HBASE-18946 Stochastic load balancer assigns replica regions to the same RS

Am on this today and probably will put up another patch.

Regards
Ram

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 5:18 AM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote:

> hbase-2.0.0-beta-1 update (Reminder, beta-1 is where we finish last
> remaining features and apply final polish to API. There will be a beta-2
> but it is about upgrade/rolling-upgrade and bug fixes ONLY).
>
> Myself and Mr. Drob did a pass over the outstanding hbase-2.0.0-beta-1 list
> this morning. See here [1].
>
> There are about ~12 issues in progress with most of these about to land.
> There are 37 TODO. Many of these are tests we need to run, some are related
> to the backup/restore, but a good few are meaty w/o assignees.
>
> The awkward outstanding ones as I see it are the below:
>
> HBASE-18946 Stochastic load balancer assigns replica regions to the same RS
> HBASE-17204 Make L2 off heap cache default ON
> HBASE-19112 Suspect methods on Cell to be deprecated
> HBASE-19147 All branch-2 unit tests pass
>
> We need to make progress on the above or punt on them (can't punt on the
> last one though).
>
> Any ideas on what configs we should update in hbase2? Dump ideas into:
> HBASE-19148 Edit of default configuration
>
> Still hoping for an early December beta-1 RC. beta-2 hopefully will be
> close behind.
>
> Comments? Thoughts?
>
> Thanks all,
> S
>
> 1. https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/HBASE/versions/12340861
>
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 2:56 PM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 2:31 PM, Mike Drob <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Hoping to keep momentum going from our Stack working on alpha4, I tried
> to
> >> take a stab at triaging some of the open beta-1 issues.
> >>
> >> I moved some docs stuff out form beta-1 to 2.0-GA, if it gets done
> sooner
> >> then I'm happy to see it pulled back in. Trying to balance optimism with
> >> realism here, and knowing that documentation unfortunately often gets
> >> pushed to the back-burner.
> >>
> >> Also, I poked some folks on unassigned issues that they've filed for
> >> beta-1, especially in the last few days. If issues don't have an owner
> >> they
> >> are unlikely to get worked. I chatted with stack and he agreed to take
> on
> >> some of the tasks, but there's a lot of surface area to cover.
> >>
> >> If you you're working on issues that are critical for beta-1, please
> mark
> >> them as such. Then the rest of the community will know to help
> prioritize
> >> feedback and reviews there.
> >>
> >> Do we have a general theme for the betas like we did with the alphas?
> >>
> >> Beta1 is upgrades work from branch1, beta2 is rolling upgrades work as
> >> well? Continue to work on tests throughout?
> >>
> >>
> > Thanks Mike for helping to kick off the beta-1 train.
> >
> > Regards a theme for beta-1, I'd like it to be 'finish'; beta-1 is what we
> > are going to ship (beta-2 is rolling upgrade and any minor items turned
> up
> > in testing/burn-in).
> >
> > Thanks,
> > S
> >
> >
> >
> >> Mike
> >>
> >> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > +1 go from my POV.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 10/31/17 10:07 AM, Stack wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I want to push an alpha-4 today. A few items didn't make it
> >> (HBASE-19092).
> >> >> They need more time. We'll pull them in for beta-1. CP API is
> basically
> >> >> done. There may be some changes for beta-1 but hopefully only changes
> >> >> informed by experience trying to port an existing Coprocessor to
> >> hbase2.
> >> >>
> >> >> Shout if there is anything that needs to make alpha-4.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> St.Ack
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Yup, that was going to be my plan, Mike!
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Making a pass now, and will check back later tonight again. I see
> >> others
> >> >>> have already done some work today on this front.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On 10/27/17 11:38 PM, Mike Drob wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> 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/12341
> >> >>>>>>> 594
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> 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/
> 12327
> >> 188
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> 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/docume
> >> nt/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
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to