > > >> of
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> the
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > first
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> release
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> for each branch is enough? Thanks.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and I still agree to do it. I'll
>>>> write it
>>>> > up
>>>> > > > > while
>>>> > > > > > >> the
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> RC is
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > under
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> evaluation.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> ITBLL and replication testing to be
>>>> > performed
>>>> > > > on
>>>> > > > > a
>>>> > > > > > >> small
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > cluster
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > once
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> we
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> have the RC binaries.
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Anything else? (Within reason...)
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> --
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Best regards,
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Andrew
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Words like orphans lost among the
>>>> > crosstalk,
>>>> > > > > > meaning
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> torn
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > from
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > truth's
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> decrepit hands
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> - A23, Crosstalk
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> --
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Best regards,
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Andrew
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the
>>>> crosstalk,
>>>> > > > meaning
>>>> > > > > > torn
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> from
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > truth's
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> decrepit hands
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > --
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Best regards,
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Andrew
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Words like orphans lost among the
>>>> crosstalk,
>>>> > > meaning
>>>> > > > > > torn
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> from
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > truth's
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > decrepit hands
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > --
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Best regards,
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Andrew
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
>>>> meaning
>>>> > > > torn
>>>> > > > > > from
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > truth's
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > decrepit hands
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > --
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > Best regards,
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > Andrew
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning
>>>> torn
>>>> > > from
>>>> > > > > > >> truth's
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > decrepit hands
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> > - A23, Crosstalk
>>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >> --
>>>> > > > > > >> >> Best regards,
>>>> > > > > > >> >> Andrew
>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning
>>>> torn
>>>> > from
>>>> > > > > > truth's
>>>> > > > > > >> >> decrepit hands
>>>> > > > > > >> >> - A23, Crosstalk
>>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>> > > > > > >> > --
>>>> > > > > > >> > Best regards,
>>>> > > > > > >> > Andrew
>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>> > > > > > >> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning
>>>> torn from
>>>> > > > > truth's
>>>> > > > > > >> > decrepit hands
>>>> > > > > > >> > - A23, Crosstalk
>>>> > > > > > >> >
>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>> > > > > > >> --
>>>> > > > > > >> Best regards,
>>>> > > > > > >> Andrew
>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>> > > > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn
>>>> from
>>>> > > > truth's
>>>> > > > > > >> decrepit hands
>>>> > > > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk
>>>> > > > > > >>
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > > >
>>>> > > > > >
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > --
>>>> > > > > Best regards,
>>>> > > > > Andrew
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
>>>> > truth's
>>>> > > > > decrepit hands
>>>> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > > --
>>>> > > Best regards,
>>>> > > Andrew
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
>>>> truth's
>>>> > > decrepit hands
>>>> > > - A23, Crosstalk
>>>> > >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best regards,
>>> Andrew
>>>
>>> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
>>> decrepit hands
>>> - A23, Crosstalk
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Andrew
>>
>> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
>> decrepit hands
>> - A23, Crosstalk
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> decrepit hands
> - A23, Crosstalk
>
--
Best regards,
Andrew
Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
decrepit hands
- A23, Crosstalk
Re: Release 1.4.0 update
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
We need to discuss branch-1 policy regarding builds against Hadoop 3.0.0.
See HBASE-19421
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> I propose to eject hbase-native-client to GitHub on HBASE-19419
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> No problem, please commit it.
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Guanghao Zhang <zg...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Andrew, HBASE-18626 is a document fix for the incompatible change about
>>> the
>>> replication TableCFs' config. Can we include it for 1.4? Thanks.
>>>
>>> 2017-12-01 9:19 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
>>>
>>> > I pushed HBASE-18233. Thanks for finding the issue and patience
>>> waiting on
>>> > fix Andrew.
>>> > St.Ack
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > No problem, committing it now
>>> > >
>>> > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Sergey Soldatov <
>>> > sergeysoldatov@gmail.com
>>> > > >
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > Andrew,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Can we include HBASE-19393 as well? Quite annoying issue and very
>>> > simple
>>> > > > fix.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Thanks,
>>> > > > Sergey
>>> > > >
>>> > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>> apurtell@apache.org>
>>> > > > wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > Not too late, no
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > > Fix is up if it is not too late Andrew.
>>> > > > > > St.Ack
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
>>> wrote:
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > Andrew, your testing has turned up an issue in HBASE-18233.
>>> It is
>>> > > > > present
>>> > > > > > > in the 1.4 candidate patch and in 1.3. The failure is
>>> > > intermittent. I
>>> > > > > am
>>> > > > > > > working on a fix but want to make sure I have it right. So, I
>>> > > > withdraw
>>> > > > > my
>>> > > > > > > request that 1.4 include it.
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > Thanks,
>>> > > > > > > S
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>> > > apurtell@apache.org
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > > > wrote:
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> TestGlobalThrottler is a problem stemming from the revert of
>>> > > > > HBASE-9465
>>> > > > > > >> on branch-1.4. The test came in on HBASE-17314 so I'll
>>> also
>>> > > revert
>>> > > > > > that
>>> > > > > > >> from branch-1.4. For more on this see HBASE-19381
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>> > > > apurtell@apache.org>
>>> > > > > > >> wrote:
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> > The TestEndToEndSplitTransaction failure will be fixed by
>>> > > > > HBASE-19379.
>>> > > > > > >> >
>>> > > > > > >> > The TestGlobalThrottler issue is a hang, which is
>>> probably why
>>> > > it
>>> > > > > > >> slipped
>>> > > > > > >> > through the cracks. I went back 32 commits from head and
>>> it
>>> > was
>>> > > > > still
>>> > > > > > >> > stuck. 64 commits back it's good. Somewhere in between.
>>> Will
>>> > get
>>> > > > to
>>> > > > > > the
>>> > > > > > >> > offending commit shortly.
>>> > > > > > >> >
>>> > > > > > >> >
>>> > > > > > >> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>> > > > > apurtell@apache.org>
>>> > > > > > >> > wrote:
>>> > > > > > >> >
>>> > > > > > >> >> Thanks. I'll take a look. They were passing for me
>>> before I
>>> > > went
>>> > > > > out
>>> > > > > > on
>>> > > > > > >> >> vacation.
>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net
>>> >
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> Thanks.
>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> BTW, I noticed this morning that TestGlobalThrottler and
>>> > > > > > >> >>> TestEndToEndSplitTransaction
>>> > > > > > >> >>> fail locally for me and up on jenkins as part of
>>> hadoopqa
>>> > runs
>>> > > > and
>>> > > > > > on
>>> > > > > > >> >>> recent 1.4 runs.
>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> I tried to poke at why. They seem fine in 1.2, 1.3, and
>>> 2.0.
>>> > > Got
>>> > > > > > >> >>> distracted
>>> > > > > > >> >>> and got no further than this....
>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> S
>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>> > > > > > apurtell@apache.org>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> wrote:
>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > Ok, no problem.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Stack <
>>> stack@duboce.net>
>>> > > > > wrote:
>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > May I get HBASE-18233 into 1.4.0 Andrew? It is in
>>> 1.2
>>> > and
>>> > > > 1.3.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> Waiting on
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > hadoopqa run. Would be good to have it all up and
>>> down
>>> > > > > branch-1.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > Thanks Sir,
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > St.Ack
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Peter Somogyi <
>>> > > > > > >> >>> psomogyi@cloudera.com>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > wrote:
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > HBASE-19188 was just resolved. :)
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>>> > > > > > >> >>> apurtell@apache.org>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > wrote:
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > I come back to find HBASE-19188 is a blocker.
>>> :-/
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Need to resolve it
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Sean Busbey <
>>> > > > > > >> busbey@apache.org
>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > wrote:
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > thanks for all the work as RM on this Andrew!
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Andrew
>>> Purtell
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Everything is in and ready to go. I'm out
>>> next
>>> > > week
>>> > > > > for
>>> > > > > > >> the
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Thanksgiving
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > holiday, but will be back first week in
>>> > December.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Here is what I anticipate:
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 4
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 1.4.0 RC0 binaries will be
>>> available.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting begins.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Preflight checks will include RAT
>>> check,
>>> > > > > release
>>> > > > > > >> >>> audits,
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > and
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > 25
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > iterations of the unit test suite.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 5 - 8
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 24 hours ITBLL
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB on cluster perf
>>> comparison
>>> > > with
>>> > > > > 1.2
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB single server profiling
>>> with
>>> > > > JFR,
>>> > > > > > >> >>> comparison
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > with
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > 1.2
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 11
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting concludes
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Release, or RC1 depending on testing
>>> > > outcome
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 18
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - RC1 voting concludes and release,
>>> if we
>>> > > > need a
>>> > > > > > RC1
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > From now until the 1.4.0 release, please
>>> refrain
>>> > > > from
>>> > > > > > >> >>> committing
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > potentially destabilizing changes or
>>> changes to
>>> > > > public
>>> > > > > > >> APIs
>>> > > > > > >> >>> to
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.4.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Andrew
>>> > Purtell <
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > wrote:
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On HBASE-19232 we discuss testing the
>>> shaded
>>> > > client
>>> > > > > > using
>>> > > > > > >> >>> YCSB,
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > so
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > I'll
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> use it to sanity check the shaded client as
>>> > well
>>> > > as
>>> > > > > > >> >>> complete a
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > perf
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> comparison with 1.2.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Andrew
>>> > Purtell <
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> wrote:
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> I'll do a PE comparison between 1.4.0 and
>>> 1.3
>>> > > > and/or
>>> > > > > > >> 1.2.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> Maybe
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > YSCB
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > too
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> if I have time. Good idea, thanks.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > On Nov 11, 2017, at 5:05 AM, Yu Li <
>>> > > > > > carp84@gmail.com>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> wrote:
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Great to know, really good progress!
