Thanks Sean, I indeed missed that looking at the list of issues. I'm not familiar with Phoenix, but will try to look at the HBase side and help reviewing patches here. I also see that HBASE-14845 is marked critical (and 's been for long time), do you want that patch in for 1.3 or should we bump it to 1.3.1/1.4.0?
-Mikhail On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 10:38 PM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote: > HBASE-15698 is still open and a blocker. > > I've been stepping through phoenix + hbase code to chase it down, but > so far haven't pinned it down. If anyone has more familiarity with > Phoenix than me, another set of eyes would be great. > > On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 10:19 PM, Mikhail Antonov <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hey guys, > > > > I'm planning to roll first RC for branch 1.3 tomorrow, was holding off on > > the fix for HBASE-15811 to get committed. At the moment I'm not aware of > > any major bugfixes marked for 1.3. I've moved / moving to 1.4 several > jiras > > without recent movement in there, like: > > > > - HBASE-15593 (could still go in 1.3 if committed soon? Seems like no > > objections to it so far) > > - HBASE-15454 (improvements in date-tiered compactions, waiting for more > > perf testing?) > > - HBASE-15691 (concurrent modification exception in bucket cache in > > branch-1, > > this is indeed a bug, but seems like branch-1 have lived without this > > fix for long enough so far) > > > > Ping me on the above if there's movement and desire go get it in. > > > > There're two jiras which should be ready to get committed pretty soon, > > related to interfaces: > > > > - HBASE-15780 (make AuthUtils public) and > > - HBASE-15779 (examples for the above). > > > > Let me know if you have any concerns, or anything which could have > escaped > > my view and should go to 1.3. > > > > Thanks! > > Mikhail > > > > > > > > There are few jiras I've kicked out of 1.3 schedule: > > > > - HBASE-15454, improvements for date-tiered compactions waiting for > more > > perf testing > > > > > > > > So > > > > On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Mikhail Antonov <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> Heads up on where we are with branch-1.3. > >> > >> Lots of stuff we had outstanding 10 days ago got committed and now we > are > >> down to just 3 bugfixes > >> and 2 features which I'm looking to get in, all have patches in review. > I > >> hope we could get them in > >> in next few days and then I can start preparing RCs. > >> > >> Bugfixes: > >> > >> HBASE-15691 Port HBASE-10205 (ConcurrentModificationException in > >> BucketAllocator) to branch-1 (Andrew/Stack let me know if I can help > here? > >> Any more performance testing we wait for?) > >> HBASE-15615 Wrong sleep time when RegionServerCallable need retry > (almost > >> there, just some more tests around would be great) > >> HBASE-15593 Time limit of scanning should be offered by client (Stack - > >> should we get it in or you're looking for more tests?) > >> > >> Features: > >> > >> HBASE-15454 Archive store files older than max age (Duo / Heng / Enis do > >> we wait for more reviews/tests?) > >> HBASE-15773 CellCounter improvements (should be pretty straightforward > to > >> get in) > >> > >> Let me know if I missed anything. > >> > >> -Mikhail > >> > >> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 10:20 PM, Mikhail Antonov <[email protected] > > > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Thanks! > >>> > >>> -Mikhail > >>> > >>> On 4/27/16, ramkrishna vasudevan <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > I saw Andy's comment. Will create a patch for trunk also and will > commit > >>> > both together. > >>> > > >>> > Regards > >>> > Ram > >>> > > >>> > On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 10:39 AM, Mikhail Antonov < > [email protected]> > >>> > wrote: > >>> > > >>> >> Thanks Ram! It seems like that's fixed now (the problem when we > don't > >>> >> compact often enough in TestHRegion). > >>> >> > >>> >> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 4:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan < > >>> >> [email protected]> wrote: > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>Also need to figure out situation around HBASE-14970 - > HBASE-13082 > >>> >> > - HBASE-15697, > >>> >> > Regarding this - HBASE-14970 is found in both branch-1 and > >>> branch-1.3. > >>> >> The > >>> >> > patch for HBASE-15697 solves the ulimit issue with respect number > of > >>> >> > open > >>> >> > files. Once Andrew verifies it we can commit the patch and you can > >>> have > >>> >> > that in the branch-1.3 release IMHO. > >>> >> > > >>> >> > Thanks Mikhail for the heads up. > >>> >> > > >>> >> > Regards > >>> >> > Ram > >>> >> > > >>> >> > On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Mikhail