Michael, you can try master + latest patch on HBASE-14123 (v29). No need to use HBASE-7912 branch. I will double check HBASE-7912.
-Vlad On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > More info: > > stack@ve0524:~/hbase.git$ git checkout origin/HBASE-7912 -b 7912v2 > Branch 7912v2 set up to track remote branch HBASE-7912 from origin. > Switched to a new branch '7912v2' > stack@ve0524:~/hbase.git$ java -version > java version "1.8.0_101" > Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_101-b13) > Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.101-b13, mixed mode) > stack@ve0524:~/hbase.git$ mvn clean install -DskipTests &> /tmp/out.txt > > ... > > St.Ack > > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > > > Interesting. When I try it fails w/ below: > > > > [INFO] 26 warnings > > 322 [INFO] ------------------------------------------------------------- > > 323 [INFO] ------------------------------------------------------------- > > 324 [ERROR] COMPILATION ERROR : > > 325 [INFO] ------------------------------------------------------------- > > 326 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/ > > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexCodecV2.java:[48,8] > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.encoding.rowindexV2.RowIndexCodecV2 is not > > abstract and does not override abstract method createSeeker(org.ap > > ache.hadoop.hbase.CellComparator,org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.encoding. > HFileBlockDecodingContext) > > in org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.encoding.DataBlockEncoder > > 327 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/ > > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexCodecV2.java:[143,3] > > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype > > 328 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/ > > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexCodecV2.java:[147,29] > > incompatible types: java.nio.ByteBuffer cannot be converted to > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.nio.ByteBuff > > 329 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/ > > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexCodecV2.java:[148,33] > > cannot find symbol > > 330 symbol: method getKeyDeepCopy() > > 331 location: variable seeker of type org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io. > > encoding.DataBlockEncoder.EncodedSeeker > > 332 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/ > > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexCodecV2.java:[153,3] > > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype > > 333 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/ > > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV1/RowIndexCodecV1.java:[45,8] > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.encoding.rowindexV1.RowIndexCodecV1 is not > > abstract and does not override abstract method createSeeker(org.ap > > ache.hadoop.hbase.CellComparator,org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.encoding. > HFileBlockDecodingContext) > > in org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.encoding.DataBlockEncoder > > 334 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/ > > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV1/RowIndexCodecV1.java:[145,3] > > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype > > 335 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/ > > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV1/RowIndexCodecV1.java:[158,3] > > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype > > 336 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/ > > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexSeekerV2.java:[46,8] > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.encoding.rowindexV2.RowIndexSeekerV2 is not > > abstract and does not override abstract method compareKey(org.ap > > ache.hadoop.hbase.CellComparator,org.apache.hadoop.hbase.Cell) in > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.encoding.DataBlockEncoder.EncodedSeeker > > 337 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/ > > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexSeekerV2.java:[79,3] > > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype > > 338 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/ > > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexSeekerV2.java:[117,3] > > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype > > 339 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/ > > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexSeekerV2.java:[190,3] > > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype > > 340 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/ > > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexSeekerV2.java:[214,3] > > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype > > 341 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/ > > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexSeekerV2.java:[349,3] > > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype > > 342 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/ > > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexSeekerV2.java:[355,3] > > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype > > 343 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/ > > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/ > RowIndexSeekerV2.java:[421,36] > > no suitable method found for uncompressTags(java.nio. > > ByteBuffer,byte[],int,int) > > 344 method org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.TagCompressionContext. > > uncompressTags(java.io.InputStream,byte[],int,int) is not applicable > > 345 (argument mismatch; java.nio.ByteBuffer cannot be converted to > > java.io.InputStream) > > 346 method org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.TagCompressionContext. > > uncompressTags(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.nio.ByteBuff,byte[],int,int) is > > not applicable > > 347 (argument mismatch; java.nio.ByteBuffer cannot be converted to > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.nio.ByteBuff) > > > > .... > > > > St.Ack > > > > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Apekshit Sharma <a...@cloudera.com> > > wrote: > > > >> @stack, it compiled for me. > >> > >> Also tried few commands, and have to say, it's well designed from user > >> commands perspective. > >> > >> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > >> > >> > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Vladimir Rodionov < > >> vladrodio...@gmail.com > >> > > > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > Michael, > >> > > > >> > > Its in HBASE-7912 > >> > > > >> > > This is tip of git log: > >> > > > >> > > commit a072f6f49a26a7259ff2aaef6cb56d85eb592482 > >> > > Author: Frank Welsch <fwel...@jps.net> > >> > > Date: Fri Sep 23 18:00:42 2016 -0400 > >> > > > >> > > HBASE-16574 Book updates for backup and restore > >> > > > >> > > commit b14e2ab1c24e65ff88dd4c579acf83cb4ed0605e > >> > > Author: tedyu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> > >> > > Date: Wed Oct 5 16:29:40 2016 -0700 > >> > > > >> > > HBASE-16727 Backup refactoring: remove MR dependencies from > >> HMaster > >> > > (Vladimir Rodionov) > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Thanks. I have that. I tried it and it doesn't compile for me. Does it > >> > compile for you? > >> > Thanks, > >> > M > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -Vlad > >> > > > >> > > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > Which branch do I check out to try it? HBASE-7912 is not it. I > don't > >> > see > >> > > an > >> > > > HBASE-16727... > >> > > > Thanks, > >> > > > M > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:41 AM, Vladimir Rodionov < > >> > > > vladrodio...@gmail.com> > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > The last patch is on review board: > >> > > > > https://reviews.apache.org/r/52748 > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Vladimir Rodionov < > >> > > > vladrodio...@gmail.com > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> How hard to put in an hbase-backup module? hbase-server is > >> fat > >> > > > enough > >> > > > > > >> already. Could be done as a follow-up. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-16727? > >> > > > > > focusedCommentId=15531237&page=com.atlassian.jira. > >> > > > > > plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment- > 15531237 > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Can we do merge first? Then we can discuss separate module. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > -Vlad > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> > >> > wrote: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> Looks like the first quote was cut off. > >> > > > > >> The original sentence was: > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> bq. no mapreduce job launched from master or region server. > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> mapreduce job is launched from the node where command line > >> tool is > >> > > > run. > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> > >> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > bq. launched from master or region server. > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > What does this mean please? Has to be run from Master or > >> > > > RegionServer? > >> > > > > >> Can > >> > > > > >> > it be run from another node altogether? > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Vladimir Rodionov < > >> > > > > >> vladrodio...