[jira] [Created] (HBASE-26593) [hbase-thirdparty] Set version as 4.0.1 in prep for first RC
Duo Zhang created HBASE-26593: - Summary: [hbase-thirdparty] Set version as 4.0.1 in prep for first RC Key: HBASE-26593 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26593 Project: HBase Issue Type: Sub-task Components: build, pom, thirdparty Reporter: Duo Zhang Fix For: thirdparty-4.0.1 -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Created] (HBASE-26594) [hbase-thirdparty] Generate CHANGES.md and RELEASENOTES.md for 4.0.1
Duo Zhang created HBASE-26594: - Summary: [hbase-thirdparty] Generate CHANGES.md and RELEASENOTES.md for 4.0.1 Key: HBASE-26594 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26594 Project: HBase Issue Type: Sub-task Components: thirdparty Reporter: Duo Zhang Fix For: thirdparty-4.0.1 -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Created] (HBASE-26595) Put up 4.0.1RC0
Duo Zhang created HBASE-26595: - Summary: Put up 4.0.1RC0 Key: HBASE-26595 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26595 Project: HBase Issue Type: Sub-task Reporter: Duo Zhang -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
Re: [VOTE] The second release condidate for hbase-thirdparty 4.0.0 is available for download
Filed HBASE-26592. 张铎(Duo Zhang) 于2021年12月17日周五 12:25写道： > Oh, when backporting to branch-2, I found that there is a serious problem > with this release. > > We do not include the proto files in protobuf-java jar, I think this is a > side effect of HBASE-26496. > > And on the master branch, hbase-shaded-protobuf also pulls in > protobuf-java 3.19.1 dependency so everything is fine. But for branch-2, we > will need to depend on protobuf 2.5.0 then the compilation is broken. > > Anyway, we should include the proto files in hbase-shaded-protobuf, and > also we should not pull in the original protobuf-java dependency. > > Let me fix this and do a 4.0.1 release. > > 张铎(Duo Zhang) 于2021年12月10日周五 13:41写道： > >> With 4 binding +1s, no -1, the vote passes. >> >> Let me push out the release. >> >> Thanks all for voting! >> >> 张铎(Duo Zhang) 于2021年12月10日周五 13:40写道： >> >>> Here is my +1, I've been testing it by opening a PR against hbase master >>> branch and it works. >>> >>> See https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/3910 >>> >>> Yu Li 于2021年12月10日周五 09:37写道： >>> +1 Checked the diff between 3.5.1 and 4.0.0-rc1: OK ( https://github.com/apache/hbase-thirdparty/compare/rel/3.5.1...4.0.0RC1 ) Checked release note and changes: OK Checked sums and signatures: OK Maven clean install from source (1.8.0_121): OK - Minor: I tried to build a tarball from source following README but failed with "No assembly descriptors found" error Checked the jars in the staging repo: OK btw, I haven't followed up for a while and could anyone kindly let me know where to find this fancy hbase-vote.sh script, so next time I could also try it out? Thanks :-) Best Regards, Yu On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 at 05:46, Nick Dimiduk wrote: > +1 > > I've used the hbase-vote.sh script to evaluate this artifact and there's a > problem in the final `run_tests` , executed after `build_from_source`. > > * Signature: ok > * Checksum : ok > * Rat check (11.0.11): ok > - mvn clean apache-rat:check > * Built from source (11.0.11): ok > - mvn clean install -DskipTests > * Unit tests pass (11.0.11): failed > - mvn package -P runAllTests -Dsurefire.rerunFailingTestsCount=3 > > [WARNING] The requested profile "runAllTests" could not be activated > because it does not exist. > [ERROR] Failed to execute goal > org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-shade-plugin:3.2.4:shade (default) on > project hbase-shaded-jackson-jaxrs-json-provider: Error creating shaded > jar: duplicate entry: > META-INF/services/org.apache.hbase.thirdparty.javax.ws.rs > .ext.MessageBodyWriter > > Manually running `mvn clean package` within the source tarball, we succeed. > > I have also triggered a PR build of HBASE-25864 / PR#3243 that uses this > RC. The tests are still running. > > https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/blue/organizations/jenkins/HBase%2FHBase-PreCommit-GitHub-PR/detail/PR-3243/5/pipeline/ > > On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 6:02 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) > wrote: > > > Ah, Thanks Nick for explaining and thanks Andrew for testing. > > > > We still need one more +1 to close this vote. > > > > Andrew Purtell 于2021年12月7日周二 05:50写道： > > > > > Ok, change my vote to +1 (binding). The hbase-thirdparty build and > > > artifacts are good. > > > > > > > On Dec 6, 2021, at 1:18 PM, Nick Dimiduk > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 11:49 AM Andrew Purtell < apurt...@apache.org > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> -1 (binding) > > > >> > > > >> Checked sums and signature, ok > > > >> RAT check passed, ok > > > >> Built from source, ok > > > >> Built HEAD of master (d9315fa043) with > > -Dhbase-thirdparty.version=4.0.0, > > > >> hbase-http module tests fail > > > >> > > > > > > > > Adoption of this dependency will require changes to master. I had > > posted > > > > necessary changes on https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/3243 and > Duo > > > did > > > > his own on https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/3910. > > > > > > > > [ERROR] Tests run: 17, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 2, Time > > elapsed: > > > >> 2.29 s <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.hadoop.hbase.http.TestHttpServer > > > >> [ERROR] org.apache.hadoop.hbase.http.TestHttpServer.testJersey Time > > > >> elapsed: 0.123 s <<< ERROR! > > > >> java.io.FileNotFoundException: > > http://localhost:55106/jersey/foo?op=bar > > > >> at > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >
