here is what has happened on branch-1.2 since RC2: * 7ed1603 - (origin/branch-1.2) HBASE-15252 Data loss when replaying wal if HDFS timeout (11 hours ago) * 19d964d - HBASE-15198 RPC client not using Codec and CellBlock for puts by default-addendum. (18 hours ago) * cc863f3 - HBASE-15224 Undo "hbase.increment.fast.but.narrow.consistency" option; it is not necessary since HBASE-15213 (23 hours ago) * 644326b - HBASE-15129 Set default value for hbase.fs.tmp.dir rather than fully depend on hbase-default.xml (Yu Li) (27 hours ago) * 7d5a158 - HBASE-15198 RPC client not using Codec and CellBlock for puts by default. (33 hours ago) * c5b6c96 - HBASE-14192 Fix REST Cluster Constructor with String List (2 days ago) * 3b6c305 - HBASE-15229 Canary Tools should not call System.Exit on error (Vishal Khandelwal) (2 days ago) * 8a2cb16 - HBASE-15219 Canary tool does not return non-zero exit code when one of regions is in stuck state (2 days ago) * 7643509 - HBASE-15216 Canary does not accept config params from command line (Vishal Khandelwal) (3 days ago) * d5fd993 - HBASE-15238 HFileReaderV2 prefetch overreaches; runs off the end of the data; ADDENDUM (3 days ago) * 6f6cd66 - HBASE-15238 HFileReaderV2 prefetch overreaches; runs off the end of the data (3 days ago) * 4cb21cf - HBASE-15224 Undo "hbase.increment.fast.but.narrow.consistency" option; it is not necessary since HBASE-15213 (4 days ago) * d568db8 - (1.2.0RC2) HBASE-14025 update CHANGES.txt for 1.2 RC2 (5 days ago)
I *could* make 1.2.0 RC3 that just cherry picks HBASE-15252 onto RC2, but that's going to make things a bit messy and possibly confusing for folks who look for the 1.2.0 tag to be an ancestor of branch-1.2's HEAD. On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purt...@gmail.com> wrote: > Same here. I have started with RC2 but can mostly carry findings to RC3 > given only one additional change. > > > On Feb 12, 2016, at 8:56 AM, Elliott Clark <ecl...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > -1 until the dataloss is fixed. > > > > But assuming that's fixed I would be good for a short vote cycle for the > > next RC. > > > >> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:02 AM, 张铎 <palomino...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> HBASE-15252 is fixed :). > >> > >> 2016-02-12 14:00 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>: > >> > >>> -1 > >>> > >>> The dataloss issue was just discovered. I think now we know of it, even > >>> though the incidence is rare, would be best to respin the RC. > >>> > >>> You the man Sean, > >>> St.Ack > >>> > >>> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey <sean.bus...@gmail.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>>> On Feb 11, 2016 18:33, "张铎" <palomino...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue. > >>>>> > >>>>> It's marked major (though perhaps that's off since it's dataloss, > even > >>> if > >>>>> rare). More importantly it's been present in prior releases for some > >>> time. > >>>>> > >>>>> Blocking 1.2.0 would put pressure on getting a solution faster, I > >> think. > >>>>> Additionally, letting the fix wait for 1.2.1 will give me a good > >>> incentive > >>>>> to keep the path releases on schedule. ;) > >>>>> > >>>>> My 2¢. Happy to roll another RC if folks see it otherwise. > >>>> > >>>> Dataloss. I think we should roll a new RC with short voting timeframe. > >>>> St.Ack > >> > -- Sean