@gmail.com > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> mapreduce dependency has been moved to client side - > no > >> > > > mapreduce > >> > > > > >> job > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > 1. We have no code in the client module anymore, due to > >> > > dependency > >> > > > > on > >> > > > > >> > > internal server API (HFile and WAL access). > >> > > > > >> > > 2. Backup/ restore are client - driven operations, but > all > >> the > >> > > > code > >> > > > > >> > resides > >> > > > > >> > > in the server module > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > How hard to put in an hbase-backup module? hbase-server is > >> fat > >> > > > enough > >> > > > > >> > already. Could be done as a follow-up. > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > Thanks, > >> > > > > >> > St.Ack > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > 3. No MR in Master, no procedure - driven execution. > >> > > > > >> > > 4. Old good MR from command-line. > >> > > > > >> > > 5. Security was simplified and now only super-user is > >> allowed > >> > to > >> > > > run > >> > > > > >> > > backup/restores. > >> > > > > >> > > 6. HBase Backup API was gone due to 1. Now only > >> command-line > >> > > > access > >> > > > > to > >> > > > > >> > > backup tools. > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > These consequences of refactoring has been discussed in > >> > > > HBASE-16727. > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > -Vlad > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Ted Yu < > >> yuzhih...@gmail.com> > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Reviving this thread. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > The following has taken place: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > mapreduce dependency has been moved to client side - no > >> > > > mapreduce > >> > > > > >> job > >> > > > > >> > > > launched from master or region server. > >> > > > > >> > > > document patch (HBASE-16574) has been integrated. > >> > > > > >> > > > Updated mega patch has been attached to HBASE-14123: > this > >> > > covers > >> > > > > the > >> > > > > >> > > > refactor in #1 above and the protobuf 3 merge. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > If community has more feedback on the merge proposal, I > >> > would > >> > > > love > >> > > > > >> to > >> > > > > >> > > hear > >> > > > > >> > > > it. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Thanks > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Sean Busbey < > >> > > > > bus...@cloudera.com> > >> > > > > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > I'd like to see the docs proposed on HBASE-16574 > >> > integrated > >> > > > into > >> > > > > >> our > >> > > > > >> > > > > project's documentation prior to merge. > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Ted Yu < > >> > > yuzhih...@gmail.com> > >> > > > > >> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > > This feature can be marked experimental due to some > >> > > > > limitations > >> > > > > >> > such > >> > > > > >> > > as > >> > > > > >> > > > > > security. > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > Your previous round of comments have been > addressed. > >> > > > > >> > > > > > Command line tool has gone through: > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > HBASE-16620 Fix backup command-line tool usability > >> > issues > >> > > > > >> > > > > > HBASE-16655 hbase backup describe with incorrect > >> backup > >> > id > >> > > > > >> results > >> > > > > >> > in > >> > > > > >> > > > NPE > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > The updated doc has been attached to HBASE-16574. > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > Cheers > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Stack < > >> > st...@duboce.net> > >> > > > > >> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 7:43 AM, Ted Yu < > >> > > > yuzhih...@gmail.com > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Are there more (review) comments ? > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Are outstanding comments addressed? > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> I don't see answer to my 'is this > experimental/will > >> it > >> > be > >> > > > > >> marked > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> experimental' question. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> I ran into some issues trying to use the feature > and > >> > > > > suggested > >> > > > > >> > that > >> > > > > >> > > a > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> feature likes this needs polish else it'll just > rot, > >> > > > unused. > >> > > > > >> Has > >> > > > > >> > > > polish > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> been applied? All ready for another 'user' test? > >> > Suggest > >> > > > that > >> > > > > >> you > >> > > > > >> > > > update > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> here going forward for the benefit of those trying > >> to > >> > > > follow > >> > > > > >> along > >> > > > > >> > > and > >> > > > > >> > > > > who > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> are not watching JIRA change fly-by. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> It looks like doc got a revision -- I have to > check > >> -- > >> > to > >> > > > > take > >> > > > > >> on > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> suggestion made above but again, suggest, that > this > >> > > thread > >> > > > > gets > >> > > > > >> > > > updated. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Thanks, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> St.Ack > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Thanks > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:02 AM, Devaraj Das < > >> > > > > >> > > d...@hortonworks.com > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Just reviving this thread. Thanks Sean, Stack, > >> > Dima, > >> > > > and > >> > > > > >> > others > >> > > > > >> > > > for > >> > > > > >> > > > > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > thorough reviews and testing. Thanks Ted and > >> Vlad > >> > for > >> > > > > >> taking > >> > > > > >> > > care > >> > > > > >> > > > of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > feedback. Are we all good to do the merge now? > >> > Rather > >> > > > do > >> > > > > >> > sooner > >> > > > > >> > > > than > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > later. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > ________________________________________ > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > From: saint....@gmail.com < > saint....@gmail.com> > >> on > >> > > > > behalf > >> > > > > >> of > >> > > > > >> > > > Stack > >> > > > > >> > > > > < > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > st...@duboce.net> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Sent: Monday, September 12, 2016 1:18 PM > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > To: HBase Dev List > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Merge Backup / > >> Restore - > >> > > > Branch > >> > > > > >> > > > HBASE-7912 > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 12:19 PM, Ted Yu < > >> > > > > >> yuzhih...@gmail.com > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Mega patch (rev 18) is on HBASE-14123. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Please comment on HBASE-14123 on how you > want > >> to > >> > > > > review. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Yeah. That was my lost tab. Last rb was 6 > months > >> > ago. > >> > > > > >> Suggest > >> > > > > >> > > > > updating > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > it. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > RB is pretty good for review. Patch is only > >> 1.5M so > >> > > > > should > >> > > > > >> be > >> > > > > >> > > > fine. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > St.Ack > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Thanks > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Stack < > >> > > > > >> st...@duboce.net> > >> > > > > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On review of the 'patch', do I just > compare > >> the > >> > > > > branch > >> > > > > >> to > >> > > > > >> > > > > master or > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > is > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > there a megapatch posted somewhere (I > think > >> I > >> > saw > >> > > > one > >> > > > > >> but > >> > > > > >> > it > >> > > > > >> > > > > seemed > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > stale > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > and then I 'lost' the tab). Sorry for dumb > >> > > > question. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > St.Ack > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 12:01 PM, Stack < > >> > > > > >> st...@duboce.net > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > Late to the game. A few comments after > >> > > rereading > >> > > > > this > >> > > > > >> > > thread > >> > > > > >> > > > > as a > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > 'user'. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > + Before merge, a user-facing feature > like > >> > this > >> > > > > >> should > >> > > > > >> > > work > >> > > > > >> > > > > (If > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > this > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > is > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > "higher-bar > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > for new features", bring it on -- > smile). > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > + As a user, I tried the branch with > tools > >> > > after > >> > > > > >> > reviewing > >> > > > > >> > > > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > just-posted > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > doc. I had an 'interesting' experience > >> (left > >> > > > > >> comments up > >> > > > > >> > > on > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > issue). I > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > think > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > the tooling/doc. important to get right. > >> If > >> > it > >> > > > > breaks > >> > > > > >> > > easily > >> > > > > >> > > > > or > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> is > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > inconsistent (or lacks 'polish'), > >> operators > >> > > will > >> > > > > >> judge > >> > > > > >> > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > whole > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > backup/restore tooling chain as not > >> > trustworthy > >> > > > and > >> > > > > >> > > abandon > >> > > > > >> > > > > it. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Lets > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > not > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > have this happen to this feature. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > + Matteo's suggestion (with a helpful > >> starter > >> > > > list) > >> > > > > >> that > >> > > > > >> > > > there > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > needs > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > to > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > be > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > explicit qualification on what is > actually > >> > > being > >> > > > > >> > delivered > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > including a > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > listing of limitations (some look > serious > >> > such > >> > > as > >> > > > > >> data > >> > > > > >> > > bleed > >> > > > > >> > > > > from > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > other > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > regions in WALs, but maybe I don't care > >> for > >> > my > >> > > > use > >> > > > > >> > > case...) > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > needs > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > to > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > accompany the merge. Lets fold them into > >> the > >> > > user > >> > > > > >> doc. > >> > > > > >> > in > >> > > > > >> > > > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > technical > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > overview area as suggested so user > >> > expectations > >> > > > are > >> > > > > >> > > properly > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > managed > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > (otherwise, they expect the world and > will > >> > just > >> > > > > give > >> > > > > >> up > >> > > > > >> > > when > >> > > > > >> > > > > we > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > fall > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > short). Vladimir did a list of what is > in > >> > each > >> > > of > >> > > > > the > >> > > > > >> > > phases > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> above > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > which > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > would serve as a good start. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > + Is this feature 'experimental' (Matteo > >> asks > >> > > > > above). > >> > > > > >> > I'd > >> > > > > >> > > > > prefer > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> it > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > is > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > not. If it is, it should be labelled all > >> over > >> > > > that > >> > > > > >> it is > >> > > > > >> > > > so. I > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> see > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > current > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > state called out as a '... technical > >> preview > >> > > > > >> feature'. > >> > > > > >> > > Does > >> > > > > >> > > > > this > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > mean > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > not-for-users? > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > St.Ack > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 8:03 AM, Ted Yu > < > >> > > > > >> > > > yuzhih...@gmail.com> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Sean: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Do you have more comments ? > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Cheers > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 1:42 PM, > Vladimir > >> > > > Rodionov > >> > > > > < > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > vladrodio...@gmail.com > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Sean, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Backup/Restore can fail due to > various > >> > > > reasons: > >> > > > > >> > network > >> > > > > >> > > > > outage > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > (cluster > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > wide), various time-outs in HBase and > >> HDFS > >> > > > > layer, > >> > > > > >> M/R > >> > > > > >> > > > > failure > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > due > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > to > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> "HDFS > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > exceeded quota", user error (manual > >> > deletion > >> > > > of > >> > > > > >> data) > >> > > > > >> > > and > >> > > > > >> > > > > so > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> on > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > so > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > on. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> That > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > is impossible to enumerate all > possible > >> > > types > >> > > > of > >> > > > > >> > > failures > >> > > > > >> > > > > in a > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> distributed > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > system - that is not our goal/task. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > We focus completely on backup system > >> table > >> > > > > >> > consistency > >> > > > > >> > > > in a > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > presence > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> any > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > type of failure. That is what I call > >> > > > "tolerance > >> > > > > to > >> > > > > >> > > > > failures". > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > On a failure: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > BACKUP. All backup system information > >> > (prior > >> > > > to > >> > > > > >> > backup) > >> > > > > >> > > > > will > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> be > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > restored > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > and all temporary data, related to a > >> > failed > >> > > > > >> session, > >> > > > > >> > in > >> > > > > >> > > > > HDFS > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > will > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > be > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > deleted > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > RESTORE. We do not care about system > >> data, > >> > > > > because > >> > > > > >> > > > restore > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> does > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > not > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> change > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > it. Temporary data in HDFS will be > >> cleaned > >> > > up > >> > > > > and > >> > > > > >> > table > >> > > > > >> > > > > will > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> be > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > in a > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> state > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > back to where it was before operation > >> > > started. