[jira] [Created] (HBASE-8278) Log message after Memstore flush is always with sequence id -1

ramkrishna.s.vasudevan created HBASE-8278: - Summary: Log message after Memstore flush is always with sequence id -1 Key: HBASE-8278 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8278 Projec

Re: Does compatibility between versions also mean binary compatibility?

On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans wrote: > Yes it's already too late for 0.94. > > Stack is fixing the Ref Guide about 0.92 and 0.94 being "interface > compatible": http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#upgrade0.94 I added a note on what we agree binary compatibility means in the 'u

[jira] [Resolved] (HBASE-8273) HColumnDescriptor setters should return void

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8273?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] stack resolved HBASE-8273. -- Resolution: Invalid I closed this rubbish issue once already. The description says nothing; in particular the

Re: 0.94 on Hadoop-23 jenkins

Done. Dead. St.Ack On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 8:17 PM, lars hofhansl wrote: > This has been failing with: > > [ERROR] > /home/jenkins/jenkins-slave/workspace/HBase-0.94-security-on-Hadoop-23/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/zookeeper/ZKUtil.java:[41,53] > cannot find symbol [ERROR] symb

RE: Please welcome our newest committer, Amitanand Aiyer

Amit, Congrats for your new role and achievement! -Anoop- From: Andrew Purtell [apurt...@apache.org] Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 11:53 PM To: dev@hbase.apache.org Subject: Re: Please welcome our newest committer, Amitanand Aiyer Congratulation

Build failed in Jenkins: hbase-0.95 #126

See Changes: [ddas] HBASE-8179. Fixes a problem to do with the json response for the cluster status [sershe] HBASE-7649 client retry timeout doesn't need to do x2 fallback when going to different server [larsh] HBASE-8169 TestMasterFailov

[jira] [Resolved] (HBASE-8127) Region of a disabling or disabled table could be stuck in transition state when RS dies during Master initialization

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8127?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Lars Hofhansl resolved HBASE-8127. -- Resolution: Fixed Hadoop Flags: Reviewed > Region of a disabling or disabled table co

Re: 0.94 on Hadoop-23 jenkins

bq. let's kill this jenkins build Fine with me. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 8:17 PM, lars hofhansl wrote: > This has been failing with: > > [ERROR] > /home/jenkins/jenkins-slave/workspace/HBase-0.94-security-on-Hadoop-23/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/zookeeper/ZKUtil.java:[41,53] > ca

0.94 on Hadoop-23 jenkins

This has been failing with: [ERROR] /home/jenkins/jenkins-slave/workspace/HBase-0.94-security-on-Hadoop-23/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/zookeeper/ZKUtil.java:[41,53] cannot find symbol [ERROR] symbol : class KerberosUtil [ERROR] location: package org.apache.hadoop.security.authe

Jenkins build is back to normal : HBase-TRUNK #4016

See

Re: HBase Types: Explicit Null Support

On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 7:18 PM, James Taylor wrote: > Would it make sense to clean up the APIs a bit and post just the type > system code somewhere to give us something to poke holes at? > That could be useful. I've been experimenting with implementations as I update the spec doc and pushing as

Re: HBase Types: Explicit Null Support

With Phoenix, variable width types may be null in all cases (in the row key or as key values) and fixed width types may be null as key values or as the last row key column. We only allow a binary type in the row key as the last column. We haven't had any push back on these restrictions to date.

Re: HBase Types: Explicit Null Support

On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 11:33 PM, James Taylor wrote: > Maybe if we can keep nullability separate from the > serialization/deserialization, we can come up with a solution that works? I think implied null could work, but let's build out the matrix. I see two kinds of types: fixed- and variable-wid

[jira] [Reopened] (HBASE-8277) [API Compatibility]: Create tool to analyze changes in the HBase Java public API

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8277?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Aleksandr Shulman reopened HBASE-8277: -- This is a different tool than the one to which this was dup'd. Specifically, I had in mind

[jira] [Resolved] (HBASE-8277) [API Compatibility]: Create tool to analyze changes in the HBase Java public API

