On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Enis Söztutar <enis....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Stack for the nice writeup. > > I think we should shoot for an alpha release sooner than 2 months. It gives > a test target, and will be a great way to test-drive and push for the > release vehicles (packing, hadoop3, license issues, etc) and also create > some well-deserved excitement. I can help with that. > > Looking at the list of items in the Core and Tasks (with an eye on the concurrent thread "A suggestion for releasing major versions faster...") , it might be time for a branch -- end of next week or better, the end-of-the-month? We could push an Alpha soon after? As I see it, the blockers on hbase2 are: + AMv2/Pv2. Its been trickling in for a year or more now. We are close to throwing the switch on move up on to new AMv2, cornerstone of 1M-regions effort and fast assignment. There'll be fall-out but we'll be up on a more solid intent-log, no-zk basis. Could put this off to hbase-3 I suppose but its all-over the code base half-done; it'll rot if we just leave it. + Rolling Restart from branch-1 to branch-2. Has to work. Can't have a singularity. No work done. + Master carrying hbase:meta. Currently it does by default. We have a running thread on pros and cons still to finish. If master is to carry hbase:meta, there is work to do. If not, there is work to do. + Updating dependencies and shading the critical likely-clashing libs (netty, guava). No work done. Other super important stuff that we should fix (criticals) but that don't warrant hold-up of the release are: + Narrative around client operation timeout (Phil Yang doing great work here rationalizing our timeout mess) + Perf (async hdfs client, netty rpcserver, G1GC default, etc.) and updating defaults. + Hadoop3 (EC, etc.) I don't make mention of criticals in above list that I have confidence will land in time (inmemory compaction, the offheaping work). I leave aside criticals that are not getting love (hbase-replication, FS Redo, though it seems like hbase-spark might see some uptake -- thanks Jerry and crew). A major release is an opportunity for big changes. It'd be a pity if we missed this window to first-class sequenceid throughout or come up on HLC, at least for new tables, or split hbase:meta but as seems to be the push over in the concurrent thread, these can wait for hbase3. St.Ack 1. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9iEu_ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit#heading=h.jxxznc91m047 > Enis > > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > > > > > ... > > > + No recent work on core decision tasks (clean-up narrative around RPC > > > timeout, hbase:meta on master or not, batch vs partial semantic, etc.) > > > > > > > > Correction. batch vs partial semantic is making goodprogress > (HBASE-15484). > > S > > > > > > > > > > > Non-criticals/Ancillaries > > > > > > + Async client and C++ client are both making good progress. Not done. > > > + Backup/Restore is making good progress > > > + RegionServer-based assignment got a bunch of scrutiny lately and is > now > > > 'done'. > > > + FileSystem Quotas making good progress. > > > > > > I'm seeing another month or two at least before branch and probably > > three. > > > See doc [1] for more detail. > > > > > > Yours, > > > St.Ack > > > > > > 1. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9 > > > iEu_ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit# > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 9:16 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > > > > > >> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 11:49 PM, ramkrishna vasudevan < > > >> ramkrishna.s.vasude...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Hi All > > >>> > > >>> Thanks Stack. The doc looks great. The offheap write path/read path- > I > > >>> think from the read path perspective we have some good feedback from > > >>> Alibaba folks. > > >>> > > >> > > >> Agree. > > >> > > >> > > >>> The write path subtasks are all done. We are currently working on > some > > >>> perf > > >>> results that would help us to come up with some docs that suggests > best > > >>> configs and tunings for the offheap write path configurations. > > >>> > > >>> > > >> Thanks Ram. Would be good to hear what configs you are looking to > > >> implement as default so those of us also starting to test can enable > > them > > >> to get you feedback. > > >> > > >> Also suggest you fill the above short status into the doc (You are > > >> keeping up full status elsewhere). I've been trying to add status as I > > see > > >> it popping up; e.g. Enis did a nice state-of-the-C++ client recently > up > > in > > >> JIRA and I added pointer to the 2.0 doc. Anyone else working on 2.0 > > >> features, would be good if you kept a short state in this overview > doc; > > >> just ask for edit perms. > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > >> St.Ack > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>> > > >>> Regards > > >>> Ram > > >>> > > >>> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 5:37 AM, Andrew Purtell < > > >>> andrew.purt...@gmail.com> > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> > I'm interested in both split meta and rsgroups. Good news. I'd like > > to > > >>> > help test. > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > On Jan 18, 2017, at 2:53 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > > >>> > > > > >>> > >> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 2:26 PM, Francis Liu <tof...@apache.org > > > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> Hi Stack, > > >>> > >> I'd like to get split meta (HBASE-112288) in 2.x as well. I can > > >>> have a > > >>> > 2.x > > >>> > >> draft up next week. Was working on the 1.x version internally. > > >>> > >> Also if you'd like I can be the owner for rsgroups as well. > > >>> > >> Thanks,Francis > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> I added splitting meta as a possible and had you and I as owner > on > > >>> > > rsgroups (I was doing to do a bit of testing and doc for this > > >>> feature). > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Would love to see splittable meta show up. Needs to be rolling > > >>> > upgradeable > > >>> > > though. Lets chat up on the issue. > > >>> > > St.Ack > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> On Wednesday, January 18, 2017 11:29 AM, Stack < > > st...@duboce.net > > >>> > > > >>> > >> wrote: > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> Done Thiruvel (And thanks Guanghao for adding > hbase-replication). > > >>> > >> St.Ack > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 6:11 PM, Thiruvel Thirumoolan < > > >>> > >> thiru...@yahoo-inc.com.invalid> wrote: > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >>> Hi Stack, > > >>> > >>> I would like to add Favored Nodes to the ancillary section. > > >>> > >>> HBASE-15531: Favored Nodes EnhancementsStatus: Active > > >>> > development.Owner: > > >>> > >>> Thiruvel Thanks!-Thiruvel > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> On Monday, January 16, 2017 2:10 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net > > > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 3:01 AM, Guanghao Zhang < > > >>> zghao...@gmail.com> > > >>> > >>> wrote: > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>>> For 6. Significant contirbs in master only, there are some > > issues > > >>> > about > > >>> > >>>> replication operations routed through master. They are > sub-task > > >>> > >>>> of HBASE-10504. And there are other umbrella issue for > > >>> replication, > > >>> > >> like > > >>> > >>>> HBase-14379 Replication V2 and HBASE-15867 Moving HBase > > >>> Replication > > >>> > >>>> tracking from Zookeeper to HBase. So i thought we can add a > new > > >>> > section > > >>> > >>>> named > > >>> > >>>> hbase-replication to possible 2.0.0s. This will help us to > track > > >>> the > > >>> > >>> state. > > >>> > >>>> Thanks. > > >>> > >>>> > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> Thanks Guanghao Zhang. I agree. I made you an editor. If you > want > > >>> to > > >>> > >> have a > > >>> > >>> go at a first cut, be my guest. If nothing done in the next day > > or > > >>> so, > > >>> > >> I'll > > >>> > >>> add this section Sir. > > >>> > >>> Thanks, > > >>> > >>> M > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > > > >>> > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