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > This is what user should expect in > case > >> > of a > >> > > > > >> failure. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > -Vlad > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > -Vlad > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 12:56 PM, Sean > >> > > Busbey < > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> bus...@apache.org > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Failing in a consistent way, with > >> docs > >> > > that > >> > > > > >> explain > >> > > > > >> > > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > various > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > expected failures would be > >> sufficient. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 12:16 PM, > >> > Vladimir > >> > > > > >> Rodionov > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > <vladrodio...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Do not worry Sean, doc is coming > >> today > >> > > as > >> > > > a > >> > > > > >> > preview > >> > > > > >> > > > and > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> our > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > writer > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Frank > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > will be working on a putting it > >> into > >> > > > Apache > >> > > > > >> > repo. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Timeline > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > depends > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> on > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Franks schedule but I hope we > will > >> get > >> > > it > >> > > > > >> rather > >> > > > > >> > > > sooner > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> than > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > later. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > As for failure testing, we are > >> > focusing > >> > > > only > >> > > > > >> on a > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> consistent > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > state > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > backup system data in a presence > of > >> > any > >> > > > type > >> > > > > >> of > >> > > > > >> > > > > failures, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> We > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > are > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > not > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > going > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > to implement anything more > >> "fancy", > >> > > than > >> > > > > >> that. > >> > > > > >> > We > >> > > > > >> > > > > allow > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > both: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> backup > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > and > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > restore to fail. What we do not > >> allow > >> > is > >> > > > to > >> > > > > >> have > >> > > > > >> > > > system > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> data > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> corrupted. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Will it suffice for you? Do you > >> have > >> > any > >> > > > > other > >> > > > > >> > > > > concerns, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> you > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > want > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> us to > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > address? > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > -Vlad > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 10:56 AM, > >> Sean > >> > > > > Busbey < > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > bus...@apache.org > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> "docs will come to Apache soon" > >> does > >> > > not > >> > > > > >> address > >> > > > > >> > > my > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> concern > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > around > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > docs > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > at > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> all, unless said docs have > already > >> > made > >> > > > it > >> > > > > >> into > >> > > > > >> > > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> project > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > repo. I > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > don't > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> want third party resources for > >> using > >> > a > >> > > > > major > >> > > > > >> and > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> important > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > feature > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> project, I want us to provide > end > >> > users > >> > > > > with > >> > > > > >> > what > >> > > > > >> > > > they > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> need > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > to > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > get > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > job > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> done. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> I see some calls for patience on > >> the > >> > > > > failure > >> > > > > >> > > > testing, > >> > > > > >> > > > > but > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> appeal > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > to > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > us > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> having done a bad job of > requiring > >> > > proper > >> > > > > >> tests > >> > > > > >> > of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> previous > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> features > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > just > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> makes me more concerned about > not > >> > > getting > >> > > > > >> them > >> > > > > >> > > > here. I > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > don't > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > want > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> to > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > set > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> yet another bad example that > will > >> > then > >> > > be > >> > > > > >> > pointed > >> > > > > >> > > to > >> > > > > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > future. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> On Sep 8, 2016 10:50, "Ted Yu" < > >> > > > > >> > > yuzhih...@gmail.com > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > Is there any concern which is > >> not > >> > > > > >> addressed ? > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > Do we need another Vote > thread ? > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > Thanks > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:21 > AM, > >> > > Andrew > >> > > > > >> > Purtell < > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> apurt...@apache.org > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > Vlad, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > I apologize for using the > term > >> > > > > >> 'half-baked' > >> > > > > >> > > in a > >> > > > > >> > > > > way > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > that > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > could > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > seem a > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > description of HBASE-7912. I > >> > meant > >> > > > that > >> > > > > >> as a > >> > > > > >> > > > > general > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> hypothetical. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 9:36 > >> AM, > >> > > > > Vladimir > >> > > > > >> > > > Rodionov > >> > > > > >> > > > > < > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > vladrodio...