Looping in Patrick who may have insight for https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-2694
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 4:35 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected]>wrote: > After some discussions today here at SU between Todd and the team, it > was suggested that this 0.89 release contains more of what we run in > production here. One major difference is that we reverted most of > HBASE-2694 since we had issues with the ZK-based assignment, didn't > know exactly how many other issues lurked in there, that most of those > fixes would probably not apply to the new master, and that it was > generally much slower than the pre-2694 master. I also helped Vidhya > with his 700 nodes today by patching 0.89.20100830 with 2694's revert, > and starting his cluster became much more faster. > > tl;dr I propose that we sink this RC and build a new one with 2694 > reverted (except for the core ZKW changes). > > What do the devs think? > > Thx, > > J-D > > On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 5:14 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Second RC, new vote! > > > > Source binary and source tar balls are available here: > > > > > > http://people.apache.org/~jdcryans/hbase-0.89.20100830-candidate-2/<http://people.apache.org/%7Ejdcryans/hbase-0.89.20100830-candidate-2/> > > > > You can also browse the candidate documentation here: > > > > > http://people.apache.org/~jdcryans/hbase-0.89.20100830-candidate-2/hbase-0.89.20100830/docs/<http://people.apache.org/%7Ejdcryans/hbase-0.89.20100830-candidate-2/hbase-0.89.20100830/docs/> > > > > Issues resolved since 0.89.20100726, our second 0.89.x release, are > > roughly ~23 issues odd including fixed deadlocks, better handling of > > IOEs during splits and improvements for filters: see > > http://su.pr/2HwiUe. 3 issues were also fixed for RC2: > > > > HBASE-2975 DFSClient names in master and RS should be unique > > HBASE-2967 Failed split: IOE 'File is Corrupt' -- sync length not > > being written out to SequenceFile > > HBASE-2964 Deadlock when RS tries to RPC to itself inside > SplitTransaction > > > > Shall we release this candidate as the third in our 0.89.x series of > > developer releases? > > > > Please see previous threads on 0.89 releases for more information > > about the purpose of this release candidate - in particular, this > > 'developer release' is for those who can tolerate risk and who are > > willing to give feedback in advance of our next major release. We're > > not making any guarantees that this is bug free. Its definitely not > > for production deploys. > > > > We'll do another release like this in a few weeks after the new master > > code has gone in. > > > > Please vote by Thursday, September 16th. > > > > Thanks, > > > > J-D > > >