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8277?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Andrew Purtell resolved HBASE-8277. --- Resolution: Duplicate Fix Version/s: (was: 0.94.7) Dup of HBASE-8275

[jira] [Created] (HBASE-8277) [API Compatibility]: Create tool to analyze changes in the HBase public API

Aleksandr Shulman created HBASE-8277: Summary: [API Compatibility]: Create tool to analyze changes in the HBase public API Key: HBASE-8277 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8277 Pro

[jira] [Reopened] (HBASE-8273) HColumnDescriptor setters should return void

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8273?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Lars Hofhansl reopened HBASE-8273: -- Let's give Ted's idea a try. > HColumnDescriptor setters should return void >

Re: Does compatibility between versions also mean binary compatibility?

Thanks for taking the time for the thoughtful feedback James. > - between 0.94.3 and 0.94.4, new methods were introduced on RegionScanner. Often coprocessors will have their own implementation of these so that they can aggregate in the postScannerOpen. Though this broke binary compat, it improved

Re: HBase Types: Explicit Null Support

On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Dmitriy Ryaboy wrote: > Hiya Nick, > Pig converts data for HBase storage using this class: > > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/pig/trunk/src/org/apache/pig/backend/hadoop/hbase/HBaseBinaryConverter.java(which > is mostly just calling into HBase's Bytes class). As

[jira] [Created] (HBASE-8276) Backport hbase-6738 to 0.94 "Too aggressive task resubmission from the distributed log manager"

Jeffrey Zhong created HBASE-8276: Summary: Backport hbase-6738 to 0.94 "Too aggressive task resubmission from the distributed log manager" Key: HBASE-8276 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8276

Build failed in Jenkins: HBase-TRUNK-on-Hadoop-2.0.0 #477

See Changes: [larsh] HBASE-8169 TestMasterFailover#testMasterFailoverWithMockedRITOnDeadRS may fail due to regions randomly assigned to a RS (Jeffrey Zhong) [jyates] HBASE-7817: Suggested JDWP debug options in hbase-env.sh

[jira] [Resolved] (HBASE-7599) Port HBASE-6066 (low hanging read path improvements) to 0.94

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-7599?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Lars Hofhansl resolved HBASE-7599. -- Resolution: Fixed Hadoop Flags: Reviewed Marking resolved (again) > Port

Build failed in Jenkins: hbase-0.95-on-hadoop2 #55

See Changes: [larsh] HBASE-8169 TestMasterFailover#testMasterFailoverWithMockedRITOnDeadRS may fail due to regions randomly assigned to a RS (Jeffrey Zhong) [jyates] HBASE-7817: Suggested JDWP debug options in hbase-env.sh are wro

[ANNOUNCE] HBase 0.94.6.1 is available for download

The HBase Team just released HBase 0.94.6.1. This release only contains a single fix for an issue with rolling restarts to 0.94.6 from older releases. See HBASE-8259 (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8259) for more details. HBase 0.94.6.1 is the current stable release of HBase. 0.94.6

Re: Does compatibility between versions also mean binary compatibility?

The binary compat is a slippery slope. It'd be a bummer if we couldn't take advantage of all the innovation you guys are doing. At the same time, it's tough to require the Phoenix user community, for example, to upgrade their HBase servers to be able to move to the latest version of Phoenix. I

Jenkins build is back to normal : HBase-0.94-security #131

See

Re: 0.94.6.1 please have a look

Thanks everybody. As soon as the changes have propagated to the primary download sites I'll make an official announcement. -- Lars From: Andrew Purtell To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 3:37 PM Subject: Re: 0.94.6.1 please have a look

[jira] [Created] (HBASE-8275) Tool to test binary compatibility

Jean-Daniel Cryans created HBASE-8275: - Summary: Tool to test binary compatibility Key: HBASE-8275 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8275 Project: HBase Issue Type: New Fea

[jira] [Resolved] (HBASE-8273) HColumnDescriptor setters should return void

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8273?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] stack resolved HBASE-8273. -- Resolution: Invalid Resolving as invalid. Ill-specified issue. How do I know when this issue is done? We ca

[jira] [Resolved] (HBASE-8211) Support for NN HA for 0.94

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8211?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Lars Hofhansl resolved HBASE-8211. -- Resolution: Fixed Hadoop Flags: Reviewed Committed. Thanks for the patch Himanshu.