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > It seems we don't do performance
>>> comparison
>>> > > with
>>> > > > > > >> current
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > stable
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > release
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > when releasing the first RC of a new
>>> branch,
>>> > > but
>>> > > > > > >> should
>>> > > > > > >> >>> we do
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > to
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > avoid
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > issues like HBASE-14460 (write
>>> performance
>>> > > > > > regression
>>> > > > > > >> >>> from
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > 0.98
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > to
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > 1.1)?
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > This is a must-have for us to decide new
>>> > > version
>>> > > > > for
>>> > > > > > >> >>> product
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > env
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > here,
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> and
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > I wonder whether this applies for most
>>> users
>>> > > > > (please
>>> > > > > > >> >>> forgive
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > my
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> ignorance
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > if there's any existing policy for
>>> this).
>>> > > > Thanks.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > bq. Back when we first discussed
>>> branching
>>> > for
>>> > > > 1.4
>>> > > > > > Yu
>>> > > > > > >> Li
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > asked
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > for
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> this...
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Thanks for remembering this and keeping
>>> the
>>> > > > > promise
>>> > > > > > >> boss
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > (smile).
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Best Regards,
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Yu
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> On 11 November 2017 at 03:30, Andrew
>>> > Purtell
>>> > > <
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > apurtell@apache.org
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> wrote:
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> The march to 1.4.0 is progressing.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I've run the unit test suite on a C4
>>> class
>>> > > AWS
>>> > > > > > >> instance
>>> > > > > > >> >>> 25
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > times
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > and
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> there
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> are no failures. This is ongoing. I'm
>>> > aiming
>>> > > > for
>>> > > > > > 100
>>> > > > > > >> >>> runs.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Fix versions are now set up for
>>> > constructing
>>> > > a
>>> > > > > > >> >>> reasonable
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > change
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > log.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> With HBASE-19232 applied a build with
>>> > release
>>> > > > > > audits
>>> > > > > > >> >>> enabled
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > will
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > pass.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I backported error-prone support
>>> yesterday
>>> > > and
>>> > > > > will
>>> > > > > > >> now
>>> > > > > > >> >>> look
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > at
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> checkstyle
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and error-prone analyses for important
>>> > > issues.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I'll probably do HBASE-19238 before
>>> 1.4.0
>>> > > goes
>>> > > > > out
>>> > > > > > so
>>> > > > > > >> >>> that
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > neat
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > utility
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> will be available.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Back when we first discussed branching
>>> for
>>> > > 1.4
>>> > > > Yu
>>> > > > > > Li
>>> > > > > > >> >>> asked
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > for
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > this:
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> One naive question here: from the book
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> <http://hbase.apache.org/book.
>>> > > > > > html#hbase.versioning
>>> > > > > > >> >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> we
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > will
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > add
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> functionality (in a
>>> backwards-compatible
>>> > > > manner)
>>> > > > > > in
>>> > > > > > >> >>> minor
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > versions,
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> but
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> it
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> seems we don't have any one-line
>>> > description
>>> > > > on
>>> > > > > > the
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > differences
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > (what
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> main functionalities have been added)
>>> > > between
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.1/1.2/1.3/1.4
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> so
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> user could better decide which
>>> version to
>>> > > > > > >> >>> choose/upgrade.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > Should
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > we
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> add some explicit document on this? Or
>>> > > release
>>> > > > > > note
>>> > > > > > >> of
>>> > > > > > >> >>> the
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > first
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> release
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> for each branch is enough? Thanks.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and I still agree to do it. I'll write
>>> it
>>> > up
>>> > > > > while
>>> > > > > > >> the
>>> > > > > > >> >>> RC is
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > under
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> evaluation.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> ITBLL and replication testing to be
>>> > performed
>>> > > > on
>>> > > > > a
>>> > > > > > >> small
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > cluster
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > once
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> we
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> have the RC binaries.
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Anything else? (Within reason...)
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> --
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Best regards,
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Andrew
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Words like orphans lost among the
>>> > crosstalk,
>>> > > > > > meaning
>>> > > > > > >> >>> torn
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > from
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > truth's
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> decrepit hands
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> - A23, Crosstalk
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> --
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Best regards,
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Andrew
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the
>>> crosstalk,
>>> > > > meaning
>>> > > > > > torn
>>> > > > > > >> >>> from
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > truth's
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> decrepit hands
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > --
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Best regards,
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Andrew
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
>>> > > meaning
>>> > > > > > torn
>>> > > > > > >> >>> from
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > truth's
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > decrepit hands
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > --
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Best regards,
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Andrew
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
>>> meaning
>>> > > > torn
>>> > > > > > from
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > truth's
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > decrepit hands
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > --
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > Best regards,
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > Andrew
>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning
>>> torn
>>> > > from
>>> > > > > > >> truth's
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > decrepit hands
>>> > > > > > >> >>> > - A23, Crosstalk
>>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>>> > > > > > >> >>>
>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >> --
>>> > > > > > >> >> Best regards,
>>> > > > > > >> >> Andrew
>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn
>>> > from
>>> > > > > > truth's
>>> > > > > > >> >> decrepit hands
>>> > > > > > >> >> - A23, Crosstalk
>>> > > > > > >> >>
>>> > > > > > >> >
>>> > > > > > >> >
>>> > > > > > >> >
>>> > > > > > >> > --
>>> > > > > > >> > Best regards,
>>> > > > > > >> > Andrew
>>> > > > > > >> >
>>> > > > > > >> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn
>>> from
>>> > > > > truth's
>>> > > > > > >> > decrepit hands
>>> > > > > > >> > - A23, Crosstalk
>>> > > > > > >> >
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> --
>>> > > > > > >> Best regards,
>>> > > > > > >> Andrew
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn
>>> from
>>> > > > truth's
>>> > > > > > >> decrepit hands
>>> > > > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > --
>>> > > > > Best regards,
>>> > > > > Andrew
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
>>> > truth's
>>> > > > > decrepit hands
>>> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > --
>>> > > Best regards,
>>> > > Andrew
>>> > >
>>> > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
>>> truth's
>>> > > decrepit hands
>>> > > - A23, Crosstalk
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Andrew
>>
>> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
>> decrepit hands
>> - A23, Crosstalk
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> decrepit hands
> - A23, Crosstalk
>
--
Best regards,
Andrew
Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
decrepit hands
- A23, Crosstalk
Re: Release 1.4.0 update
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
I propose to eject hbase-native-client to GitHub on HBASE-19419
On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> No problem, please commit it.
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Guanghao Zhang <zg...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Andrew, HBASE-18626 is a document fix for the incompatible change about
>> the
>> replication TableCFs' config. Can we include it for 1.4? Thanks.
>>
>> 2017-12-01 9:19 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
>>
>> > I pushed HBASE-18233. Thanks for finding the issue and patience waiting
>> on
>> > fix Andrew.
>> > St.Ack
>> >
>> > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > No problem, committing it now
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Sergey Soldatov <
>> > sergeysoldatov@gmail.com
>> > > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Andrew,
>> > > >
>> > > > Can we include HBASE-19393 as well? Quite annoying issue and very
>> > simple
>> > > > fix.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > > Sergey
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>> apurtell@apache.org>
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Not too late, no
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > Fix is up if it is not too late Andrew.
>> > > > > > St.Ack
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
>> wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Andrew, your testing has turned up an issue in HBASE-18233.
>> It is
>> > > > > present
>> > > > > > > in the 1.4 candidate patch and in 1.3. The failure is
>> > > intermittent. I
>> > > > > am
>> > > > > > > working on a fix but want to make sure I have it right. So, I
>> > > > withdraw
>> > > > > my
>> > > > > > > request that 1.4 include it.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Thanks,
>> > > > > > > S
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>> > > apurtell@apache.org
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> TestGlobalThrottler is a problem stemming from the revert of
>> > > > > HBASE-9465
>> > > > > > >> on branch-1.4. The test came in on HBASE-17314 so I'll also
>> > > revert
>> > > > > > that
>> > > > > > >> from branch-1.4. For more on this see HBASE-19381
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>> > > > apurtell@apache.org>
>> > > > > > >> wrote:
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> > The TestEndToEndSplitTransaction failure will be fixed by
>> > > > > HBASE-19379.
