Hi Stack Do you want HBASE-18995 before the alpha-4 (REmoving exposed internal APIs from CellUtil)? Because you had mentioned no more API changes. If so I will start making changes and put up a patch ASAP.
Regards Ram On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 3:22 AM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote: > > > +1 > > > > I was trying to work on helping out on the outstanding alpha-4 stuff last > > week -- will be continuing to try to do the same this week. > > > > If you need any help, Stack, or if others need reviews where I haven't > > noticed on my own: feel free to @mention me. > > > > > Thanks for the offer Josh. All items seem assigned and are being actively > worked on. If you get a moment, reviews by you (or anyone else) helps move > the process along. > > We need to merge in HBASE-18410 branch to pick up Filter improvements. Then > HBASE-13346 can go in. > > You are already helping out on HBASE-18906, thanks. Looks like that will be > addressed by other alpha-4s about to land. > > St.Ack > TODOs: https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/HBASE/versions/12341594 > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/23/17 12:53 PM, Stack wrote: > > > >> (Reviving this thread) > >> > >> Lets push out alpha-4 this week. Alpha-4 is the release that has the > >> refactor of the Coprocessor API shutting down access to internals marked > >> InterfaceAudience.Private. > >> > >> The outstanding list is here: > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/HBASE/versions/12341594 > >> > >> Please push in anything marked alpha-4 that belongs to you. > >> > >> If issue, talk out loud on this thread. If you need a review to land an > >> item, shout on the issue and here; we'll help you out. > >> > >> As is, items are coming along nicely I'd say. We need to merge the > filter > >> branch -- HBASE-18410 -- so APIs are finished for hbase2. > >> > >> Post alpha-4, we'll have to hunt down our downstreamers and help them > test > >> on top of alpha-4 so rolling into beta-1, we have confidence our > >> downstreamers know what to expect (or we discover what we missed BEFORE > we > >> beta-1). > >> > >> Thanks for time, > >> S > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> I'll put up an alpha3 RC Monday, probably Monday night. That should be > >>> time, if we all sprint, for the public-facing API fixes to be done. > >>> > >>> I had a bunch of Coprocessor refactor and fixup scheduled for alpha3 > but > >>> it is plain that more time is needed (in spite of valiant effort so far > >>> by > >>> Anoop, Duo, Appy, etc.). Therefore, lets run a 2.0.0-alpha-4 whose > theme > >>> is > >>> "Coprocessor Fixup". Hopefully we can put an alpha-4 up by the > following > >>> week. > >>> > >>> We should then be ready for beta (beta == no new features, no API > >>> changes, > >>> just fixes). > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> St.Ack > >>> > >>> > >>> On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> I put up the hbase-2.0.0-alpha2 release candidate. Please vote on it. > >>>> > >>>> For hbase-2.0.0-alpha3, the theme is solidifying API. I hope to get a > >>>> release out in the next week or so. > >>>> > >>>> I did a weeding of 2.0.0 issues over the last day. If folks are > >>>> interested in helping out, below are the items I think we need done > for > >>>> alpha3 (below are at least 'Critical' status, are API possibly > altering > >>>> items, and are absent those JIRAs that are making active progress, > i.e. > >>>> the > >>>> HTD/HCD revamp by Chia-Ping Tsai). A project NOT listed that needs > >>>> doing is > >>>> what Andrew did comparing 1.3. and 1.4 APIs > >>>> > >>>> * HBASE-18622 Mitigate compatibility concerns between branch-1 and > >>>> branch-2 > >>>> This is to do what Andrew did between 1.3 and 1.4 branches only do it > >>>> between branch-1 and branch-2. > >>>> > >>>> * HBASE-10462 Recategorize some of the client facing Public / Private > >>>> interfaces > >>>> This one is almost done. It could do with a finish, attention to the > >>>> items in last