[jira] [Created] (HBASE-8274) Backport to 94: HBASE-7488 Implement HConnectionManager.locateRegions which is currently returning null

Sergey Shelukhin created HBASE-8274: --- Summary: Backport to 94: HBASE-7488 Implement HConnectionManager.locateRegions which is currently returning null Key: HBASE-8274 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse

[jira] [Created] (HBASE-8273) HColumnDescriptor setters should return void

Ted Yu created HBASE-8273: - Summary: HColumnDescriptor setters should return void Key: HBASE-8273 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8273 Project: HBase Issue Type: Bug Repo

Build failed in Jenkins: hbase-0.95 #125

See Changes: [jyates] HBASE-7817: Suggested JDWP debug options in hbase-env.sh are wrong (Vasu Mariyala) -- [...truncated 3688 lines...] Running org.apache.hadoop.hbase.snapshot.TestRestoreFlushSnapsh

Re: Does compatibility between versions also mean binary compatibility?

Yes it's already too late for 0.94. Stack is fixing the Ref Guide about 0.92 and 0.94 being "interface compatible": http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#upgrade0.94 We could add a new column in the release testing matrix to add versions that we binary-tested, at least for the user-facing methods. A

Re: Does compatibility between versions also mean binary compatibility?

I agree we need both, but I'm afraid that ship has sailed. It's not something we paid a lot of attention to especially being forward-binary-compatible. I would guess that there will be many more of these issues. Also, we have to qualify this statement somewhere. If you extend HRegionServer you

Re: 0.94.6.1 please have a loop

+1 checked tarball layouts and signatures. Launched in tree and tested with 1M inserts via LoadTestTool, nothing unexpected found in logs. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Stack wrote: > +1 > > Checked signature and md4. Looked at doc. Started it up. Looked at UI. > Uploaded a few million.

Re: Does compatibility between versions also mean binary compatibility?

What Andrew and Nick said. St.Ack On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > "Compatible" implies both to my understanding of the term, unless > qualified. > > I don't think we should qualify it. This looks like a regression to me. > > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Jean-Daniel

Re: 0.94.6.1 please have a look

+1, tarballs look good, checksums match, started up local clusters with both the base and security builds and ran LoadTestTool, didn't see anything amiss in the logs. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 2:45 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans wrote: > +1 > > I tested a 0.94.6.1 master with a 0.94.2 region server and now

Build failed in Jenkins: HBase-TRUNK #4015

See Changes: [jyates] HBASE-7817: Suggested JDWP debug options in hbase-env.sh are wrong (Vasu Mariyala) -- [...truncated 3727 lines...] Tests run: 63, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elaps

Re: Does compatibility between versions also mean binary compatibility?

"Compatible" implies both to my understanding of the term, unless qualified. I don't think we should qualify it. This looks like a regression to me. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans wrote: > tl;dr should two compatible versions be considered both wire and > binary compatible o

Re: Does compatibility between versions also mean binary compatibility?

On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans wrote: > tl;dr should two compatible versions be considered both wire and > binary compatible or just the former? > I agree; if the compatibility is not explicitly quantified, it implies both. -n

[jira] [Created] (HBASE-8272) make compaction checker frequency configurable per table/cf

Sergey Shelukhin created HBASE-8272: --- Summary: make compaction checker frequency configurable per table/cf Key: HBASE-8272 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8272 Project: HBase

Re: 0.94.6.1 please have a look

+1 I tested a 0.94.6.1 master with a 0.94.2 region server and now it works :) J-D On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 2:35 PM, lars hofhansl wrote: > I think we're good. Any objection if I released this as 0.94.6.1 and > remove 0.94.6 once propagated? > > -- Lars > > > > >