@gmail.com> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >> I'm not sure that > "There > >> is > >> > > > > already > >> > > > > >> > lots > >> > > > > >> > > of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > half-baked > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> code > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > in > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > branch, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > so what's the harm in > adding > >> > > more?" > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > I meant - not production - > >> > ready > >> > > > yet. > >> > > > > >> This > >> > > > > >> > > is > >> > > > > >> > > > > 2.0 > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > development > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > branch > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > and, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > hence many features are in > >> > works, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > not being tested well etc. > >> I do > >> > > not > >> > > > > >> > consider > >> > > > > >> > > > > backup > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > as > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > half > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > baked > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > feature - > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > it has passed our internal > >> QA > >> > and > >> > > > has > >> > > > > >> very > >> > > > > >> > > > good > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> doc, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > which > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > we > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > will > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > provide > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > to Apache shortly. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > -Vlad > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at > 9:13 > >> AM, > >> > > > > Andrew > >> > > > > >> > > > Purtell < > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > apurt...@apache.org> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > We shouldn't admit half > >> baked > >> > > > > changes > >> > > > > >> > that > >> > > > > >> > > > > won't > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> be > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> finished. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> However > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > in > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > this case the crew > >> working on > >> > > > this > >> > > > > >> > feature > >> > > > > >> > > > are > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> long > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > timers > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> and > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > less > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > likely > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > than just about anyone > to > >> > leave > >> > > > > >> > something > >> > > > > >> > > > in a > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> half > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > baked > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > state. Of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > course > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > there is no guarantee > how > >> > > > anything > >> > > > > >> will > >> > > > > >> > > turn > >> > > > > >> > > > > out, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > but I > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > am > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > willing > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> to > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > take > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > a little on faith if > they > >> > feel > >> > > > > their > >> > > > > >> > best > >> > > > > >> > > > path > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > forward > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > now > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> is > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > to > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > merge > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > to > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > trunk. I only wish I had > >> > > > bandwidth > >> > > > > to > >> > > > > >> > have > >> > > > > >> > > > > done > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > some > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > real > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > kicking > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > tires by now. Maybe this > >> > week. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > (Yes, I'm using some of > >> that > >> > > time > >> > > > > for > >> > > > > >> > this > >> > > > > >> > > > > email > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > :-) > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > but > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > I > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > type > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > fast.) > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > That said, I would like > to > >> > > > agitate > >> > > > > >> for > >> > > > > >> > > > making > >> > > > > >> > > > > 2.0 > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > more > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > real > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > and > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> spend > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > some > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > time on it now that I'm > >> > winding > >> > > > > down > >> > > > > >> > with > >> > > > > >> > > > > 0.98. I > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > think > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> that > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > means > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > branching for 2.0 real > >> soon > >> > now > >> > > > and > >> > > > > >> even > >> > > > > >> > > > > evicting > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > things > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> from > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > 2.0 > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > branch > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > that aren't finished or > >> > stable, > >> > > > > >> leaving > >> > > > > >> > > them > >> > > > > >> > > > > only > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > once > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> again > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > in > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > master > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > branch. Or, maybe just > >> > evicting > >> > > > > them. > >> > > > > >> > > Let's > >> > > > > >> > > > > take > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> it > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > case > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > by > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > case. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > I think this feature can > >> come > >> > > in > >> > > > > >> > > relatively > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> safely. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > As > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> added > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > insurance, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > let's admit the > >> possibility > >> > it > >> > > > > could > >> > > > > >> be > >> > > > > >> > > > > reverted > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> on > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > 2.0 > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > branch > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> if > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > folks > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > working on stabilizing > 2.0 > >> > > decide > >> > > > > to > >> > > > > >> > evict > >> > > > > >> > > > it > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > because > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > it > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > is > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > unfinished > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > or > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > unstable, because that > >> > > certainly > >> > > > > can > >> > > > > >> > > > happen. I > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > would > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> expect if > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > talk > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > like > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > that starts, we'd get > help > >> > > > > finishing > >> > > > > >> or > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> stabilizing > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > what's > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > under > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > discussion > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > for revert. Or, we'd > have > >> a > >> > > > revert. > >> > > > > >> > Either > >> > > > > >> > > > way > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > outcome > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> is > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > acceptable. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at > >> 8:56 > >> > AM, > >> > > > > Dima > >> > > > > >> > > Spivak > >> > > > > >> > > > < > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > dimaspi...@apache.org > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > I'm not sure that > >> "There is > >> > > > > already > >> > > > > >> > lots > >> > > > > >> > > > of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > half-baked > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> code > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > in > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > branch, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > so what's the harm in > >> > adding > >> > > > > more?" > >> > > > > >> > is a > >> > > > > >> > > > > good > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > code > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > commit > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > philosophy > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > for > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > a > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > fault-tolerant > >> distributed > >> > > data > >> > > > > >> store. > >> > > > > >> > > ;) > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > More seriously, a lack > >> of > >> > > test > >> > > > > >> > coverage > >> > > > > >> > > > for > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > existing > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > features > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > shouldn't > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > be > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > used as justification > >> for > >> > > > > >> introducing > >> > > > > >> > > new > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > features > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > with > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > same > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > shortcomings. > >> Ultimately, > >> > > it's > >> > > > > the > >> > > > > >> end > >> > > > > >> > > > user > >> > > > > >> > > > > who > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > will > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > feel > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> pain, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > so > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > shouldn't we do > >> everything > >> > we > >> > > > can > >> > > > > >> to > >> > > > > >> > > > > mitigate > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > that? > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > -Dima > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at > >> 8:46 > >> > > AM, > >> > > > > >> > Vladimir > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Rodionov < > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > vladrodio...@gmail.com> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > Sean, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > * have docs > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > Agree. We have a doc > >> and > >> > > > backup > >> > > > > >> is > >> > > > > >> > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > most > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > documented > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > feature > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > :), > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > we > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > will > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > release it shortly > to > >> > > Apache. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > * have sunny-day > >> > > correctness > >> > > > > >> tests > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > Feature has close > to > >> 60 > >> > > test > >> > > > > >> cases, > >> > > > > >> > > > which > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> run > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > for > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> approx > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > 30 > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> min. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > We > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > can > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > add more, if > >> community do > >> > > not > >> > > > > >> mind > >> > > > > >> > :) > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > * have > >> > > > > >> > correctness-in-face-of-failure > >> > > > > >> > > > > tests > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > Any examples of > these > >> > tests > >> > > > in > >> > > > > >> > > existing > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > features? > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > In > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > works, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > we > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > have a > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > clear > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > understanding of > what > >> > > should > >> > > > be > >> > > > > >> done > >> > > > > >> > > by > >> > > > > >> > > > > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > time > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > 2.0 > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> release. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > That is very close > >> goal > >> > for > >> > > > us, > >> > > > > >> to > >> > > > > >> > > > verify > >> > > > > >> > > > > IT > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > monkey > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > for > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> existing > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > code. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > * don't rely on > things > >> > > > outside > >> > > > > of > >> > > > > >> > > HBase > >> > > > > >> > > > > for > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > normal > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > operation > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > (okay > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > for > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > advanced operation) > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > We do not. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > Enormous time has > been > >> > > spent > >> > > > > >> already > >> > > > > >> > > on > >> > > > > >> > > > > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > development > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > and > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > testing > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > feature, it has > passed > >> > our > >> > > > > >> internal > >> > > > > >> > > > tests > >> > > > > >> > > > > and > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > many > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> rounds > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> code > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > reviews > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > by HBase committers. > >> We > >> > do > >> > > > not > >> > > > > >> mind > >> > > > > >> > if > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> someone > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > from > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> HBase > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > community > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > (outside of HW) will > >> > review > >> > > > the > >> > > > > >> > code, > >> > > > > >> > > > but > >> > > > > >> > > > > it > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > will > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> probably > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> takes > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > forever > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > to > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > wait for volunteer?, > >> the > >> > > > > feature > >> > > > > >> is > >> > > > > >> > > > quite > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> large > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > (1MB+ > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> cumulative > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > patch) > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > 2.0 branch is full > of > >> > half > >> > > > > baked > >> > > > > >> > > > features, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> most > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > them > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > are > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > in > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > active > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > development, > >> therefore I > >> > am > >> > > > not > >> > > > > >> > > > following > >> > > > > >> > > > > you > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > here, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Sean? > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Why > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > HBASE-7912 > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > is > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > not good enough yet > >> to be > >> > > > > >> integrated > >> > > > > >> > > > into > >> > > > > >> > > > > 2.0 > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > branch? > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > -Vlad > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 > at > >> > 8:23 > >> > > > AM, > >> > > > > >> Sean > >> > > > > >> > > > > Busbey < > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > bus...