For what it’s worth I had previously been concerned about the disparity between hbck capability in 1.x and 2.x but after review of the recent work I believe that is no longer true. Put another way, it is reasonable to claim it on par.
As for moving the stable pointer I don’t personally have enough experience with HBase 2 to weigh in but will trust the opinions of those that do. > On Sep 14, 2019, at 8:44 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > > HBASE-21745 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-21745>, the issue > addressing gaps between hbck1 and hbck2 was closed a few days back after a > bunch of work by a kaleidoscope of folks. The release notes section tries > to describe what was added by HBASE-21745. Shout if you think the claim at > the end of the release notes section that hbck2 now is on par or beyond > what hbck1 offered is problematic. Otherwise, will proceed as though it is > the case. > > Suggestion: Given that hbase 2.2.1 will ship soon and hbase-operator-tools > 1.0.0 with latest hbase-hbck2 should get an RC inside the next week or so, > if feedback that 2.2.1 looks good, give 2.2.2 (with bug fixes only) the > stable pointer? > > Thanks, > S > >> On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 11:31 AM Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: >> >> As per Sean, bypass with optional 'force' (override) and recurse for case >> where a procedure had spawned children was the mechanism Allan implemented >> after a chat about merits of procedure delete. I found it of use doing >> fixup to clusters I'd intentionally damaged testing candidates. Procedures >> are usually part of a fabric with relations that an operator might have >> trouble unraveling. It was thought that the bypass would be safer than a >> delete, likely to cause more damage than solution. >> >> Interested in the issues you are seeing on Master branch Sergey. >> >> Thanks, >> S >> >>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 1:54 PM Sean Busbey <bus...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> that's already present, see the README for the "bypass" command: >>> >>> https://github.com/apache/hbase-operator-tools/tree/master/hbase-hbck2 >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 3:40 PM Sergey Shelukhin >>> <sergey.sheluk...@microsoft.com.invalid> wrote: >>>> >>>> I think one thing that is needed for HBCK2 for AMv2 is to be able to >>> delete single procedures from store. >>>> We are evaluating master (whose assignment is very similar to branch-2) >>> right now and I have to delete proc WAL pretty much every day because some >>> procedure(s) are in bad state, but deleting the entire WAL also causes >>> other issues. >>>> It should be possible to remove some offending procedure while master >>> is offline and/or online. >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> >>>> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2019 5:52 PM >>>> To: HBase Dev List <dev@hbase.apache.org> >>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving towards a branch-2 line that can get the >>> 'stable' pointer. >>>> >>>> OK, the original issue is HBCK2 for AMv2, but here we need to do more, >>> not only for AMv2. >>>> >>>> Let me open a new issue and post what Andrew said above there. >>>> >>> >>
