> Anyways, if you fellas can't wait anymore, just say and we'll figure out something. As I see it, HBASE-9563 is committed, and HBASE-9696 is not a blocker against 0.96. But if you argue that 9696 is indeed a blocker, let's raise it as such. There is no point in creating an RC, an immediately sinking it if we cannot verify the RC for a +1. We don't run into data loss issues anymore which is why I still think we can release 0.96 even without 9696 and 9724. Nothing is preventing us to release 0.96.1, with this and more fixes in let's say a couple of weeks or months.
I guess let's wait for tomorrow to see whether there is any progress on 9563 and 9696. Enis On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Enis Söztutar <[email protected]> wrote: > >> HBASE-9563 is trivial enough and it is already in 0.96. We may have run >> that into some point, but not lately. Do you see your tests succeeding >> with >> HBASE-9563 and HBASE-9696? >> >> > Both are under test in independent rigs. For HBASE-9563, we are trying to > repro the clash of the masters to see if the patch helped. We've also > instrumented the rig so we can get more data when we hit the hang again. > > Anyways, if you fellas can't wait anymore, just say and we'll figure out > something. >