@apache.org > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 6, > 2016 > >> at > >> > > > 10:36 > >> > > > > >> PM, > >> > > > > >> > > Josh > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Elser < > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > josh.el...@gmail.com> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > So, the answer > to > >> > > Sean's > >> > > > > >> > original > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> question > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > is > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > "as > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > robust as > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > snapshots > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > presently are"? > >> > > > > >> (independence of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > backup/restore > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > failure > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > tolerance > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > from > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > snapshot failure > >> > > > tolerance) > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > Is this just a > >> > question > >> > > > WRT > >> > > > > >> > > context > >> > > > > >> > > > of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > change, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> or > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > is it > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > means > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > for a > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > veto > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > from you, Sean? > >> Just > >> > > > trying > >> > > > > >> to > >> > > > > >> > > make > >> > > > > >> > > > > sure > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > I'm > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> following > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> along > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > adequately. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > I'd say ATM I'm > -0, > >> > > > bordering > >> > > > > >> on > >> > > > > >> > -1 > >> > > > > >> > > > but > >> > > > > >> > > > > not > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > for > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> reasons > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > I > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > can > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > articulate > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > well. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > Here's an attempt. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > We've been trying > to > >> > > move, > >> > > > > as a > >> > > > > >> > > > > community, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > towards > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > minimizing > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > risk > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > to > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > downstream folks > by > >> > > getting > >> > > > > >> > > "complete > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> enough > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > for > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > use" > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > gates > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> in > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > place > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > before we > introduce > >> new > >> > > > > >> features. > >> > > > > >> > > This > >> > > > > >> > > > > was > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > spurred > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> by a > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > some > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > features > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > getting in > >> half-baked > >> > and > >> > > > > never > >> > > > > >> > > making > >> > > > > >> > > > > it > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> to > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > "can > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> really > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > use" > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > status > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > (I'm thinking of > >> > > > distributed > >> > > > > >> log > >> > > > > >> > > > replay > >> > > > > >> > > > > and > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> zk-less > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > assignment > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > stuff, I don't > >> recall > >> > if > >> > > > > there > >> > > > > >> was > >> > > > > >> > > > > more). > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > The gates, > >> generally, > >> > > > > included > >> > > > > >> > > things > >> > > > > >> > > > > like: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > * have docs > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > * have sunny-day > >> > > > correctness > >> > > > > >> tests > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > * have > >> > > > > >> > > correctness-in-face-of-failure > >> > > > > >> > > > > tests > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > * don't rely on > >> things > >> > > > > outside > >> > > > > >> of > >> > > > > >> > > > HBase > >> > > > > >> > > > > for > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > normal > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > operation > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > (okay > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > for > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > advanced > operation) > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > As an example, we > >> kept > >> > > the > >> > > > > MOB > >> > > > > >> > work > >> > > > > >> > > > off > >> > > > > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> a > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > branch > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> and > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > out > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > master > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > until it could > pass > >> > these > >> > > > > >> > criteria. > >> > > > > >> > > > The > >> > > > > >> > > > > big > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > exemption > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > we've > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> had > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > to > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > this was the > >> > hbase-spark > >> > > > > >> > > integration, > >> > > > > >> > > > > where > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > we > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > all > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > agreed > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > it > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > could > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > land in master > >> because > >> > it > >> > > > was > >> > > > > >> very > >> > > > > >> > > > well > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > isolated > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > (the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > slide > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > away > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > from > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > including docs as > a > >> > > > > first-class > >> > > > > >> > part > >> > > > > >> > > > of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > building > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > up > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> that > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > integration > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > has led me to > doubt > >> the > >> > > > > wisdom > >> > > > > >> of > >> > > > > >> > > this > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > decision). > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > We've also been > >> > treating > >> > > > > >> inclusion > >> > > > > >> > > in > >> > > > > >> > > > a > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > "probably > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> will > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > be > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > released > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > to > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > downstream" > branches > >> > as a > >> > > > > >> higher > >> > > > > >> > > bar, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > requiring > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > * don't moderately > >> > impact > >> > > > > >> > > performance > >> > > > > >> > > > > when > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> feature > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > isn't > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> in > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > use > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > * don't severely > >> impact > >> > > > > >> > performance > >> > > > > >> > > > when > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > feature > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> is > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > in > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> use > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > * either > >> default-to-on > >> > or > >> > > > > show > >> > > > > >> > > enough > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> demand > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > to > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> believe > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > a > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > non-trivial > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > number of folks > will > >> > turn > >> > > > the > >> > > > > >> > > feature > >> > > > > >> > > > on > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > The above has kept > >> MOB > >> > > and > >> > > > > >> > > hbase-spark > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > integration > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> out > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > branch-1, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > presumably while > >> > they've > >> > > > > >> "gotten > >> > > > > >> > > more > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> stable" > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > in > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> master > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > from > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > odd > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > vendor inclusion. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > Are we going to > >> have a > >> > > 2.0 > >> > > > > >> release > >> > > > > >> > > > > before > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > end > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> year? > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > We're > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > coming up on 1.5 > >> years > >> > > > since > >> > > > > >> the > >> > > > > >> > > > > release of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > version > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> 1.0; > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> seems > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > like > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > it's about time, > >> > though I > >> > > > > >> haven't > >> > > > > >> > > seen > >> > > > > >> > > > > any > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > concrete > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > plans > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> this > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > year. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > Presuming we are > >> going > >> > to > >> > > > > have > >> > > > > >> one > >> > > > > >> > > by > >> > > > > >> > > > > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> end > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > of > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > year, it > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > seems a > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > bit close to still > >> be > >> > > > adding > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > >> > > > > "features > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > that > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > need > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > maturing" > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > on > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > the > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > branch. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > The lack of a > >> concrete > >> > > plan > >> > > > > for > >> > > > > >> > 2.0 > >> > > > > >> > > > > keeps > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> me > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > from > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > considering > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > these > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > things blocker at > >> the > >> > > > moment. > >> > > > > >> But > >> > > > > >> > I > >> > > > > >> > > > know > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > first > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > hand > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> how > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > much > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > trouble > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > folks have had > with > >> > other > >> > > > > >> features > >> > > > > >> > > > that > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> have > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > gone > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> into > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > downstream > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > facing releases > >> without > >> > > > > >> robustness > >> > > > > >> > > > > checks > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > (i.e. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > replication), > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > and > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > I'm > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > concerned about > what > >> > > we're > >> > > > > >> setting > >> > > > > >> > > up > >> > > > > >> > > > if > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> 2.0 > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > goes > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > out > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > with > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> this > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > feature in its > >> current > >> > > > state. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > -- > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > Best regards, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > - Andy > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > Problems worthy of > attack > >> > prove > >> > > > > their > >> > > > > >> > > worth > >> > > > > >> > > > by > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > hitting > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> back. - > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Piet > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > Hein > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > (via Tom White) > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > -- > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > Best regards, > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > - Andy > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > Problems worthy of attack > >> prove > >> > > their > >> > > > > >> worth > >> > > > > >> > by > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> hitting > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > back. > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > - > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Piet > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> Hein > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > (via Tom White) > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > -- > >> > > > > >> > > > > busbey > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> > >> -- Appy > >> > > > > >