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > The TestGlobalThrottler issue is a hang, which is probably
>> why
>> > > it
>> > > > > > >> slipped
>> > > > > > >> > through the cracks. I went back 32 commits from head and it
>> > was
>> > > > > still
>> > > > > > >> > stuck. 64 commits back it's good. Somewhere in between.
>> Will
>> > get
>> > > > to
>> > > > > > the
>> > > > > > >> > offending commit shortly.
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>> > > > > apurtell@apache.org>
>> > > > > > >> > wrote:
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> >> Thanks. I'll take a look. They were passing for me before
>> I
>> > > went
>> > > > > out
>> > > > > > on
>> > > > > > >> >> vacation.
>> > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > >> >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> Thanks.
>> > > > > > >> >>>
>> > > > > > >> >>> BTW, I noticed this morning that TestGlobalThrottler and
>> > > > > > >> >>> TestEndToEndSplitTransaction
>> > > > > > >> >>> fail locally for me and up on jenkins as part of hadoopqa
>> > runs
>> > > > and
>> > > > > > on
>> > > > > > >> >>> recent 1.4 runs.
>> > > > > > >> >>>
>> > > > > > >> >>> I tried to poke at why. They seem fine in 1.2, 1.3, and
>> 2.0.
>> > > Got
>> > > > > > >> >>> distracted
>> > > > > > >> >>> and got no further than this....
>> > > > > > >> >>>
>> > > > > > >> >>> S
>> > > > > > >> >>>
>> > > > > > >> >>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>> > > > > > apurtell@apache.org>
>> > > > > > >> >>> wrote:
>> > > > > > >> >>>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > Ok, no problem.
>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Stack <
>> stack@duboce.net>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > May I get HBASE-18233 into 1.4.0 Andrew? It is in 1.2
>> > and
>> > > > 1.3.
>> > > > > > >> >>> Waiting on
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > hadoopqa run. Would be good to have it all up and
>> down
>> > > > > branch-1.
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > Thanks Sir,
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > St.Ack
>> > > > > > >> >>> > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Peter Somogyi <
>> > > > > > >> >>> psomogyi@cloudera.com>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >> >>> > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > HBASE-19188 was just resolved. :)
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Andrew Purtell <
>> > > > > > >> >>> apurtell@apache.org>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > I come back to find HBASE-19188 is a blocker. :-/
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Need to resolve it
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Sean Busbey <
>> > > > > > >> busbey@apache.org
>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > thanks for all the work as RM on this Andrew!
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Andrew
>> Purtell
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Everything is in and ready to go. I'm out
>> next
>> > > week
>> > > > > for
>> > > > > > >> the
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Thanksgiving
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > holiday, but will be back first week in
>> > December.
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Here is what I anticipate:
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 4
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 1.4.0 RC0 binaries will be available.
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting begins.
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Preflight checks will include RAT
>> check,
>> > > > > release
>> > > > > > >> >>> audits,
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > and
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > 25
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > iterations of the unit test suite.
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 5 - 8
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 24 hours ITBLL
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB on cluster perf
>> comparison
>> > > with
>> > > > > 1.2
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB single server profiling
>> with
>> > > > JFR,
>> > > > > > >> >>> comparison
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > with
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > 1.2
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 11
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting concludes
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Release, or RC1 depending on testing
>> > > outcome
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 18
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - RC1 voting concludes and release, if
>> we
>> > > > need a
>> > > > > > RC1
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > From now until the 1.4.0 release, please
>> refrain
>> > > > from
>> > > > > > >> >>> committing
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > potentially destabilizing changes or changes
>> to
>> > > > public
>> > > > > > >> APIs
>> > > > > > >> >>> to
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.4.
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Andrew
>> > Purtell <
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On HBASE-19232 we discuss testing the shaded
>> > > client
>> > > > > > using
>> > > > > > >> >>> YCSB,
>> > > > > > >> >>> > so
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > I'll
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> use it to sanity check the shaded client as
>> > well
>> > > as
>> > > > > > >> >>> complete a
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > perf
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> comparison with 1.2.
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Andrew
>> > Purtell <
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> wrote:
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> I'll do a PE comparison between 1.4.0 and
>> 1.3
>> > > > and/or
>> > > > > > >> 1.2.
>> > > > > > >> >>> Maybe
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > YSCB
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > too
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> if I have time. Good idea, thanks.
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > On Nov 11, 2017, at 5:05 AM, Yu Li <
>> > > > > > carp84@gmail.com>
>> > > > > > >> >>> wrote:
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Great to know, really good progress!
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > It seems we don't do performance
>> comparison
>> > > with
>> > > > > > >> current
>> > > > > > >> >>> > stable
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > release
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > when releasing the first RC of a new
>> branch,
>> > > but
>> > > > > > >> should
>> > > > > > >> >>> we do
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > to
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > avoid
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > issues like HBASE-14460 (write
>> performance
>> > > > > > regression
>> > > > > > >> >>> from
>> > > > > > >> >>> > 0.98
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > to
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > 1.1)?
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > This is a must-have for us to decide new
>> > > version
>> > > > > for
>> > > > > > >> >>> product
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > env
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > here,
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> and
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > I wonder whether this applies for most
>> users
>> > > > > (please
>> > > > > > >> >>> forgive
>> > > > > > >> >>> > my
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> ignorance
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > if there's any existing policy for this).
>> > > > Thanks.
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > bq. Back when we first discussed
>> branching
>> > for
>> > > > 1.4
>> > > > > > Yu
>> > > > > > >> Li
>> > > > > > >> >>> > asked
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > for
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> this...
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Thanks for remembering this and keeping
>> the
>> > > > > promise
>> > > > > > >> boss
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > (smile).
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Best Regards,
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Yu
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> On 11 November 2017 at 03:30, Andrew
>> > Purtell
>> > > <
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > apurtell@apache.org
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> wrote:
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> The march to 1.4.0 is progressing.
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I've run the unit test suite on a C4
>> class
>> > > AWS
>> > > > > > >> instance
>> > > > > > >> >>> 25
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > times
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > and
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> there
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> are no failures. This is ongoing. I'm
>> > aiming
>> > > > for
>> > > > > > 100
>> > > > > > >> >>> runs.
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Fix versions are now set up for
>> > constructing
>> > > a
>> > > > > > >> >>> reasonable
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > change
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > log.
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> With HBASE-19232 applied a build with
>> > release
>> > > > > > audits
>> > > > > > >> >>> enabled
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > will
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > pass.
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I backported error-prone support
>> yesterday
>> > > and
>> > > > > will
>> > > > > > >> now
>> > > > > > >> >>> look
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > at
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> checkstyle
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and error-prone analyses for important
>> > > issues.
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I'll probably do HBASE-19238 before
>> 1.4.0
>> > > goes
>> > > > > out
>> > > > > > so
>> > > > > > >> >>> that
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > neat
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > utility
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> will be available.
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Back when we first discussed branching
>> for
>> > > 1.4
>> > > > Yu
>> > > > > > Li
>> > > > > > >> >>> asked
>> > > > > > >> >>> > for
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > this:
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> One naive question here: from the book
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> <http://hbase.apache.org/book.
>> > > > > > html#hbase.versioning
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> >>> we
>> > > > > > >> >>> > will
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > add
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> functionality (in a
>> backwards-compatible
>> > > > manner)
>> > > > > > in
>> > > > > > >> >>> minor
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > versions,
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> but
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> it
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> seems we don't have any one-line
>> > description
>> > > > on
>> > > > > > the
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > differences
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > (what
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> main functionalities have been added)
>> > > between
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.1/1.2/1.3/1.4
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> so
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> user could better decide which version
>> to
>> > > > > > >> >>> choose/upgrade.
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > Should
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > we
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> add some explicit document on this? Or
>> > > release
>> > > > > > note
>> > > > > > >> of
>> > > > > > >> >>> the
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > first
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> release
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> for each branch is enough? Thanks.
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and I still agree to do it. I'll write
>> it
>> > up
>> > > > > while
>> > > > > > >> the
>> > > > > > >> >>> RC is
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > under
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> evaluation.
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> ITBLL and replication testing to be
>> > performed
>> > > > on
>> > > > > a
>> > > > > > >> small
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > cluster
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > once
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> we
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> have the RC binaries.
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Anything else? (Within reason...)