Re: 0.94.6.1 please have a look

+1 from me. MR is still running, not facing any unusual issue. Since 0.94.6 was also tested a lot, sound like it will be a go for 0.94.6.1 too... 2013/4/4 James Taylor : > +1 from the Phoenix team. We installed and tested on our internal cluster > and everything looks good. > > James > > > On

Re: 0.94.6.1 please have a look

+1 from the Phoenix team. We installed and tested on our internal cluster and everything looks good. James On 04/04/2013 01:33 PM, lars hofhansl wrote: Fixed subject. (Maybe you can have a "loop", but I'd be fine if you just had a "look".) +1 from me. All tests pass. I installed it, loa

Re: 0.94.6.1 please have a look

I think we're good. Any objection if I released this as 0.94.6.1 and remove 0.94.6 once propagated? -- Lars From: lars hofhansl To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" ; lars hofhansl Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 1:33 PM Subject: Re: 0.94.6.1 please have a look Fixe

Build failed in Jenkins: HBase-0.94-security #130

See Changes: [tedyu] HBASE-8127 Region of a disabling or disabled table could be stuck in transition state when RS dies during Master initialization (Rajeshbabu) [stack] HBASE-8231 delete tests in table_tests.rb(TestShell) always r

[jira] [Resolved] (HBASE-8231) delete tests in table_tests.rb(TestShell) always running on empty table.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8231?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Lars Hofhansl resolved HBASE-8231. -- Resolution: Fixed Fix Version/s: 0.94.7 0.98.0 Committed to 0.94.7 as

[jira] [Created] (HBASE-8271) Book updates for changes to GC options in shell scripts

Jesse Yates created HBASE-8271: -- Summary: Book updates for changes to GC options in shell scripts Key: HBASE-8271 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8271 Project: HBase Issue Type:

[jira] [Created] (HBASE-8270) Backport HBASE-8097 to 0.94

Devaraj Das created HBASE-8270: -- Summary: Backport HBASE-8097 to 0.94 Key: HBASE-8270 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8270 Project: HBase Issue Type: Bug Reporter: D

Build failed in Jenkins: hbase-0.95 #124

See Changes: [tedyu] HBASE-8240 CompoundConfiguration should implement Iterable (Ted Yu) -- [...truncated 3684 lines...] Running org.apache.hadoop.hbase.procedure.TestZKProcedureControllers Tests run:

Re: 0.94.6.1 please have a look

Fixed subject. (Maybe you can have a "loop", but I'd be fine if you just had a "look".) +1 from me. All tests pass. I installed it, loaded some data, ran my in-block-cache perf test, checked the version numbers, etc. -- Lars From: lars hofhansl To: hbase-d

Build failed in Jenkins: HBase-TRUNK #4014

See Changes: [tedyu] HBASE-8240 CompoundConfiguration should implement Iterable (Ted Yu) -- [...truncated 3687 lines...] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 33.684 sec Run

Does compatibility between versions also mean binary compatibility?

tl;dr should two compatible versions be considered both wire and binary compatible or just the former? Hey devs, 0.92 is compatible with 0.94, meaning that you can run a client for either against the other and you can roll restart from 0.92 to 0.94. What about binary compatibility? Meaning, can

Re: 0.94.6.1 please have a loop

+1 Checked signature and md4. Looked at doc. Started it up. Looked at UI. Uploaded a few million. Read it and confirmed it there. No exceptions in log. St.Ack On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 12:33 PM, lars hofhansl wrote: > Uploaded here: > > http://people.apache.org/~larsh/hbase-0.94.6.1/ > > Pl

0.94.6.1 please have a loop

Uploaded here: http://people.apache.org/~larsh/hbase-0.94.6.1/ Please have a quick look and vote +1/-1 today. Only changes are HBASE-8259, CHANGES.txt (to include that jira), and pom.xml (naming the release 0.94.6.1). Thanks. -- Lars

Jenkins build is back to normal : HBase-0.94 #942

See

Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)