[jira] [Created] (HBASE-26592) Fix the broken shaded protobuf module
Duo Zhang created HBASE-26592: - Summary: Fix the broken shaded protobuf module Key: HBASE-26592 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26592 Project: HBase Issue Type: Sub-task Components: hbase-thirdparty, Protobufs Reporter: Duo Zhang Assignee: Duo Zhang Fix For: thirdparty-4.0.1 First, we should include the proto files in the final uber jar. Second, we should not pull in the protobuf-java dependency as we always include everything in the uber jar. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Created] (HBASE-26591) [hbase-thirdparty] Make a 4.0.1 release for hbase-thirdparty
Duo Zhang created HBASE-26591:
-
Summary: [hbase-thirdparty] Make a 4.0.1 release for
hbase-thirdparty
Key: HBASE-26591
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26591
Project: HBase
Issue Type: Umbrella
Components: community, hbase-thirdparty
Reporter: Duo Zhang
Copy the content in mailing list here
{noformat}
Oh, when backporting to branch-2, I found that there is a serious problem with
this release.
We do not include the proto files in protobuf-java jar, I think this is a side
effect of HBASE-26496.
And on the master branch, hbase-shaded-protobuf also pulls in protobuf-java
3.19.1 dependency so everything is fine. But for branch-2, we will need to
depend on protobuf 2.5.0 then the compilation is broken.
Anyway, we should include the proto files in hbase-shaded-protobuf, and also
we should not pull in the original protobuf-java dependency.
Let me fix this and do a 4.0.1 release.
{noformat}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Resolved] (HBASE-26498) [hbase-thirdparty] Make a 4.0.0 release for hbase-thirdparty
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26498?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Duo Zhang resolved HBASE-26498. --- Resolution: Fixed > [hbase-thirdparty] Make a 4.0.0 release for hbase-thirdparty > > > Key: HBASE-26498 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26498 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Umbrella > Components: community, hbase-thirdparty >Reporter: Duo Zhang >Assignee: Duo Zhang >Priority: Major > -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
Re: [VOTE] The second release condidate for hbase-thirdparty 4.0.0 is available for download
Oh, when backporting to branch-2, I found that there is a serious problem with this release. We do not include the proto files in protobuf-java jar, I think this is a side effect of HBASE-26496. And on the master branch, hbase-shaded-protobuf also pulls in protobuf-java 3.19.1 dependency so everything is fine. But for branch-2, we will need to depend on protobuf 2.5.0 then the compilation is broken. Anyway, we should include the proto files in hbase-shaded-protobuf, and also we should not pull in the original protobuf-java dependency. Let me fix this and do a 4.0.1 release. 张铎(Duo Zhang) 于2021年12月10日周五 13:41写道： > With 4 binding +1s, no -1, the vote passes. > > Let me push out the release. > > Thanks all for voting! > > 张铎(Duo Zhang) 于2021年12月10日周五 13:40写道： > >> Here is my +1, I've been testing it by opening a PR against hbase master >> branch and it works. >> >> See https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/3910 >> >> Yu Li 于2021年12月10日周五 09:37写道： >> >>> +1 >>> >>> Checked the diff between 3.5.1 and 4.0.0-rc1: OK ( >>> https://github.com/apache/hbase-thirdparty/compare/rel/3.5.1...4.0.0RC1) >>> Checked release note and changes: OK >>> Checked sums and signatures: OK >>> Maven clean install from source (1.8.0_121): OK >>> - Minor: I tried to build a tarball from source following README but >>> failed >>> with "No assembly descriptors found" error >>> Checked the jars in the staging repo: OK >>> >>> btw, I haven't followed up for a while and could anyone kindly let me >>> know >>> where to find this fancy hbase-vote.sh script, so next time I could also >>> try it out? Thanks :-) >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> Yu >>> >>> >>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 at 05:46, Nick Dimiduk wrote: >>> >>> > +1 >>> > >>> > I've used the hbase-vote.sh script to evaluate this artifact and >>> there's a >>> > problem in the final `run_tests` , executed after `build_from_source`. >>> > >>> > * Signature: ok >>> > * Checksum : ok >>> > * Rat check (11.0.11): ok >>> > - mvn clean apache-rat:check >>> > * Built from source (11.0.11): ok >>> > - mvn clean install -DskipTests >>> > * Unit