comment, and then our codebase could do with another > sweep > >>>> after the spirit of this issue since a bunch has gone in since the > pass > >>>> that was the basis of this issue. > >>>> > >>>> * HBASE-10504 Define Replication Interface > >>>> I was going to take a crack at this as part of the revamp forced by > >>>> 'HBASE-15982 Interface ReplicationEndpoint extends Guava's Service' > but > >>>> if > >>>> anyone else is interested, be my guest. > >>>> > >>>> * HBASE-14996 Some more API cleanup for 2.0 > >>>> Has a bunch of subtasks, some of which are being worked on. Needs > >>>> finishing. > >>>> > >>>> * HBASE-14998 Unify synchronous and asynchronous methods in Admin and > >>>> cleanup > >>>> Needs a pass. Small issue I think. Could also look at new AsyncClient > >>>> and > >>>> make sure symmetry. > >>>> > >>>> * HBASE-15607 Remove PB references from Admin for 2.0 > >>>> Predicated on result of an ongoing DISCUSSION thread but needs to be > >>>> done. > >>>> > >>>> Rolling upgrade will have implications for our API. Would be good to > try > >>>> it and figure what needs fixup (as said above, according to trial by > >>>> Sean, > >>>> we might not be too bad here): > >>>> * HBASE-16060 1.x clients cannot access table state talking to 2.0 > >>>> cluster > >>>> * HBASE-16550 Procedure v2 - Add AM compatibility for 2.x Master and > 1.x > >>>> RSs; i.e. support Rolling Upgrade from hbase-1 to -2. > >>>> > >>>> * HBASE-17442 Move most of the replication related classes to > >>>> hbase-server package > >>>> The above would be good to do generally but it may make for ripples in > >>>> API so would be good to do now. > >>>> > >>>> * HBASE-18106 Redo ProcedureInfo and LockInfo > >>>> Balazs is working on this. The idea is that we avoid adding two new > >>>> types > >>>> to our API, two types that are nought but curtailed, read-only views > on > >>>> internals. Input if you have time appreciated. > >>>> > >>>> * HBASE-18596 A hbase1 cluster should be able to replicate to a hbase2 > >>>> cluster; verify > >>>> Esteban is looking at this one > >>>> > >>>> * HBASE-9417 SecureBulkLoadEndpoint should be folded in core > >>>> * HBASE-17143 Scan improvement > >>>> > >>>> Our Coprocessor Interface needs a tough edit. It exposes > implementations > >>>> marked audience Private and returns implementations rather than > >>>> Interfaces. > >>>> In a few locations, we allow returning an alternate implementation > >>>> altogether which is probably something we don't want a CP doing. To > that > >>>> end, the following issues started by Duo and Anoop need to be taken to > >>>> the > >>>> finish line; ideally they'd have an owner: > >>>> > >>>> * HBASE-18169 Coprocessor fix and cleanup before 2.0.0 release <= The > >>>> umbrella issue. > >>>> * HBASE-18298 RegionServerServices Interface cleanup for CP expose > >>>> * HBASE-16769 Deprecate/remove PB references from MasterObserver and > >>>> RegionServerObserver > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Nice-to-haves: > >>>> > >>>> * HBASE-15284 Make TimeRange constructors IA.Private and remove unused > >>>> TimeRange constructors > >>>> > >>>> * HBASE-10944 Remove all kv.getBuffer() and kv.getRow() references > >>>> existing in the code > >>>> This is the end of an old long-running project moving up on to Cell > >>>> Interface. We think it is done but for a few little items (deprecate > KV > >>>> methods in MR and provide Cell versions instead...) > >>>> > >>>> * HBASE-13271 Table#puts(List<Put>) operation is indeterminate; needs > >>>> fixing > >>>> > >>>> * HBASE-13346 Clean up Filter package for post 1.0 > >>>> > >>>> * HBASE-14255 Simplify Cell creation post 1.0 > >>>> * HBASE-14997 > >>>> Move compareOp and Comparators out of filter to client package > >>>> > >>>> * HBASE-13740 Stop using Hadoop private interfaces > >>>> > >>>> What about: > >>>> > >>>> * HBASE-18601 Remove Htrace 3.2 > >>>> As has been noted, the HTrace API is our 'trace' API. > >>>> > >>>> If interested in any of the above and you need a legup, just ask in > the > >>>> issue and I'll be