Deployed 0.94.6.1 on 8 servers. Stopped/started (not rolling). All regions got re-assigned correctly. Did some truncate/MRs(in progress)/balancing/shell, everything working fine. +1 2013/4/4 Andrew Purtell : > +1 > > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:40 AM, lars hofhansl wrote: > >> Just did that so w

Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)

+1 --- Jesse Yates @jesse_yates jyates.github.com On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > +1 > > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:40 AM, lars hofhansl wrote: > > > Just did that so we can fire quickly. We should all agree (or at least > not > > disagree) that this i

Re: Adding String offset for ColumnPaginationFilter

+1 Wouldn't offset be a family:qualifier instead of a String? Please consider adding two interfaces: a version which exposes the state externally (as you've described) and another that encapsulates the state handling on the user's behalf. The former is useful for exposing over stateless protocols

Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)

+1 On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:40 AM, lars hofhansl wrote: > Just did that so we can fire quickly. We should all agree (or at least not > disagree) that this is right (least confusing) path. > > -- Lars > > > > > From: Stack > To: HBase Dev List ; lars hofhansl

Re: Marking fix version

Not necessarily. 0.95 is special in that it is a known "experimental" version to play with. From: Nick Dimiduk To: dev@hbase.apache.org; lars hofhansl Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 11:55 AM Subject: Re: Marking fix version By this logic, 0.98 tag should b

Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)

The 0.94.6.1 tarball is here: http://people.apache.org/~larsh/hbase-0.94.6.1/ Building the -security tarball now. -- Lars From: Jonathan Hsieh To: dev@hbase.apache.org; lars hofhansl Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 11:41 AM Subject: Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (

Re: Marking fix version

By this logic, 0.98 tag should be renamed to 0.97, yes? On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:33 AM, lars hofhansl wrote: > Yes, I think we should remove the 0.96 tag. Stack said the other day that > he should have just renamed 0.96 to 0.95 rather than moving all the issues. > > The rest is already what I h

Re: Marking fix version

I was just marking issues in 0.95 and trunk w/ 0.95. Let me go back and fix so has 0.98 on it too. Let me also remove 0.96 for now. We can bring it back later (or just skip it and go to 1.0?). St.Ack On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:33 AM, lars hofhansl wrote: > Yes, I think we should remove the 0

Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)

+1 to replacing 0.94.6 with 0.94.6.1 Jon. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:40 AM, lars hofhansl wrote: > Just did that so we can fire quickly. We should all agree (or at least not > disagree) that this is right (least confusing) path. > > -- Lars > > > > > From: Stack

Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)

Just did that so we can fire quickly. We should all agree (or at least not disagree) that this is right (least confusing) path. -- Lars From: Stack To: HBase Dev List ; lars hofhansl Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 11:37 AM Subject: Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (W

Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)

On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:19 AM, lars hofhansl wrote: > And FYI, I did make a 0.94.6.1 branch. Applied the change, updated > CHANGES.txt and pom.xml, and am running the test suite now. > As soon as that is done we can release it and simultaneously pull 0.94.6. > > > The 0.94.6.1 branch is under t

[jira] [Created] (HBASE-8269) Fix data locallity documentation.

Jean-Marc Spaggiari created HBASE-8269: -- Summary: Fix data locallity documentation. Key: HBASE-8269 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8269 Project: HBase Issue Type: Bug

Re: Please welcome our newest committer, Amitanand Aiyer

Congratulations! On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:21 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan < ramkrishna.s.vasude...@gmail.com> wrote: > Congrats and welcome. !!! > > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:45 PM, Jonathan Hsieh wrote: > > > welcome! > > > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Jesse Yates > >wrote: > > > > > Con

Re: Please welcome our newest committer, Amitanand Aiyer

Congrats and welcome. !!! On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:45 PM, Jonathan Hsieh wrote: > welcome! > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Jesse Yates >wrote: > > > Congrats and welcome! > > > > - Jesse Yates > > > > On Apr 4, 2013, at 7:53 AM, Nicolas Liochon wrote: > > > > > Welcome, Amit! > > > > >

Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)