Antonov < > [email protected] > >>> > > >>> >> > wrote: > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > Ok, I think it's time to bring up this thread again. Let's see > >>> where > >>> >> > > we > >>> >> > > are. > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > So, outstanding - > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > Significant bugs (looked through jira filters): > >>> >> > > - Several bugfixes/improvements in HBase client, often related > to > >>> >> > > rpc/retries, went in recently or about to go in. > >>> >> > > * HBASE-15645, when we don't use rpc timeouts properly, went > in > >>> >> > (pending > >>> >> > > addendum for nits) > >>> >> > > * HBASE-15658, when we unnecessarily clear MetaCache on > retries, > >>> >> > > went > >>> >> > in > >>> >> > > on 1.3+, > >>> >> > > probably should go in 1.2 as well, see discussion there. > >>> >> > > * HBASE-15593, and HBASE-15615 - those should be addressed > soon I > >>> >> guess > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > - Bucket cache fixes improvements, HBASE-15240 and subtasks, > would > >>> >> > > be > >>> >> > good > >>> >> > > to pull in as much as possible. > >>> >> > > - HBASE-15703, bug in deadline rpc scheduler, I'd need to fix > it > >>> >> before > >>> >> > > the release > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > Any other very-nice-to-get-in fixes we want? > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > Also need to figure out situation around HBASE-14970 - > HBASE-13082 > >>> >> > > - HBASE-15697, > >>> >> > > I kind of lost track what was committed/reverted/re-aplied on > which > >>> >> > branch. > >>> >> > > @Andrew, Stack, Ram > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > Features: > >>> >> > > * Date-tiered compactions. I'm looking at umbrella jira for > d-t > >>> >> > > compactions, HBASE-15339 < > >>> >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-15339> > >>> >> > > , > >>> >> > > looks like there's one big item left on the list > >>> (HBASE-15454, > >>> >> > > archive StoreFile older than max age), > >>> >> > > and it's being actively worked on / reviewed, and another > >>> one - > >>> >> > > documentation task, so I assume it's all good > >>> >> > > and we get all date-tiers compactions improvements for > 1.3. > >>> >> > > * Spark connector. Haven't seen much activity on it lately. > Sean > >>> - > >>> >> what > >>> >> > > do you think about HBASE-14160? > >>> >> > > I'm inclined to push it to 1.4 (or whatever next release > will > >>> >> > > be) > >>> >> if > >>> >> > > there're no takers at this point. > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > Thanks! > >>> >> > > Mikhail > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > bq. There are several patches > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > Let us know the JIRA numbers. > >>> >> > > > I can help with reviewing if needed. > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > Cheers > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Mikhail Antonov < > >>> >> [email protected] > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > wrote: > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > Last time I've tried to run 1.3 builds there were issues > with > >>> >> > balancer, > >>> >> > > > > which are fixed now. There are several patches I definitely > >>> would > >>> >> > like > >>> >> > > to > >>> >> > > > > pull in, other than that I feel we are pretty close. I'll > start > >>> >> > > spinning > >>> >> > > > > internal builds in a few days and if things look good will > >>> start > >>> >> > > > preparing > >>> >> > > > > RC's next week or so. > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > I guess we are getting to feature-complete state, I'll walk > >>> >> > > > > through > >>> >> > the > >>> >> > > > > jiras and send detailed email over weekend. > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > Thanks! > >>> >> > > > > Mikhail > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > On Apr 22, 2016, at 8:13 AM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> > >>> >> > > > > > wrote: > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > Mikhail: > >>> >> > > > > > Any plan when to spin 1.3 RC0 ? > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > HBaseCon is not very far. > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > I was wondering if 1.3 release can be done before > HBaseCon. > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > Cheers > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:54 PM, Mikhail Antonov < > >>> >> > > [email protected]> > >>> >> > > > > > wrote: > >>> >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > >> To me it's not really about individual big features > >>> (besides, > >>> >> big > >>> >> > > > > features > >>> >> > > > > >> might be hard to accommodate in a minor