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> --
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Best regards,
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Andrew
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Words like orphans lost among the
>> > crosstalk,
>> > > > > > meaning
>> > > > > > >> >>> torn
>> > > > > > >> >>> > from
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > truth's
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> decrepit hands
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> - A23, Crosstalk
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> --
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Best regards,
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Andrew
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
>> > > > meaning
>> > > > > > torn
>> > > > > > >> >>> from
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > truth's
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> decrepit hands
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Best regards,
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Andrew
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
>> > > meaning
>> > > > > > torn
>> > > > > > >> >>> from
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > truth's
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > decrepit hands
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > --
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Best regards,
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Andrew
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
>> meaning
>> > > > torn
>> > > > > > from
>> > > > > > >> >>> > truth's
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > decrepit hands
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > >
>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > --
>> > > > > > >> >>> > Best regards,
>> > > > > > >> >>> > Andrew
>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>> > > > > > >> >>> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning
>> torn
>> > > from
>> > > > > > >> truth's
>> > > > > > >> >>> > decrepit hands
>> > > > > > >> >>> > - A23, Crosstalk
>> > > > > > >> >>> >
>> > > > > > >> >>>
>> > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > >> >> --
>> > > > > > >> >> Best regards,
>> > > > > > >> >> Andrew
>> > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > >> >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn
>> > from
>> > > > > > truth's
>> > > > > > >> >> decrepit hands
>> > > > > > >> >> - A23, Crosstalk
>> > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > --
>> > > > > > >> > Best regards,
>> > > > > > >> > Andrew
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn
>> from
>> > > > > truth's
>> > > > > > >> > decrepit hands
>> > > > > > >> > - A23, Crosstalk
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> --
>> > > > > > >> Best regards,
>> > > > > > >> Andrew
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn
>> from
>> > > > truth's
>> > > > > > >> decrepit hands
>> > > > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > --
>> > > > > Best regards,
>> > > > > Andrew
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
>> > truth's
>> > > > > decrepit hands
>> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Best regards,
>> > > Andrew
>> > >
>> > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
>> > > decrepit hands
>> > > - A23, Crosstalk
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> decrepit hands
> - A23, Crosstalk
>
--
Best regards,
Andrew
Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
decrepit hands
- A23, Crosstalk
Re: Release 1.4.0 update
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
No problem, please commit it.
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Guanghao Zhang <zg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Andrew, HBASE-18626 is a document fix for the incompatible change about the
> replication TableCFs' config. Can we include it for 1.4? Thanks.
>
> 2017-12-01 9:19 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
>
> > I pushed HBASE-18233. Thanks for finding the issue and patience waiting
> on
> > fix Andrew.
> > St.Ack
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > No problem, committing it now
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Sergey Soldatov <
> > sergeysoldatov@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Andrew,
> > > >
> > > > Can we include HBASE-19393 as well? Quite annoying issue and very
> > simple
> > > > fix.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Sergey
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Not too late, no
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Fix is up if it is not too late Andrew.
> > > > > > St.Ack
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Andrew, your testing has turned up an issue in HBASE-18233. It
> is
> > > > > present
> > > > > > > in the 1.4 candidate patch and in 1.3. The failure is
> > > intermittent. I
> > > > > am
> > > > > > > working on a fix but want to make sure I have it right. So, I
> > > > withdraw
> > > > > my
> > > > > > > request that 1.4 include it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > S
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > apurtell@apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> TestGlobalThrottler is a problem stemming from the revert of
> > > > > HBASE-9465
> > > > > > >> on branch-1.4. The test came in on HBASE-17314 so I'll also
> > > revert
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > >> from branch-1.4. For more on this see HBASE-19381
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > apurtell@apache.org>
> > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > The TestEndToEndSplitTransaction failure will be fixed by
> > > > > HBASE-19379.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > The TestGlobalThrottler issue is a hang, which is probably
> why
> > > it
> > > > > > >> slipped
> > > > > > >> > through the cracks. I went back 32 commits from head and it
> > was
> > > > > still
> > > > > > >> > stuck. 64 commits back it's good. Somewhere in between. Will
> > get
> > > > to
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > >> > offending commit shortly.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > > apurtell@apache.org>
> > > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >> Thanks. I'll take a look. They were passing for me before I
> > > went
> > > > > out
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > >> >> vacation.
> > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> >>> Thanks.
> > > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> >>> BTW, I noticed this morning that TestGlobalThrottler and
> > > > > > >> >>> TestEndToEndSplitTransaction
> > > > > > >> >>> fail locally for me and up on jenkins as part of hadoopqa
> > runs
> > > > and
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > >> >>> recent 1.4 runs.
> > > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> >>> I tried to poke at why. They seem fine in 1.2, 1.3, and
> 2.0.
> > > Got
> > > > > > >> >>> distracted
> > > > > > >> >>> and got no further than this....
> > > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> >>> S
> > > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> >>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > > > apurtell@apache.org>
> > > > > > >> >>> wrote:
> > > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> >>> > Ok, no problem.
> > > > > > >> >>> >
> > > > > > >> >>> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Stack <
> stack@duboce.net>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> >>> >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > May I get HBASE-18233 into 1.4.0 Andrew? It is in 1.2
> > and
> > > > 1.3.
> > > > > > >> >>> Waiting on
> > > > > > >> >>> > > hadoopqa run. Would be good to have it all up and down
> > > > > branch-1.
> > > > > > >> >>> > > Thanks Sir,
> > > > > > >> >>> > > St.Ack
> > > > > > >> >>> > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Peter Somogyi <
> > > > > > >> >>> psomogyi@cloudera.com>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> >>> > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > HBASE-19188 was just resolved. :)
> > > > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > > > >> >>> apurtell@apache.org>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > I come back to find HBASE-19188 is a blocker. :-/
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Need to resolve it
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Sean Busbey <
> > > > > > >> busbey@apache.org
> > > > > > >> >>> >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > thanks for all the work as RM on this Andrew!
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Andrew Purtell
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Everything is in and ready to go. I'm out next
> > > week
> > > > > for
> > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Thanksgiving
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > holiday, but will be back first week in
> > December.
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Here is what I anticipate:
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 4
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 1.4.0 RC0 binaries will be available.
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting begins.
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Preflight checks will include RAT
> check,
> > > > > release
> > > > > > >> >>> audits,
> > > > > > >> >>> > > and
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > 25
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > iterations of the unit test suite.
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 5 - 8
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 24 hours ITBLL
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB on cluster perf comparison
> > > with
> > > > > 1.2
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB single server profiling
> with
> > > > JFR,
> > > > > > >> >>> comparison
> > > > > > >> >>> > > with
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > 1.2
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 11
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting concludes
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Release, or RC1 depending on testing
> > > outcome
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 18
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - RC1 voting concludes and release, if
> we
> > > > need a
> > > > > > RC1
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > From now until the 1.4.0 release, please
> refrain
> > > > from
> > > > > > >> >>> committing
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > potentially destabilizing changes or changes
> to
> > > > public
> > > > > > >> APIs
> > > > > > >> >>> to
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.4.
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Andrew
> > Purtell <
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On HBASE-19232 we discuss testing the shaded
> > > client
> > > > > > using
> > > > > > >> >>> YCSB,
> > > > > > >> >>> > so
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > I'll
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> use it to sanity check the shaded client as
> > well
> > > as
> > > > > > >> >>> complete a
> > > > > > >> >>> > > perf
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> comparison with 1.2.
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Andrew
> > Purtell <
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> I'll do a PE comparison between 1.4.0 and
> 1.3
> > > > and/or
> > > > > > >> 1.2.
> > > > > > >> >>> Maybe
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > YSCB
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > too
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> if I have time. Good idea, thanks.
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > On Nov 11, 2017, at 5:05 AM, Yu Li <
> > > > > > carp84@gmail.com>
> > > > > > >> >>> wrote:
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Great to know, really good progress!
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > It seems we don't do performance
> comparison
> > > with
> > > > > > >> current
> > > > > > >> >>> > stable
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > release
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > when releasing the first RC of a new
> branch,
> > > but
> > > > > > >> should
> > > > > > >> >>> we do
> > > > > > >> >>> > > to
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > avoid
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > issues like HBASE-14460 (write performance
> > > > > > regression
> > > > > > >> >>> from
> > > > > > >> >>> > 0.98
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > to
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > 1.1)?
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > This is a must-have for us to decide new
> > > version
> > > > > for
> > > > > > >> >>> product
> > > > > > >> >>> > > env
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > here,
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> and
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > I wonder whether this applies for most
> users
> > > > > (please
> > > > > > >> >>> forgive
> > > > > > >> >>> > my
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> ignorance
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > if there's any existing policy for this).
> > > > Thanks.
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > bq. Back when we first discussed branching
> > for
> > > > 1.4
> > > > > > Yu
> > > > > > >> Li
> > > > > > >> >>> > asked
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > for
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> this...
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Thanks for remembering this and keeping
> the
> > > > > promise
> > > > > > >> boss
> > > > > > >> >>> > > (smile).
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Best Regards,
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Yu
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> On 11 November 2017 at 03:30, Andrew
> > Purtell
> > > <
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > apurtell@apache.org
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> The march to 1.4.0 is progressing.
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I've run the unit test suite on a C4
> class
> > > AWS
> > > > > > >> instance
> > > > > > >> >>> 25
> > > > > > >> >>> > > times
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > and
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> there
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> are no failures. This is ongoing. I'm
> > aiming
> > > > for
> > > > > > 100
> > > > > > >> >>> runs.
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Fix versions are now set up for
> > constructing
> > > a
> > > > > > >> >>> reasonable
> > > > > > >> >>> > > change
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > log.
