> This is begging another unaddressed question -- are we going to continue > branching for the 2.x minor release lines? Will we release directly from > branch-2, as we have started with branch-1?
This specific point should be discussed in a different thread. On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 12:31 PM Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]> wrote: > > > And on backporting to branch-2, I think this is all to Nick as he is the > release manager. > > I'd like to take it into branch-2 as soon as we can. We've done a major > round of stabilization of branch-2, but that concluded before the winter > break. Now that we've had a handful of major features land, I'm > anticipating another round of stabilization in the coming weeks. > > The reasons I can think of to NOT back-port it for 2.3 are the following: > 1. Does not conform with our minor release compatibility "promises". > 2. Introduces significant changes to the assignment manager. > 3. Introduces known complications with JDK11. > > Unfortunately I've still not had time to review the meat of the patch. I > expect there to be changes to the AM, but I hope those changes are isolated > and not systemic. > > If there are significant reviewer concerns AND someone is up for managing > the overhead, what do you think about maintaining a back port branch that > is regularly rebased onto branch-2? We can start our stabilization efforts > on that feature branch. If it's looking good, the merge will be trivial. If > it's problematic, the feature can receive further attention and we've not > destabilized the pending release. > > This is begging another unaddressed question -- are we going to continue > branching for the 2.x minor release lines? Will we release directly from > branch-2, as we have started with branch-1? > > Thanks, > Nick > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 8:59 AM Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote: > > > +1 > > > > Also, +1 to putting this in 2.4. Will give us one of hopefully several > > reasons to keep moving forward. No need to delay the 2.3 release train. > > > > I'd like to try to pick up the backport of this at my employer as part of > > adopting 2.4 in some way, for what it's worth. I think maybe 2.4 for us for > > this reason (rsgroups improvements!!) but also some minor but also minor > > release requiring changes to coprocessor APIs. Will discuss the latter > > point with you soon on a JIRA issue. > > > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 6:12 AM Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Personally, I'd rather see the branch-2 backport wait for 2.4. the 2.3 > > > release has been "close" for a while now and 2.2 came out in June > > > 2019. > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 1:16 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Thanks stack, so finally we have 3 binding +1s now. > > > > > > > > Let merge the branch back. And on backporting to branch-2, I think this > > > is > > > > all to Nick as he is the release manager. > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > Stack <[email protected]> 于2020年3月2日周一 下午1:40写道： > > > > > > > > > I'm +1 on backport. Will keep an eye on it. > > > > > S > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 5:32 AM Duo Zhang <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > The issue aims to make rs group the first class citizen in HBase, > > > where > > > > > the > > > > > > feature can be enabled through a simple flag, not a complicated > > > > > > coprocessor, and also we can manage it through the Admin interface, > > > while > > > > > > in the old time the only public way is to through the shell > > command, > > > as > > > > > the > > > > > > coprocessor client is marked as IA.Private. > > > > > > > > > > > > This is a simple design doc > > > > > > > > > > > > <goog_2028452043> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SuodZ_uDQQQVJyryRxqp033cgz2aQPJmjIREbbbmB3c/edit?usp=sharing > > > > > > > > > > > > The PR for all the changes > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/1165 > > > > > > > > > > > > And let me copy the release note here > > > > > > > > > > > > Moved rs group feature into core. Use this flag to enable or > > disable > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > The coprocessor > > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.rsgroup.RSGroupAdminEndpoint > > > is > > > > > > deprected, but for compatible, if you want the pre 3.0.0 hbase > > > > > client/shell > > > > > > to communicate with the new hbase cluster, you still need to add > > this > > > > > > coprocessor to master. And if this coprocessor is specified, the > > > above > > > > > flag > > > > > > will be set to true automatically to enable rs group feature. > > > > > > > > > > > > These methods are added to the Admin/AsyncAdmin interface for > > > managing rs > > > > > > groups. See the javadoc of these methods for more details. > > > > > > > > > > > > void addRSGroup(String groupName) throws IOException; > > > > > > RSGroupInfo getRSGroup(String groupName) throws IOException; > > > > > > RSGroupInfo getRSGroup(Address hostPort) throws IOException; > > > > > > RSGroupInfo getRSGroup(TableName tableName) throws IOException; > > > > > > List<RSGroupInfo> listRSGroups() throws IOException; > > > > > > List<TableName> listTablesInRSGroup(String groupName) throws > > > > > IOException; > > > > > > Pair<List<String>, List<TableName>> > > > > > > getConfiguredNamespacesAndTablesInRSGroup(String groupName) throws > > > > > > IOException; > > > > > > void removeRSGroup(String groupName) throws IOException; > > > > > > void removeServersFromRSGroup(Set<Address> servers) throws > > > IOException; > > > > > > void moveServersToRSGroup(Set<Address> servers, String > > targetGroup) > > > > > > throws IOException; > > > > > > void setRSGroup(Set<TableName> tables, String groupName) throws > > > > > > IOException; > > > > > > boolean balanceRSGroup(String groupName) throws IOException; > > > > > > > > > > > > The shell commands for rs group are not changed. > > > > > > > > > > > > The main difference on the implementation is that, now the rs group > > > for a > > > > > > table is stored in TableDescriptor, instead of in RSGroupInfo, so > > the > > > > > > getTables method of RSGroupInfo has been deprecated. And if you use > > > the > > > > > > above Admin methods to get the RSGroupInfo, its getTables method > > will > > > > > > always return empty. Of course the behavior for the old > > > > > > RSGroupAdminEndpoint is not changed, we will fill the tables field > > > of the > > > > > > RSGroupInfo before returning, to make it compatible with old hbase > > > > > > client/shell. > > > > > > > > > > > > When upgrading, the migration between the RSGroupInfo and > > > TableDescriptor > > > > > > will be done automatically. It will take sometime, but it is fine > > to > > > > > > restart master in the middle, the migration will continue after > > > restart. > > > > > > > > > > > > The vote will open for at least 72 hours. > > > > > > > > > > > > Please vote > > > > > > > > > > > > [+1] Agree > > > > > > [-1] Disagree > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Andrew > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's > > decrepit hands > > - A23, Crosstalk > >