by.... > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> St.Ack > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Heads-up: > >>>>> > >>>>> I'm about to put up an hbase-2.0.0-alpha2 Release Candidate. Theme is > >>>>> updated dependencies, reliance on relocated popular libs (guava, > netty, > >>>>> protobuf), purge of checked-in generated src, and > >>>>> master-carries-no-regions > >>>>> by default. > >>>>> > >>>>> alpha3 I hope will follow soon after (end-of-August?). Its theme will > >>>>> be > >>>>> settling the APIs and compatibility (At first blush, we are not > >>>>> looking too > >>>>> bad; our Sean ran some tests over weekend that have hbase-1 client > >>>>> running > >>>>> against an hbase-2 cluster....). The Coprocessor Interface revamp > >>>>> should be > >>>>> done by alpha3 (i.e. returning Interfaces rather than > Implementations, > >>>>> and > >>>>> our shutdown of CPs accessing classes in hbase marked > >>>>> InterfaceAudience). > >>>>> We'll also have purged thirdparty classes from our API; e.g. guava > 0.12 > >>>>> Service showing through in our replication API and protobufs in Admin > >>>>> Interface. On alpha3, we will have to do a bunch of outreach to make > >>>>> sure > >>>>> our downstreamers are up on what is coming down the pipe. > >>>>> > >>>>> Beta1 in mid-September? > >>>>> > >>>>> I encourage you to check out the items marked for hbase2: > >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/HBASE/versions/12327188 Edit > >>>>> as > >>>>> you see appropriate. Punt if you know the JIRA will not get any > >>>>> attention > >>>>> in next month or so. > >>>>> > >>>>> A bunch of issues marked blocker are unassigned. I'll leave them as > is > >>>>> another while but I'll boot them soon. > >>>>> > >>>>> While I have your attention: > >>>>> > >>>>> + I think we should leave thrift version at 0.9.3. Moving hbase > thrift > >>>>> to 0.10.0 will break existing clients. The change is easy enough if > >>>>> folks > >>>>> need to upgrade their hbase thrift. See HBASE-18591. > >>>>> + Upgrade from 0.94 is disallowed. You have to get to 1.0 first > >>>>> (0.98?). > >>>>> > >>>>> St.Ack > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 9:43 AM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 7/31/17 9:00 AM, Stack wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Josh Elser<[email protected]> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> ... > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I like the idea of this also hitting 2.0 as it would make the > >>>>>>>>> feature a > >>>>>>>>> bit more "real", but am obviously a little nervous (I have no > >>>>>>>>> reason > >>>>>>>>> to be > >>>>>>>>> nervous though). I am pretty happy with the feature in terms of > how > >>>>>>>>> much it > >>>>>>>>> is covered via testing. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17748 > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Sounds good to me. Whats involved? Backport? If so, +1 Josh. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Last think on space quota says that need doc too. See 'Space > Quota' > >>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>> here: > >>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9i > >>>>>>>> Eu_ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit#heading=h.wuw3a6jukzo5 > >>>>>>>> Does this little section need an update Josh? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>> S > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Yep, just a couple of cherry-picks. Good test coverage and some > docs > >>>>>>> already included for 17748. Happy to put that on my plate if > you're > >>>>>>> good > >>>>>>> with it. I can reasonably assume that no one is against it :) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I think I had knocked out docs for the "phase 1" stuff before we > >>>>>>> merged it in from the original feature branch. I'll double check > and > >>>>>>> update > >>>>>>> the gdoc. Perhaps this was just a timing thing. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks Josh, > >>>>>> S > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> >
