On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 11:44 PM, ramkrishna vasudevan < ramkrishna.s.vasude...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Stack > > First I would like to thank you for the reviews and understand the > decision. > I would just like to highlight few facts if this does not make into 0.96 > then we may have to > -> Handle backward compatability issues with WAL. Currently inorder to > retrieve tags we write a taglength thought it is 0. This would help us to > replay WAL with Tags. > Is there not a version in WALEdit or on the WAL file that would allow us distinguish a WALEdit written w/ tags from one w/o? > -> Codecs like PRefixTreeCodec needs to be working for versions without > Tags. Currently as PrefixTreeCodec is not out in any release these are not > a problem for now. > Could we have two codecs, one that supports tags and another that does not? > > So to avoid these problems we can get these Tags on 0.96 release. May be a > few more days of time. Is it possible? I can try getting people for more > reviews too. My sense going by recent experience is that landing big patches, what w/ review cycles and then stabilization of build post commit, is that the process always takes way more time than I expect. You fellas are almost there -- tags is shaping up nicely -- and you and Anoop are super receptive and reactive to criticism so it would all likely run faster than usual but I predict at least another week before it lands -- perhaps too weeks -- and that is too long for a 0.96 that is already way too late. Lets get tags into trunk. I can help after this development release and the release candidate gets posted. Lets then make a tags-only release on the heels of 0.96. As said above, tags is cause enough for a major hbase release. Good on you Ram, St.Ack