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> With HBASE-19232 applied a build with
> > release
> > > > > > audits
> > > > > > >> >>> enabled
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > will
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > pass.
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I backported error-prone support
> yesterday
> > > and
> > > > > will
> > > > > > >> now
> > > > > > >> >>> look
> > > > > > >> >>> > > at
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> checkstyle
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and error-prone analyses for important
> > > issues.
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I'll probably do HBASE-19238 before 1.4.0
> > > goes
> > > > > out
> > > > > > so
> > > > > > >> >>> that
> > > > > > >> >>> > > neat
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > utility
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> will be available.
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Back when we first discussed branching
> for
> > > 1.4
> > > > Yu
> > > > > > Li
> > > > > > >> >>> asked
> > > > > > >> >>> > for
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > this:
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> One naive question here: from the book
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> <http://hbase.apache.org/book.
> > > > > > html#hbase.versioning
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >>> we
> > > > > > >> >>> > will
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > add
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> functionality (in a backwards-compatible
> > > > manner)
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > >> >>> minor
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > versions,
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> but
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> it
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> seems we don't have any one-line
> > description
> > > > on
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > >> >>> > > differences
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > (what
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> main functionalities have been added)
> > > between
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.1/1.2/1.3/1.4
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> so
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> user could better decide which version
> to
> > > > > > >> >>> choose/upgrade.
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > Should
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > we
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> add some explicit document on this? Or
> > > release
> > > > > > note
> > > > > > >> of
> > > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > first
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> release
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> for each branch is enough? Thanks.
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and I still agree to do it. I'll write it
> > up
> > > > > while
> > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > >> >>> RC is
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > under
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> evaluation.
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> ITBLL and replication testing to be
> > performed
> > > > on
> > > > > a
> > > > > > >> small
> > > > > > >> >>> > > cluster
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > once
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> we
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> have the RC binaries.
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Anything else? (Within reason...)
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> --
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Best regards,
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Andrew
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Words like orphans lost among the
> > crosstalk,
> > > > > > meaning
> > > > > > >> >>> torn
> > > > > > >> >>> > from
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > truth's
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> decrepit hands
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Best regards,
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Andrew
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
> > > > meaning
> > > > > > torn
> > > > > > >> >>> from
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > truth's
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> decrepit hands
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Andrew
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
> > > meaning
> > > > > > torn
> > > > > > >> >>> from
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > truth's
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > decrepit hands
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > --
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Andrew
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
> meaning
> > > > torn
> > > > > > from
> > > > > > >> >>> > truth's
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > decrepit hands
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > > > >> >>> > >
> > > > > > >> >>> >
> > > > > > >> >>> >
> > > > > > >> >>> >
> > > > > > >> >>> > --
> > > > > > >> >>> > Best regards,
> > > > > > >> >>> > Andrew
> > > > > > >> >>> >
> > > > > > >> >>> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning
> torn
> > > from
> > > > > > >> truth's
> > > > > > >> >>> > decrepit hands
> > > > > > >> >>> > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > > >> >>> >
> > > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> >> --
> > > > > > >> >> Best regards,
> > > > > > >> >> Andrew
> > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn
> > from
> > > > > > truth's
> > > > > > >> >> decrepit hands
> > > > > > >> >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > --
> > > > > > >> > Best regards,
> > > > > > >> > Andrew
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn
> from
> > > > > truth's
> > > > > > >> > decrepit hands
> > > > > > >> > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > >> Best regards,
> > > > > > >> Andrew
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> > > > truth's
> > > > > > >> decrepit hands
> > > > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > Andrew
> > > > >
> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> > truth's
> > > > > decrepit hands
> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best regards,
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> > > decrepit hands
> > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > >
> >
>
--
Best regards,
Andrew
Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
decrepit hands
- A23, Crosstalk
Re: Release 1.4.0 update
Posted by Guanghao Zhang <zg...@gmail.com>.
Andrew, HBASE-18626 is a document fix for the incompatible change about the
replication TableCFs' config. Can we include it for 1.4? Thanks.
2017-12-01 9:19 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
> I pushed HBASE-18233. Thanks for finding the issue and patience waiting on
> fix Andrew.
> St.Ack
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > No problem, committing it now
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Sergey Soldatov <
> sergeysoldatov@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Andrew,
> > >
> > > Can we include HBASE-19393 as well? Quite annoying issue and very
> simple
> > > fix.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Sergey
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Not too late, no
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Fix is up if it is not too late Andrew.
> > > > > St.Ack
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Andrew, your testing has turned up an issue in HBASE-18233. It is
> > > > present
> > > > > > in the 1.4 candidate patch and in 1.3. The failure is
> > intermittent. I
> > > > am
> > > > > > working on a fix but want to make sure I have it right. So, I
> > > withdraw
> > > > my
> > > > > > request that 1.4 include it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > S
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > apurtell@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> TestGlobalThrottler is a problem stemming from the revert of
> > > > HBASE-9465
> > > > > >> on branch-1.4. The test came in on HBASE-17314 so I'll also
> > revert
> > > > > that
> > > > > >> from branch-1.4. For more on this see HBASE-19381
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > apurtell@apache.org>
> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > The TestEndToEndSplitTransaction failure will be fixed by
> > > > HBASE-19379.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > The TestGlobalThrottler issue is a hang, which is probably why
> > it
> > > > > >> slipped
> > > > > >> > through the cracks. I went back 32 commits from head and it
> was
> > > > still
> > > > > >> > stuck. 64 commits back it's good. Somewhere in between. Will
> get
> > > to
> > > > > the
> > > > > >> > offending commit shortly.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > apurtell@apache.org>
> > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >> Thanks. I'll take a look. They were passing for me before I
> > went
> > > > out
> > > > > on
> > > > > >> >> vacation.
> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> > wrote:
> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> >>> Thanks.
> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > >> >>> BTW, I noticed this morning that TestGlobalThrottler and
> > > > > >> >>> TestEndToEndSplitTransaction
> > > > > >> >>> fail locally for me and up on jenkins as part of hadoopqa
> runs
> > > and
> > > > > on
> > > > > >> >>> recent 1.4 runs.
> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > >> >>> I tried to poke at why. They seem fine in 1.2, 1.3, and 2.0.
> > Got
> > > > > >> >>> distracted
> > > > > >> >>> and got no further than this....
> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > >> >>> S
> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > >> >>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > > apurtell@apache.org>
> > > > > >> >>> wrote:
> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > >> >>> > Ok, no problem.
> > > > > >> >>> >
> > > > > >> >>> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> >>> >
> > > > > >> >>> > > May I get HBASE-18233 into 1.4.0 Andrew? It is in 1.2
> and
> > > 1.3.
> > > > > >> >>> Waiting on
> > > > > >> >>> > > hadoopqa run. Would be good to have it all up and down
> > > > branch-1.
> > > > > >> >>> > > Thanks Sir,
> > > > > >> >>> > > St.Ack
> > > > > >> >>> > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Peter Somogyi <
> > > > > >> >>> psomogyi@cloudera.com>
> > > > > >> >>> > > wrote:
> > > > > >> >>> > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > HBASE-19188 was just resolved. :)
> > > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > > >> >>> apurtell@apache.org>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > I come back to find HBASE-19188 is a blocker. :-/
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > Need to resolve it
> > > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Sean Busbey <
> > > > > >> busbey@apache.org
> > > > > >> >>> >
> > > > > >> >>> > > wrote:
> > > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > thanks for all the work as RM on this Andrew!
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Andrew Purtell
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Everything is in and ready to go. I'm out next
> > week
> > > > for
> > > > > >> the
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > Thanksgiving
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > holiday, but will be back first week in
> December.
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Here is what I anticipate:
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 4
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 1.4.0 RC0 binaries will be available.
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting begins.
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Preflight checks will include RAT check,
> > > > release
> > > > > >> >>> audits,
> > > > > >> >>> > > and
> > > > > >> >>> > > > 25
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > iterations of the unit test suite.
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 5 - 8
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 24 hours ITBLL
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB on cluster perf comparison
> > with
> > > > 1.2
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB single server profiling with
> > > JFR,
> > > > > >> >>> comparison
> > > > > >> >>> > > with
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > 1.2
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 11
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting concludes
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Release, or RC1 depending on testing
> > outcome
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 18
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - RC1 voting concludes and release, if we
> > > need a
> > > > > RC1
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > From now until the 1.4.0 release, please refrain
> > > from
> > > > > >> >>> committing
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > potentially destabilizing changes or changes to
> > > public
> > > > > >> APIs
> > > > > >> >>> to
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.4.
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Andrew
> Purtell <
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On HBASE-19232 we discuss testing the shaded
> > client
> > > > > using
> > > > > >> >>> YCSB,
> > > > > >> >>> > so
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > I'll
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> use it to sanity check the shaded client as
> well
> > as
> > > > > >> >>> complete a
> > > > > >> >>> > > perf
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> comparison with 1.2.
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Andrew
> Purtell <
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> I'll do a PE comparison between 1.4.0 and 1.3
> > > and/or
> > > > > >> 1.2.