And FYI, I did make a 0.94.6.1 branch. Applied the change, updated CHANGES.txt and pom.xml, and am running the test suite now. As soon as that is done we can release it and simultaneously pull 0.94.6. The 0.94.6.1 branch is under tags, in case you wanted to have a look. -- Lars

Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)

That said, doing a release (even a point release) is some work. I typically go through every single outstanding issue and decide whether to get that in or push it, teasing out related issues, etc. In this case I would wholesale move all 0.94.7 to 0.94.8 and declare 0.94.7 done. -- Lars _

Re: Please welcome our newest committer, Amitanand Aiyer

welcome! On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Jesse Yates wrote: > Congrats and welcome! > > - Jesse Yates > > On Apr 4, 2013, at 7:53 AM, Nicolas Liochon wrote: > > > Welcome, Amit! > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Jimmy Xiang wrote: > > > >> Congratulations! > >> > >> On Thu, Apr 4, 20

Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)

My vote is release 0.94.6.1 with just this one fix _and_ pull 0.94.6(.0) On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:12 AM, lars hofhansl wrote: > Pulling 0.94.6 is another option. > > > > > From: Stack > To: HBase Dev List > Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 11:09 AM > Subject: R

Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)

Pulling 0.94.6 is another option. From: Stack To: HBase Dev List Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 11:09 AM Subject: Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts) +1 on 0.94.7 rather than 0.94

Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)

+1 on 0.94.7 rather than 0.94.6.1. Chatting w/ JD and Aleks, we should pull 0.94.6. I can add note up on webpage to explain the hole. Can I help w/ the 0.94.7 rolling? St.Ack On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans wrote: > My problem with delaying getting this patch out there is

Re: Please welcome our newest committer, Amitanand Aiyer

Congrats and welcome! - Jesse Yates On Apr 4, 2013, at 7:53 AM, Nicolas Liochon wrote: > Welcome, Amit! > > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Jimmy Xiang wrote: > >> Congratulations! >> >> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Sergey Shelukhin >> wrote: >> >>> Congrats! >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 4,

Build failed in Jenkins: HBase-0.94 #941

See Changes: [stack] HBASE-8231 delete tests in table_tests.rb(TestShell) always running on empty table; REVERT -- [...truncated 5946 lines...] Running org.apache.hadoop.hbase.coprocessor.TestRegionS

Re: [0.94] sbin directory in tarball

Opened HBASE-8268 . Patch is same as HBASE-4894 so did not attach. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans wrote: > Looks like it. Please open a jira? > > Thx, > > J-D > > On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Shrijeet Paliwal > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > HBASE-4894 removed sbin from tarball

[jira] [Created] (HBASE-8268) Do no include sbin directory in tarball

Shrijeet Paliwal created HBASE-8268: --- Summary: Do no include sbin directory in tarball Key: HBASE-8268 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8268 Project: HBase Issue Type: Bug

Re: Please welcome our newest committer, Amitanand Aiyer

Welcome, Amit! On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Jimmy Xiang wrote: > Congratulations! > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Sergey Shelukhin >wrote: > > > Congrats! > > > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari < > > jean-m...@spaggiari.org> wrote: > > > > > Congratulation Amit! >

Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)

My problem with delaying getting this patch out there is that people who adopt 0.94.6 are putting themselves in a hole because you also can't roll restart out of it. J-D On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Ted Yu wrote: > Third 0.94.6 RC was cut on Mar. 14th. > It has been almost 3 weeks since them

Re: Please welcome our newest committer, Amitanand Aiyer

Congratulations! On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Sergey Shelukhin wrote: > Congrats! > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari < > jean-m...@spaggiari.org> wrote: > > > Congratulation Amit! > > > > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Stack wrote: > > > > > >> Our Amit has been aro

Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)

+1 on both 0.94.6.1 with short tests (since only 1 patch is added), but I don't have anything against starting 0.94.7RC too. 2013/4/4 lars hofhansl : > If we do a 0.94.6.1 we should call it that (IMHO), replacing releases with > the same name is confusing, also we only have to validate that one p

