My 2 cents.. - HBASE-10909 is pretty much completed, the only outstanding subtask is about WAL splitting (HBASE-11072), and we seem to be on-track here (the patch was/is being reviewed, thanks a lot for all the reviews!, and now looks really close to the state when it could be committed I guess). I hope this one will be finished coming week or a week after that. - On abstracting ZK client (HBASE-11464), and in particular, rewiring clients connections to cluster (HBASE-11467), that's in progress and patches are there for reviews and feedbacks, but these ones don't seem to be fittable into 1.0.0 anyway, as they change cluster topology...Same for coordination engine work (HADOOP-10641).
I may have capacity to review some patches if that would be useful. -Mikhail 2014-08-24 18:19 GMT-07:00 Enis Söztutar <enis....@gmail.com>: > Hey, > > Yeah, was busy with something else (HBASE-10070 subtasks) for the last > couple of weeks. I intend to get back to 0.99 real soon. > > Any help would be awesome. I'll call out for an RC next week. > > Enis > > > On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > > > How we looking for a 0.99.0? > > > > I can go review of outstanding issue list np Enis, just say, but you > > probably have a notion on where we are already. > > > > Grand, > > St.Ack > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 2:35 AM, Aditya <adityakish...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Thanks Ted! > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 4:37 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > I started with https://reviews.apache.org/r/23175/ > > > > > > > > Will continue reviewing this week. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Aditya <adityakish...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> Did anyone get a chance to take a look at the patches? > > > >> > > > >> Regards, > > > >> aditya... > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 8:37 PM, Aditya <adityakish...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > The wrapper jar is part of the first patch, which is in git > mailbox > > > >> patch > > > >> > format. > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> >> You may want to attach the wrapper jar to the JIRA directly. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Cheers > > > >> >> > > > >> >> On Jul 19, 2014, at 1:52 AM, Aditya <adityakish...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Looks like the regular patch command skips any binary included in > > > >> patches. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 1:37 AM, Aditya <adityakish...@gmail.com > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> >> > > > >> >>> Thanks for taking a look Ted! > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> Looks like the second patch created with "git diff" excluded the > > > >> Gradle > > > >> >>> wrapper JAR from the patch. > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> I would generate a new one which includes this this jar. In the > > > >> >>> meantime, you should be able to use the first patch attached to > > the > > > >> JIRA > > > >> >>> which is in git-am format and that would let you build. > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>>> Nice work, Aditya. > > > >> >>>> > > > >> >>>> Looks like the hbase-native-client profile requires gradle ? > > > >> >>>> > > > >> >>>> [exec] Error: Could not find or load main class > > > >> >>>> org.gradle.wrapper.GradleWrapperMain > > > >> >>>> > > > >> >>>> Will take a look at your patch. > > > >> >>>> > > > >> >>>> Cheers > > > >> >>>> > > > >> >>>> > > > >> >>>> > > > >> >>>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Aditya < > adityakish...@gmail.com > > > > > > >> >>>> wrote: > > > >> >>>> > > > >> >>>>> As requested, I have attached a combined patch to the umbrella > > > JIRA > > > >> >>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-1015> and > > submitted > > > >> it to > > > >> >>>>> > > > >> >>>>> jenkins. > > > >> >>>>> > > > >> >>>>> Would be great if someone could take a look and provide > > feedback. > > > >> >>>>> > > > >> >>>>> Regards, > > > >> >>>>> aditya... > > > >> >>>>> > > > >> >>>>> > > > >> >>>>> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Aditya < > adityakish...@gmail.com > > > > > > >> >>>>> wrote: > > > >> >>>>> > > > >> >>>>> > I was hoping to get some initial comments before attaching > > > patches > > > >> >>>>> for the > > > >> >>>>> > build boat. > > > >> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>> > I have broken the entire code into 5 patch sets, layered in > a > > > >> >>>>> sequnce, > > > >> >>>>> > each focusing on a particular area (public headers/JNI > > > >> >>>>> > implementation/Examples+unit test, etc) for the ease of > > review. > > > >> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/23175/ > > > >> >>>>> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/23176/ > > > >> >>>>> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/23177/ > > > >> >>>>> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/23178/ > > > >> >>>>> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/23179/ > > > >> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>> > These are also available as a sequence of patches as the > pull > > > >> request > > > >> >>>>> > <https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/1>. > > > >> >>>>> > > > >> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>> > Only the last patch hooks everything to the HBase build > > process > > > >> >>>>> > (optionally) and hence I was thinking of squashing these > > > separate > > > >> >>>>> patches > > > >> >>>>> > into a single patch to be submitted for build. > > > >> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>> > On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Nick Dimiduk < > > > ndimi...@gmail.com > > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> wrote: > > > >> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>> >> This ticket has only open subtasks, ie nothing in 'patch > > > >> >>>>> available'. I > > > >> >>>>> >> assume you mean HBASE-10168. We'll see about getting you > some > > > >> >>>>> reviews, but > > > >> >>>>> >> you should also go about formatting the patch for buildbot. > > > Also, > > > >> >>>>> since > > > >> >>>>> >> your 3 reviews are individually 100+k, you should consider > > > >> breaking > > > >> >>>>> them > > > >> >>>>> >> into three separate tickets. > > > >> >>>>> >> > > > >> >>>>> >> my 2¢ > > > >> >>>>> >> -n > > > >> >>>>> >> > > > >> >>>>> >> > > > >> >>>>> >> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Aditya < > > > adityakish...@gmail.com > > > >> > > > > >> >>>>> wrote: > > > >> >>>>> >> > > > >> >>>>> >>> Sorry about that. > > > >> >>>>> >>> > > > >> >>>>> >>> Here is the umbrella JIRA > > > >> >>>>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-1015 > > > >> >>>>> >>> > > > >> >>>>> >>> > > > >> >>>>> >>> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Nick Dimiduk < > > > >> ndimi...@gmail.com> > > > >> >>>>> >>> wrote: > > > >> >>>>> >>> > > > >> >>>>> >>>> Would you mind including the JIRA numbers along with the > > > >> request? > > > >> >>>>> >>>> > > > >> >>>>> >>>> Thanks, > > > >> >>>>> >>>> Nick > > > >> >>>>> >>>> > > > >> >>>>> >>>> > > > >> >>>>> >>>> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Aditya < > > > >> adityakish...