> > > > > >> >>> Maybe
> > > > > >> >>> > > > YSCB
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > too
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> if I have time. Good idea, thanks.
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > On Nov 11, 2017, at 5:05 AM, Yu Li <
> > > > > carp84@gmail.com>
> > > > > >> >>> wrote:
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Great to know, really good progress!
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > It seems we don't do performance comparison
> > with
> > > > > >> current
> > > > > >> >>> > stable
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > release
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > when releasing the first RC of a new branch,
> > but
> > > > > >> should
> > > > > >> >>> we do
> > > > > >> >>> > > to
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > avoid
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > issues like HBASE-14460 (write performance
> > > > > regression
> > > > > >> >>> from
> > > > > >> >>> > 0.98
> > > > > >> >>> > > > to
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > 1.1)?
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > This is a must-have for us to decide new
> > version
> > > > for
> > > > > >> >>> product
> > > > > >> >>> > > env
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > here,
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> and
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > I wonder whether this applies for most users
> > > > (please
> > > > > >> >>> forgive
> > > > > >> >>> > my
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> ignorance
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > if there's any existing policy for this).
> > > Thanks.
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > bq. Back when we first discussed branching
> for
> > > 1.4
> > > > > Yu
> > > > > >> Li
> > > > > >> >>> > asked
> > > > > >> >>> > > > for
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> this...
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Thanks for remembering this and keeping the
> > > > promise
> > > > > >> boss
> > > > > >> >>> > > (smile).
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Best Regards,
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Yu
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> On 11 November 2017 at 03:30, Andrew
> Purtell
> > <
> > > > > >> >>> > > > apurtell@apache.org
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> The march to 1.4.0 is progressing.
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I've run the unit test suite on a C4 class
> > AWS
> > > > > >> instance
> > > > > >> >>> 25
> > > > > >> >>> > > times
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > and
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> there
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> are no failures. This is ongoing. I'm
> aiming
> > > for
> > > > > 100
> > > > > >> >>> runs.
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Fix versions are now set up for
> constructing
> > a
> > > > > >> >>> reasonable
> > > > > >> >>> > > change
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > log.
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> With HBASE-19232 applied a build with
> release
> > > > > audits
> > > > > >> >>> enabled
> > > > > >> >>> > > > will
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > pass.
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I backported error-prone support yesterday
> > and
> > > > will
> > > > > >> now
> > > > > >> >>> look
> > > > > >> >>> > > at
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> checkstyle
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and error-prone analyses for important
> > issues.
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I'll probably do HBASE-19238 before 1.4.0
> > goes
> > > > out
> > > > > so
> > > > > >> >>> that
> > > > > >> >>> > > neat
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > utility
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> will be available.
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Back when we first discussed branching for
> > 1.4
> > > Yu
> > > > > Li
> > > > > >> >>> asked
> > > > > >> >>> > for
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > this:
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> One naive question here: from the book
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> <http://hbase.apache.org/book.
> > > > > html#hbase.versioning
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >>> we
> > > > > >> >>> > will
> > > > > >> >>> > > > add
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> functionality (in a backwards-compatible
> > > manner)
> > > > > in
> > > > > >> >>> minor
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > versions,
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> but
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> it
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> seems we don't have any one-line
> description
> > > on
> > > > > the
> > > > > >> >>> > > differences
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > (what
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> main functionalities have been added)
> > between
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.1/1.2/1.3/1.4
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> so
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> user could better decide which version to
> > > > > >> >>> choose/upgrade.
> > > > > >> >>> > > > Should
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > we
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> add some explicit document on this? Or
> > release
> > > > > note
> > > > > >> of
> > > > > >> >>> the
> > > > > >> >>> > > > first
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> release
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> for each branch is enough? Thanks.
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and I still agree to do it. I'll write it
> up
> > > > while
> > > > > >> the
> > > > > >> >>> RC is
> > > > > >> >>> > > > under
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> evaluation.
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> ITBLL and replication testing to be
> performed
> > > on
> > > > a
> > > > > >> small
> > > > > >> >>> > > cluster
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > once
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> we
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> have the RC binaries.
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Anything else? (Within reason...)
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> --
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Best regards,
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Andrew
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Words like orphans lost among the
> crosstalk,
> > > > > meaning
> > > > > >> >>> torn
> > > > > >> >>> > from
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > truth's
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> decrepit hands
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> --
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Best regards,
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Andrew
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
> > > meaning
> > > > > torn
> > > > > >> >>> from
> > > > > >> >>> > > > truth's
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> decrepit hands
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > --
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Andrew
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
> > meaning
> > > > > torn
> > > > > >> >>> from
> > > > > >> >>> > > > truth's
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > decrepit hands
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > --
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > Andrew
> > > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning
> > > torn
> > > > > from
> > > > > >> >>> > truth's
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > decrepit hands
> > > > > >> >>> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > > >> >>> > >
> > > > > >> >>> >
> > > > > >> >>> >
> > > > > >> >>> >
> > > > > >> >>> > --
> > > > > >> >>> > Best regards,
> > > > > >> >>> > Andrew
> > > > > >> >>> >
> > > > > >> >>> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn
> > from
> > > > > >> truth's
> > > > > >> >>> > decrepit hands
> > > > > >> >>> > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > >> >>> >
> > > > > >> >>>
> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> >> --
> > > > > >> >> Best regards,
> > > > > >> >> Andrew
> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn
> from
> > > > > truth's
> > > > > >> >> decrepit hands
> > > > > >> >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > >> >>
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > --
> > > > > >> > Best regards,
> > > > > >> > Andrew
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> > > > truth's
> > > > > >> > decrepit hands
> > > > > >> > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> --
> > > > > >> Best regards,
> > > > > >> Andrew
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> > > truth's
> > > > > >> decrepit hands
> > > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Andrew
> > > >
> > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> truth's
> > > > decrepit hands
> > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Andrew
> >
> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> > decrepit hands
> > - A23, Crosstalk
> >
>
Re: Release 1.4.0 update
Posted by Stack <st...@duboce.net>.
I pushed HBASE-18233. Thanks for finding the issue and patience waiting on
fix Andrew.
St.Ack
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> No problem, committing it now
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Sergey Soldatov <sergeysoldatov@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Andrew,
> >
> > Can we include HBASE-19393 as well? Quite annoying issue and very simple
> > fix.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Sergey
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Not too late, no
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Fix is up if it is not too late Andrew.
> > > > St.Ack
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Andrew, your testing has turned up an issue in HBASE-18233. It is
> > > present
> > > > > in the 1.4 candidate patch and in 1.3. The failure is
> intermittent. I
> > > am
> > > > > working on a fix but want to make sure I have it right. So, I
> > withdraw
> > > my
> > > > > request that 1.4 include it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > S
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> apurtell@apache.org
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> TestGlobalThrottler is a problem stemming from the revert of
> > > HBASE-9465
> > > > >> on branch-1.4. The test came in on HBASE-17314 so I'll also
> revert
> > > > that
> > > > >> from branch-1.4. For more on this see HBASE-19381
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > apurtell@apache.org>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > The TestEndToEndSplitTransaction failure will be fixed by
> > > HBASE-19379.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > The TestGlobalThrottler issue is a hang, which is probably why
> it
> > > > >> slipped
> > > > >> > through the cracks. I went back 32 commits from head and it was
> > > still
> > > > >> > stuck. 64 commits back it's good. Somewhere in between. Will get
> > to
> > > > the
> > > > >> > offending commit shortly.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > apurtell@apache.org>
> > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >> Thanks. I'll take a look. They were passing for me before I
> went
> > > out
> > > > on
> > > > >> >> vacation.
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> wrote:
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>> Thanks.
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> BTW, I noticed this morning that TestGlobalThrottler and
> > > > >> >>> TestEndToEndSplitTransaction
> > > > >> >>> fail locally for me and up on jenkins as part of hadoopqa runs
> > and
> > > > on
> > > > >> >>> recent 1.4 runs.
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> I tried to poke at why. They seem fine in 1.2, 1.3, and 2.0.
> Got
> > > > >> >>> distracted
> > > > >> >>> and got no further than this....
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> S
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > apurtell@apache.org>
> > > > >> >>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> > Ok, no problem.
> > > > >> >>> >
> > > > >> >>> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >> >>> >
> > > > >> >>> > > May I get HBASE-18233 into 1.4.0 Andrew? It is in 1.2 and
> > 1.3.
> > > > >> >>> Waiting on
> > > > >> >>> > > hadoopqa run. Would be good to have it all up and down
> > > branch-1.
> > > > >> >>> > > Thanks Sir,
> > > > >> >>> > > St.Ack
> > > > >> >>> > >
> > > > >> >>> > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Peter Somogyi <
> > > > >> >>> psomogyi@cloudera.com>
> > > > >> >>> > > wrote:
> > > > >> >>> > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > HBASE-19188 was just resolved. :)
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > >> >>> apurtell@apache.org>
> > > > >> >>> > > > wrote:
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > I come back to find HBASE-19188 is a blocker. :-/
> > > > >> >>> > > > > Need to resolve it
> > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Sean Busbey <
> > > > >> busbey@apache.org
> > > > >> >>> >
> > > > >> >>> > > wrote:
> > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > thanks for all the work as RM on this Andrew!