Re: Please welcome our newest committer, Amitanand Aiyer

Congrats! On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari < jean-m...@spaggiari.org> wrote: > Congratulation Amit! > > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Stack wrote: > > > >> Our Amit has been around with a good while now doing important, deep > stuff > >> in thorny areas. Please join me

Re: Marking fix version

Yes, I think we should remove the 0.96 tag. Stack said the other day that he should have just renamed 0.96 to 0.95 rather than moving all the issues. The rest is already what I have been doing for issues I am committing (so +1 :) ), but I did notice that not all issues are tagged correctly. --

Adding String offset for ColumnPaginationFilter

Hi, I am thinking of adding a string offset to ColumnPaginationFilter. There are two reasons: 1) For deep pagination, you can seek using SEEK_NEXT_USING_HINT. 2) For correctness reasons, this approach is better if the list of columns is mutation. Lets say you get 1st 50 columns using the current

Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)

If we do a 0.94.6.1 we should call it that (IMHO), replacing releases with the same name is confusing, also we only have to validate that one patch and not go through the whole process. +1 on 0.94.6.1 and we agree to do that with just running the test suite and double checking that one patch (w

Re: [0.94] sbin directory in tarball

Looks like it. Please open a jira? Thx, J-D On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Shrijeet Paliwal wrote: > Hi, > > HBASE-4894 removed sbin from tarball for 0.92 release. I think the 'mess' > Stack referred to in jira hasn't been taken care of in 0.94. > So shouldn't we have HBASE-4894 in 0.94 as we

Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)

Third 0.94.6 RC was cut on Mar. 14th. It has been almost 3 weeks since them. Meaning we have sizable goodies for the next release. I would vote for 0.94.7 release which would come in April anyway. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans wrote: > We might wanna bring this discussion

Jenkins build is back to normal : HBase-TRUNK #4013

See

Re: Please welcome our newest committer, Amitanand Aiyer

Congratulation Amit! > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Stack wrote: > >> Our Amit has been around with a good while now doing important, deep stuff >> in thorny areas. Please join me welcoming him as one of the hbase >> committer team. >> >> St.Ack >>

0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)

We might wanna bring this discussion here on dev@. So right now the questions are: - Should we call a release with just HBASE-8259 as 0.94.6.1 or 0.94.7? How much testing are we expecting from folks? - Should we just cut a release with what's in the branch and call it 0.94.7? My opinion is to

Re: Please welcome our newest committer, Amitanand Aiyer

Congratulations Amit. - Dave On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Stack wrote: > Our Amit has been around with a good while now doing important, deep stuff > in thorny areas. Please join me welcoming him as one of the hbase > committer team. > > St.Ack >

Re: Please welcome our newest committer, Amitanand Aiyer

Congratulations, Amit. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Stack wrote: > Our Amit has been around with a good while now doing important, deep stuff > in thorny areas. Please join me welcoming him as one of the hbase > committer team. > > St.Ack >

Please welcome our newest committer, Amitanand Aiyer

Our Amit has been around with a good while now doing important, deep stuff in thorny areas. Please join me welcoming him as one of the hbase committer team. St.Ack

Re: Marking fix version

Ok. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Jonathan Hsieh wrote: > The argument for excluding the 0.96 tag makes sense. Can we agree to do > this: > > Commit only to trunk: Mark with 0.98 > Commit to 0.95 and trunk : Mark with 0.98, and 0.95.x > Commit to 0.94.x and 0.95, and trunk: Mark with 0.98,

Re: Marking fix version

The argument for excluding the 0.96 tag makes sense. Can we agree to do this: Commit only to trunk: Mark with 0.98 Commit to 0.95 and trunk : Mark with 0.98, and 0.95.x Commit to 0.94.x and 0.95, and trunk: Mark with 0.98, 0.95.x, and 0.94.x Commit to 89-fb: Mark with 89-fb. Commit site fixes: no

Re: Marking fix version

Thank Jon, I do not think we have to include anticipated future branches in the tags. The release notes are not accumulative but list changes made for each release. So if something is in 0.95.x a 0.96 tag neither needed nor wanted (IMHO) until we actually have a *parallel* 0.96 branch. That is

  1   2   >