Josh - Do you want to kick off a bunch of QA runs? (Do you know how to do it directly on the jenkins job, so you don't have to bother with JIRA uploads)
If you're busy, then I can make time tomorrow or Sunday to kick off jobs, but I want to make sure we're not duplicating effort and jenkins cycles. On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 7:10 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote: > My turn to bump ;) > > By my take: HBASE-18770 and HBASE-19092 are the only issues that remain > needing some more work. The rest are just awaiting a good QA run. > > Unless I hear otherwise, I'll try to keep an eye on things over the > weekend, bump them along as necessary, and get them committed. Would be > great to be able get a vote up on Monday. > > > On 10/24/17 6:03 PM, Stack wrote: > >> Chatting with my coworker Mr. Mike Drob, we were batting back and forth >> what remains to be done. Surfacing our thoughts here so you all clued >> in....Or if you think otherwise, please speak up. >> >> We have ~13 issues to land: >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/HBASE/versions/12341594 About two >> are meta-issues that are about process which leaves 11. >> >> Duo and Zheng Hu are to merge the FilterList fixes improvements >> (HBASE-19057, HBASE-18410 et al.). These are blocker because some changed >> API/semantic that we need to get out earlier rather than later. >> >> Once the above is merged, HBASE-13346, change of Filter method names to >> mention Cell instead of KeyValue can land. >> >> HBASE-199048 needs a review (Anoop will probably do it), removing >> IA.Private objects as params to MasterObserver... Hopefully this goes in >> soon. >> >> Duo is hard at work on trackers for flush and compaction for CPs >> (HBASE-18905). How is HBASE-19033 looking Duo (facility for Tephra)? >> >> I think HBASE-18906 (Phoenix Region#waitFor...) will evaporate after Duo >> is >> done w/ his work above. >> >> I'm on HBASE-18770 bypass and HBASE-19077 restore some parity after all >> the >> purges allowing CPs do direct calls against Regions in same Host. >> >> Anoop is on HBASE-19047 (Fixes) and Ram on cleanup of CellUtil. >> >> Another day or two? >> >> St.Ack >> >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 2:52 PM, 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 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >>