@gmail.com> > > > >> >>>>> wrote: > > > >> >>>>> >>>> > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> Do we want to have the C APIs part of 1.0.0 release. I > had > > > >> >>>>> posted few > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> patches and a set of review request sometime last week. > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Enis Söztutar < > > > >> >>>>> enis....@gmail.com> > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> wrote: > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Mikhail Antonov < > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> olorinb...@gmail.com> > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > wrote: > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > Moved ZK watcher & listener subtask out of scope > > > >> >>>>> HBASE-10909. Enis > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> - with > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > that, I guess HBASE-10909 can be marked in branch-1? > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > Sounds good. > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > HBASE-11464 - this is the jira where I'll capture > > tasks > > > to > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> abstract hbase > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > client from ZK (mostly it would be post-1.0 work). > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > Not sure whether we can make it fully backwards > > compatible > > > >> >>>>> with 1.0 > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > clients. I guess we will see when the patches are > done. > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > Thanks, > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > Mikhail > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > 2014-07-03 12:52 GMT-07:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net > >: > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Mikhail Antonov < > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> olorinb...@gmail.com > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > wrote: > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > Guys, > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > getting back to ZK abstraction work w.r.t. > release > > > 1.0 > > > >> >>>>> and > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > thereafter, > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > some > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > status update. So as we're getting closer to > > > complete > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> HBASE-10909, it > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > looks > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > like the steps may be like this: > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > - there are 2 subtasks out there not closed > yet, > > > one > > > >> of > > > >> >>>>> which > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> is > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > about > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > log > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > splitting (and Sergey S has submitted a patch > for > > > >> >>>>> review), > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> another is > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > abstraction of ZK watcher (this is what I've > been > > > >> >>>>> working on > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> in the > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > background; but after sketching the patch it > seems > > > >> like > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> without being > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > able > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > to modify the control flows and some changes in > > the > > > >> >>>>> module > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> structure, > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > it'd > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > be a lot of scaffolding code not really > > simplifying > > > >> >>>>> current > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> code). So > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > I'd > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > propose to descope abstraction of ZK watcher > jira > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> (HBASE-11073), > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > namely: > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > convert it to top-level JIRA and continue to > work > > on > > > >> it > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> separately; > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > rename > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > HBASE-10909 to "ZK abstraction: phase 1", and > mark > > > it > > > >> as > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> closed as > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > soon > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > as > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > log splitting jira is completed. This way > > > HBASE-10909 > > > >> >>>>> fits to > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > branch-1. > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > Sounds good to me. > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > - secondly, in the discussion to the > > CatalogTracker > > > >> >>>>> patch, we > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > started > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > talking about modifying client to not know about > > ZK, > > > >> but > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> rather keep > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > the > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > location of current masters and talk to them > using > > > RPC > > > >> >>>>> calls. > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> This > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > work > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > can > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > not go into branch-1, as it involves invasive > > > changes > > > >> in > > > >> >>>>> client > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > including > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > new RPC. As I understand the branching schema > now, > > > >> those > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> changes can > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > go > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > to > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > master branch, we just don't merge them to > > branch-1, > > > >> and > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> depending on > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > their > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > completeness we can pull them to 1.1 release or > > so. > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > You have it right Mikhail. > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > St.Ack > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > -- > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > Thanks, > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > Michael Antonov > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > >> >>>>> >>>> > > > >> >>>>> >>>> > > > >> >>>>> >>> > > > >> >>>>> >> > > > >> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>> > > > >> >>>> > > > >> >>>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Thanks, Michael Antonov