release), but > enough > >>> >> good > >>> >> > > > > things to > >>> >> > > > > >> justify minor release. > >>> >> > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > >> What we can have (unless I'm missing something): > >>> >> > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > >> [Already done or to be further improved] > >>> >> > > > > >> - HBASE-15177 - more GC-friendly allocations in RPC > services > >>> >> > > > > >> - HBASE-14457 - multi WAL improvements > >>> >> > > > > >> - HBASE-15222 - optimizations in metrics system, some > more > >>> >> metrics > >>> >> > > > > >> (like HBASE-15135, HBASE-15068) > >>> >> > > > > >> - HBASE-15306, HBASE-15136 - improving call queues > handling > >>> >> > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > >> [To be reviewed?): > >>> >> > > > > >> - HBASE-15181 - date based tiered compactions (?) > >>> >> > > > > >> - HBASE-11290 - unlock RegionStates. There was a patch > >>> update > >>> >> > > > relatively > >>> >> > > > > >> recently to it based on comments. > >>> >> > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > >> [Possible?] > >>> >> > > > > >> - HBASE-13557 - special handling for system tables WALs > >>> >> > > > > >> - HBASE-13017 - keep table state in meta > >>> >> > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > >> 1.2 was cut off mid-June 2015.. Should be enough time > since > >>> >> > > > > >> then > >>> >> > > for a > >>> >> > > > > >> minor release. > >>> >> > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > >> Mikhail > >>> >> > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > >> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Enis Söztutar < > >>> >> > [email protected] > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >> wrote: > >>> >> > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > >>> What are the "features" in current branch-1 that is not > >>> there > >>> >> in > >>> >> > > 1.2? > >>> >> > > > > If > >>> >> > > > > >>> there is none, it is not worth branching yet. > >>> >> > > > > >>> > >>> >> > > > > >>> Enis > >>> >> > > > > >>> > >>> >> > > > > >>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 7:57 PM, Andrew Purtell < > >>> >> > > > > >> [email protected]> > >>> >> > > > > >>> wrote: > >>> >> > > > > >>> > >>> >> > > > > >>>> No, each 0.94.x/0.96.x/98.x was or is a minor release. > :-) > >>> >> > > Sometimes > >>> >> > > > > >> the > >>> >> > > > > >>>> changes in those releases could all be considered > "point" > >>> in > >>> >> > scope > >>> >> > > > or > >>> >> > > > > >>>> effect but not always. Further supporting this point of > >>> >> > > > > >>>> view, > >>> >> > when > >>> >> > > > we > >>> >> > > > > >>> went > >>> >> > > > > >>>> from 0.94 to 0.96 it was a major increment, in effect, > due > >>> >> > > > > >>>> to > >>> >> > 'the > >>> >> > > > > >>>> singularity'. > >>> >> > > > > >>>> > >>> >> > > > > >>>> Doing a new minor every month would be more like a > return > >>> to > >>> >> > past > >>> >> > > > > state > >>> >> > > > > >>> of > >>> >> > > > > >>>> affairs, for better or worse, in my humble opinion. > >>> >> > > > > >>>> > >>> >> > > > > >>>>>> On Feb 24, 2016, at 7:46 PM, Stack <[email protected] > > > >>> >> wrote: > >>> >> > > > > >>>>>> > >>> >> > > > > >>>>>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Elliott Clark < > >>> >> > > > [email protected]> > >>> >> > > > > >>>> wrote: > >>> >> > > > > >>>>>> > >>> >> > > > > >>>>>> Is it time to branch for 1.3 ? > >>> >> > > > > >>>>> > >>> >> > > > > >>>>> > >>> >> > > > > >>>>>> Sean did a great job getting 1.2 out. However it was > a > >>> >> > > > > >>>>>> hard > >>> >> > > > > >> difficult > >>> >> > > > > >>>>>> process that I wouldn't wish on anyone. Is it time to > >>> >> > > > > >>>>>> branch > >>> >> > for > >>> >> > > > 1.3 > >>> >> > > > > >>> and > >>> >> > > > > >>>>>> start the process of stabilizing again so that we can > >>> get > >>> >> > > > > >>>>>> a > >>> >> > > > monthly > >>> >> > > > > >>>> cadence > >>> >> > > > > >>>>>> for minor releases going? > >>> >> > > > > >>>>> > >>> >> > > > > >>>>> > >>> >> > > > > >>>>> Monthly cadence for minors is upping the ante. We > used to > >>> >> > > > > >>>>> be > >>> >> > > about > >>> >> > > > > >>>>> monthly's for point releases. > >>> >> > > > > >>>>> > >>> >> > > > > >>>>> +1 for the mighty Mikhail as RM. Sean, please UPS him > the > >>> >> > special > >>> >> > > > > >> robe > >>> >> > > > > >>>> that > >>> >> > > > > >>>>> he has to wear while performing his RMness duties. > >>> >> > > > > >>>>> > >>> >> > > > > >>>>> St.Ack > >>> >> > > > > >> > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Thanks, > >>> Michael Antonov > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Thanks, > >> Michael Antonov > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Thanks, > > Michael Antonov > > > > -- > busbey > -- Thanks, Michael Antonov