> > > > >> >>> > > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Andrew Purtell
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Everything is in and ready to go. I'm out next
> week
> > > for
> > > > >> the
> > > > >> >>> > > > > Thanksgiving
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > holiday, but will be back first week in December.
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Here is what I anticipate:
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 4
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 1.4.0 RC0 binaries will be available.
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting begins.
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Preflight checks will include RAT check,
> > > release
> > > > >> >>> audits,
> > > > >> >>> > > and
> > > > >> >>> > > > 25
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > iterations of the unit test suite.
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 5 - 8
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 24 hours ITBLL
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB on cluster perf comparison
> with
> > > 1.2
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB single server profiling with
> > JFR,
> > > > >> >>> comparison
> > > > >> >>> > > with
> > > > >> >>> > > > > 1.2
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 11
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting concludes
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Release, or RC1 depending on testing
> outcome
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 18
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - RC1 voting concludes and release, if we
> > need a
> > > > RC1
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > From now until the 1.4.0 release, please refrain
> > from
> > > > >> >>> committing
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > potentially destabilizing changes or changes to
> > public
> > > > >> APIs
> > > > >> >>> to
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.4.
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On HBASE-19232 we discuss testing the shaded
> client
> > > > using
> > > > >> >>> YCSB,
> > > > >> >>> > so
> > > > >> >>> > > > > I'll
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> use it to sanity check the shaded client as well
> as
> > > > >> >>> complete a
> > > > >> >>> > > perf
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> comparison with 1.2.
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> I'll do a PE comparison between 1.4.0 and 1.3
> > and/or
> > > > >> 1.2.
> > > > >> >>> Maybe
> > > > >> >>> > > > YSCB
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > too
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> if I have time. Good idea, thanks.
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > On Nov 11, 2017, at 5:05 AM, Yu Li <
> > > > carp84@gmail.com>
> > > > >> >>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Great to know, really good progress!
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > It seems we don't do performance comparison
> with
> > > > >> current
> > > > >> >>> > stable
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > release
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > when releasing the first RC of a new branch,
> but
> > > > >> should
> > > > >> >>> we do
> > > > >> >>> > > to
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > avoid
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > issues like HBASE-14460 (write performance
> > > > regression
> > > > >> >>> from
> > > > >> >>> > 0.98
> > > > >> >>> > > > to
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > 1.1)?
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > This is a must-have for us to decide new
> version
> > > for
> > > > >> >>> product
> > > > >> >>> > > env
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > here,
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> and
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > I wonder whether this applies for most users
> > > (please
> > > > >> >>> forgive
> > > > >> >>> > my
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> ignorance
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > if there's any existing policy for this).
> > Thanks.
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > bq. Back when we first discussed branching for
> > 1.4
> > > > Yu
> > > > >> Li
> > > > >> >>> > asked
> > > > >> >>> > > > for
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> this...
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Thanks for remembering this and keeping the
> > > promise
> > > > >> boss
> > > > >> >>> > > (smile).
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Best Regards,
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Yu
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> On 11 November 2017 at 03:30, Andrew Purtell
> <
> > > > >> >>> > > > apurtell@apache.org
> > > > >> >>> > > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> The march to 1.4.0 is progressing.
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I've run the unit test suite on a C4 class
> AWS
> > > > >> instance
> > > > >> >>> 25
> > > > >> >>> > > times
> > > > >> >>> > > > > and
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> there
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> are no failures. This is ongoing. I'm aiming
> > for
> > > > 100
> > > > >> >>> runs.
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Fix versions are now set up for constructing
> a
> > > > >> >>> reasonable
> > > > >> >>> > > change
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > log.
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> With HBASE-19232 applied a build with release
> > > > audits
> > > > >> >>> enabled
> > > > >> >>> > > > will
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > pass.
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I backported error-prone support yesterday
> and
> > > will
> > > > >> now
> > > > >> >>> look
> > > > >> >>> > > at
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> checkstyle
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and error-prone analyses for important
> issues.
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I'll probably do HBASE-19238 before 1.4.0
> goes
> > > out
> > > > so
> > > > >> >>> that
> > > > >> >>> > > neat
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > utility
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> will be available.
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Back when we first discussed branching for
> 1.4
> > Yu
> > > > Li
> > > > >> >>> asked
> > > > >> >>> > for
> > > > >> >>> > > > > this:
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> One naive question here: from the book
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> <http://hbase.apache.org/book.
> > > > html#hbase.versioning
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >>> we
> > > > >> >>> > will
> > > > >> >>> > > > add
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> functionality (in a backwards-compatible
> > manner)
> > > > in
> > > > >> >>> minor
> > > > >> >>> > > > > versions,
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> but
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> it
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> seems we don't have any one-line description
> > on
> > > > the
> > > > >> >>> > > differences
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > (what
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> main functionalities have been added)
> between
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.1/1.2/1.3/1.4
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> so
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> user could better decide which version to
> > > > >> >>> choose/upgrade.
> > > > >> >>> > > > Should
> > > > >> >>> > > > > we
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> add some explicit document on this? Or
> release
> > > > note
> > > > >> of
> > > > >> >>> the
> > > > >> >>> > > > first
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> release
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> for each branch is enough? Thanks.
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and I still agree to do it. I'll write it up
> > > while
> > > > >> the
> > > > >> >>> RC is
> > > > >> >>> > > > under
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> evaluation.
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> ITBLL and replication testing to be performed
> > on
> > > a
> > > > >> small
> > > > >> >>> > > cluster
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > once
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> we
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> have the RC binaries.
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Anything else? (Within reason...)
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> --
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Best regards,
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Andrew
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
> > > > meaning
> > > > >> >>> torn
> > > > >> >>> > from
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > truth's
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> decrepit hands
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> --
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Best regards,
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Andrew
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
> > meaning
> > > > torn
> > > > >> >>> from
> > > > >> >>> > > > truth's
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> decrepit hands
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > --
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Andrew
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
> meaning
> > > > torn
> > > > >> >>> from
> > > > >> >>> > > > truth's
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > decrepit hands
> > > > >> >>> > > > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > >> >>> > > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > --
> > > > >> >>> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > >> >>> > > > > Andrew
> > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning
> > torn
> > > > from
> > > > >> >>> > truth's
> > > > >> >>> > > > > decrepit hands
> > > > >> >>> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > >
> > > > >> >>> >
> > > > >> >>> >
> > > > >> >>> >
> > > > >> >>> > --
> > > > >> >>> > Best regards,
> > > > >> >>> > Andrew
> > > > >> >>> >
> > > > >> >>> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn
> from
> > > > >> truth's
> > > > >> >>> > decrepit hands
> > > > >> >>> > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > >> >>> >
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> --
> > > > >> >> Best regards,
> > > > >> >> Andrew
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> > > > truth's
> > > > >> >> decrepit hands
> > > > >> >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > --
> > > > >> > Best regards,
> > > > >> > Andrew
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> > > truth's
> > > > >> > decrepit hands
> > > > >> > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >> Best regards,
> > > > >> Andrew
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> > truth's
> > > > >> decrepit hands
> > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best regards,
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> > > decrepit hands
> > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> decrepit hands
> - A23, Crosstalk
>
Re: Release 1.4.0 update
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
No problem, committing it now
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Sergey Soldatov <se...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Andrew,
>
> Can we include HBASE-19393 as well? Quite annoying issue and very simple
> fix.
>
> Thanks,
> Sergey
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Not too late, no
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Fix is up if it is not too late Andrew.
> > > St.Ack
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Andrew, your testing has turned up an issue in HBASE-18233. It is
> > present
> > > > in the 1.4 candidate patch and in 1.3. The failure is intermittent. I
> > am
> > > > working on a fix but want to make sure I have it right. So, I
> withdraw
> > my
> > > > request that 1.4 include it.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > S
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> TestGlobalThrottler is a problem stemming from the revert of
> > HBASE-9465
> > > >> on branch-1.4. The test came in on HBASE-17314 so I'll also revert
> > > that
> > > >> from branch-1.4. For more on this see HBASE-19381
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> apurtell@apache.org>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > The TestEndToEndSplitTransaction failure will be fixed by
> > HBASE-19379.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > The TestGlobalThrottler issue is a hang, which is probably why it
> > > >> slipped
> > > >> > through the cracks. I went back 32 commits from head and it was
> > still
> > > >> > stuck. 64 commits back it's good. Somewhere in between. Will get
> to
> > > the
> > > >> > offending commit shortly.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > apurtell@apache.org>
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >> Thanks. I'll take a look. They were passing for me before I went
> > out
> > > on
> > > >> >> vacation.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>> Thanks.
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>> BTW, I noticed this morning that TestGlobalThrottler and
> > > >> >>> TestEndToEndSplitTransaction
> > > >> >>> fail locally for me and up on jenkins as part of hadoopqa runs
> and
> > > on
> > > >> >>> recent 1.4 runs.
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>> I tried to poke at why. They seem fine in 1.2, 1.3, and 2.0. Got
> > > >> >>> distracted
> > > >> >>> and got no further than this....
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>> S
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > apurtell@apache.org>
> > > >> >>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>> > Ok, no problem.
> > > >> >>> >
> > > >> >>> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> > wrote:
> > > >> >>> >
> > > >> >>> > > May I get HBASE-18233 into 1.4.0 Andrew? It is in 1.2 and
> 1.3.
> > > >> >>> Waiting on
> > > >> >>> > > hadoopqa run. Would be good to have it all up and down
> > branch-1.
> > > >> >>> > > Thanks Sir,
> > > >> >>> > > St.Ack
> > > >> >>> > >
> > > >> >>> > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Peter Somogyi <
> > > >> >>> psomogyi@cloudera.com>
> > > >> >>> > > wrote:
> > > >> >>> > >
> > > >> >>> > > > HBASE-19188 was just resolved. :)
> > > >> >>> > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > >> >>> apurtell@apache.org>
> > > >> >>> > > > wrote:
> > > >> >>> > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > > I come back to find HBASE-19188 is a blocker. :-/
> > > >> >>> > > > > Need to resolve it
> > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Sean Busbey <
> > > >> busbey@apache.org
> > > >> >>> >
> > > >> >>> > > wrote:
> > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > > > thanks for all the work as RM on this Andrew!
> > > >> >>> > > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Andrew Purtell
> > > >> >>> > > > > > <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > Everything is in and ready to go. I'm out next week
> > for
> > > >> the
> > > >> >>> > > > > Thanksgiving
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > holiday, but will be back first week in December.
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > Here is what I anticipate:
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 4
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 1.4.0 RC0 binaries will be available.
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting begins.
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Preflight checks will include RAT check,
> > release
> > > >> >>> audits,
> > > >> >>> > > and
> > > >> >>> > > > 25
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > iterations of the unit test suite.
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 5 - 8
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > - 24 hours ITBLL
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB on cluster perf comparison with
> > 1.2
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > - PE and YCSB single server profiling with
> JFR,
> > > >> >>> comparison
> > > >> >>> > > with
> > > >> >>> > > > > 1.2
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 11
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Voting concludes
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > - Release, or RC1 depending on testing outcome
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > - December 18
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > - RC1 voting concludes and release, if we
> need a
> > > RC1
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > From now until the 1.4.0 release, please refrain
> from
> > > >> >>> committing
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > potentially destabilizing changes or changes to
> public
> > > >> APIs
> > > >> >>> to
> > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.4.
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On HBASE-19232 we discuss testing the shaded client
> > > using
> > > >> >>> YCSB,
> > > >> >>> > so
> > > >> >>> > > > > I'll
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >> use it to sanity check the shaded client as well as
> > > >> >>> complete a
> > > >> >>> > > perf
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >> comparison with 1.2.
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >> On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> > > >> >>> > > > > > andrew.purtell@gmail.com>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> I'll do a PE comparison between 1.4.0 and 1.3
> and/or
> > > >> 1.2.
> > > >> >>> Maybe
> > > >> >>> > > > YSCB
> > > >> >>> > > > > > too
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> if I have time. Good idea, thanks.
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > On Nov 11, 2017, at 5:05 AM, Yu Li <
> > > carp84@gmail.com>
> > > >> >>> wrote:
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Great to know, really good progress!
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > It seems we don't do performance comparison with
> > > >> current
> > > >> >>> > stable
> > > >> >>> > > > > > release
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > when releasing the first RC of a new branch, but
> > > >> should
> > > >> >>> we do
> > > >> >>> > > to
> > > >> >>> > > > > > avoid
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > issues like HBASE-14460 (write performance
> > > regression
> > > >> >>> from
> > > >> >>> > 0.98
> > > >> >>> > > > to
> > > >> >>> > > > > > 1.1)?
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > This is a must-have for us to decide new version
> > for
> > > >> >>> product
> > > >> >>> > > env
> > > >> >>> > > > > > here,
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> and
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > I wonder whether this applies for most users
> > (please
> > > >> >>> forgive
> > > >> >>> > my
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> ignorance
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > if there's any existing policy for this).
> Thanks.
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > bq. Back when we first discussed branching for
> 1.4
> > > Yu
> > > >> Li
> > > >> >>> > asked
> > > >> >>> > > > for
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> this...
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Thanks for remembering this and keeping the
> > promise
> > > >> boss
> > > >> >>> > > (smile).
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Best Regards,
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> > Yu
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> On 11 November 2017 at 03:30, Andrew Purtell <
> > > >> >>> > > > apurtell@apache.org
> > > >> >>> > > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> The march to 1.4.0 is progressing.
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I've run the unit test suite on a C4 class AWS
> > > >> instance
> > > >> >>> 25
> > > >> >>> > > times
> > > >> >>> > > > > and
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> there
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> are no failures. This is ongoing. I'm aiming
> for
> > > 100
> > > >> >>> runs.
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Fix versions are now set up for constructing a
> > > >> >>> reasonable
> > > >> >>> > > change
> > > >> >>> > > > > > log.
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> With HBASE-19232 applied a build with release
> > > audits
> > > >> >>> enabled
> > > >> >>> > > > will
> > > >> >>> > > > > > pass.
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I backported error-prone support yesterday and
> > will
> > > >> now
> > > >> >>> look
> > > >> >>> > > at
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> checkstyle
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and error-prone analyses for important issues.
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> I'll probably do HBASE-19238 before 1.4.0 goes
> > out
> > > so
> > > >> >>> that
> > > >> >>> > > neat
> > > >> >>> > > > > > utility
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> will be available.
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Back when we first discussed branching for 1.4
> Yu
> > > Li
> > > >> >>> asked
> > > >> >>> > for
> > > >> >>> > > > > this:
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> One naive question here: from the book
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> <http://hbase.apache.org/book.
> > > html#hbase.versioning
> > > >> >
> > > >> >>> we
> > > >> >>> > will
> > > >> >>> > > > add
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> functionality (in a backwards-compatible
> manner)
> > > in
> > > >> >>> minor
> > > >> >>> > > > > versions,
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> but
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> it
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> seems we don't have any one-line description
> on
> > > the
> > > >> >>> > > differences
> > > >> >>> > > > > > (what
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> main functionalities have been added) between
> > > >> >>> > > > > > branch-1.1/1.2/1.3/1.4
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> so
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> user could better decide which version to
> > > >> >>> choose/upgrade.
> > > >> >>> > > > Should
> > > >> >>> > > > > we
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> add some explicit document on this? Or release
> > > note
> > > >> of
> > > >> >>> the
> > > >> >>> > > > first
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> release
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>> for each branch is enough? Thanks.
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> and I still agree to do it. I'll write it up
> > while
> > > >> the
> > > >> >>> RC is
> > > >> >>> > > > under
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> evaluation.
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> ITBLL and replication testing to be performed
> on
> > a
> > > >> small
> > > >> >>> > > cluster
> > > >> >>> > > > > > once
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> we
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> have the RC binaries.
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Anything else? (Within reason...)
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> --
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Best regards,
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Andrew
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
> > > meaning
> > > >> >>> torn
> > > >> >>> > from
> > > >> >>> > > > > > truth's
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> decrepit hands
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>> >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >> --
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Best regards,
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Andrew
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk,
> meaning
> > > torn
> > > >> >>> from
> > > >> >>> > > > truth's
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >> decrepit hands
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >>
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > --
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > Best regards,
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > Andrew
> > > >> >>> > > > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning
> > > torn
> > > >> >>> from
> > > >> >>> > > > truth's
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > decrepit hands
> > > >> >>> > > > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > >> >>> > > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > > --
> > > >> >>> > > > > Best regards,
> > > >> >>> > > > > Andrew
> > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning
> torn
> > > from
> > > >> >>> > truth's
> > > >> >>> > > > > decrepit hands
> > > >> >>> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > >> >>> > > > >
> > > >> >>> > > >
> > > >> >>> > >
> > > >> >>> >
> > > >> >>> >
> > > >> >>> >
> > > >> >>> > --
> > > >> >>> > Best regards,
> > > >> >>> > Andrew
> > > >> >>> >
> > > >> >>> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> > > >> truth's
> > > >> >>> > decrepit hands
> > > >> >>> > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > >> >>> >
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> --
> > > >> >> Best regards,
> > > >> >> Andrew
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> > > truth's
> > > >> >> decrepit hands
> > > >> >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > --
> > > >> > Best regards,
> > > >> > Andrew
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> > truth's
> > > >> > decrepit hands
> > > >> > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> Best regards,
> > > >> Andrew
> > > >>
> > > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> truth's
> > > >> decrepit hands
> > > >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Andrew
> >
> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> > decrepit hands
> > - A23, Crosstalk
> >
>
--
Best regards,
Andrew
Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
decrepit hands
- A23, Crosstalk