tests pass (11.0.11): failed >>> > - mvn package -P runAllTests >>> -Dsurefire.rerunFailingTestsCount=3 >>> > >>> > [WARNING] The requested profile "runAllTests" could not be activated >>> > because it does not exist. >>> > [ERROR] Failed to execute goal >>> > org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-shade-plugin:3.2.4:shade (default) on >>> > project hbase-shaded-jackson-jaxrs-json-provider: Error creating shaded >>> > jar: duplicate entry: >>> > META-INF/services/org.apache.hbase.thirdparty.javax.ws.rs >>> > .ext.MessageBodyWriter >>> > >>> > Manually running `mvn clean package` within the source tarball, we >>> succeed. >>> > >>> > I have also triggered a PR build of HBASE-25864 / PR#3243 that uses >>> this >>> > RC. The tests are still running. >>> > >>> > >>> https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/blue/organizations/jenkins/HBase%2FHBase-PreCommit-GitHub-PR/detail/PR-3243/5/pipeline/ >>> > >>> > On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 6:02 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > > Ah, Thanks Nick for explaining and thanks Andrew for testing. >>> > > >>> > > We still need one more +1 to close this vote. >>> > > >>> > > Andrew Purtell 于2021年12月7日周二 05:50写道： >>> > > >>> > > > Ok, change my vote to +1 (binding). The hbase-thirdparty build and >>> > > > artifacts are good. >>> > > > >>> > > > > On Dec 6, 2021, at 1:18 PM, Nick Dimiduk >>> > wrote: >>> > > > > >>> > > > > On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 11:49 AM Andrew Purtell < >>> apurt...@apache.org >>> > > >>> > > > wrote: >>> > > > > >>> > > > >> -1 (binding) >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> Checked sums and signature, ok >>> > > > >> RAT check passed, ok >>> > > > >> Built from source, ok >>> > > > >> Built HEAD of master (d9315fa043) with >>> > > -Dhbase-thirdparty.version=4.0.0, >>> > > > >> hbase-http module tests fail >>> > > > >> >>> > > > > >>> > > > > Adoption of this dependency will require changes to master. I had >>> > > posted >>> > > > > necessary changes on https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/3243 >>> and >>> > Duo >>> > > > did >>> > > > > his own on https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/3910. >>> > > > > >>> > > > > [ERROR] Tests run: 17, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 2, Time >>> > > elapsed: >>> > > > >> 2.29 s <<< FAILURE! - in >>> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.http.TestHttpServer >>> > > > >> [ERROR] org.apache.hadoop.hbase.http.TestHttpServer.testJersey >>> Time >>> > > > >> elapsed: 0.123 s <<< ERROR! >>> > > > >> java.io.FileNotFoundException: >>> > > http://localhost:55106/jersey/foo?op=bar >>> > > > >> at >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >>> sun.net.www.protocol.http.HttpURLConnection.getInputStream0(HttpURLConnection.java:1898) >>> > > > >> at >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >>> sun.net.www.protocol.http.HttpURLConnection.access$200(HttpURLConnection.java:92) >>> > > > >> at >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >>> > > >>> >
[jira] [Resolved] (HBASE-26542) Apply a `package` to test protobuf files
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26542?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Nick Dimiduk resolved HBASE-26542. -- Resolution: Fixed > Apply a `package` to test protobuf files > > > Key: HBASE-26542 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26542 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Test > Components: Protobufs, test >Reporter: Nick Dimiduk >Assignee: Nick Dimiduk >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 2.5.0, 2.4.9, 2.6.0, 3.0.0-alpha-3 > > > This is needed in a couple places in order to test that traces over the IPC > layer carry correct span names, and it's good hygiene anyway. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
Re: [VOTE] Merge HBASE-26067 (storefile tracking) into master and branch-2
+1 On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 1:53 PM Andor Molnar wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > Andor > > > > > On 2021. Dec 16., at 22:30, Josh Elser wrote: > > > > Hi! > > > > I'm extremely pleased to send this official vote to merge the feature > branch for HBASE-26067[1] into master and backport into branch-2 (2.x, not > 2.5.x). This feature branch introduces the pluggable StoreFileTracker > interface. > > > > The StoreFileTracker allows the StoreFileEngine to be decoupled from > where the HFiles can be found. The DEFAULT implementation of this > StoreFileTracker (e.g. files in a family's directory) is still the default > implementation. This merge would introduce a FILE implementation which uses > a flat-file in each column family to track the files which make up this > Store. This feature is notable for HBase as it invalidate the need for > HBOSS (a distributed locking layer in hbase-filesystem) when Amazon S3 is > used for HBase data. > > > > We had a DISCUSS thread [2] in which the overall sentiment was positive > to merge. > > > > Covering some high-level details/FAQ on this work: > > * Wellington and Szabolcs have successfully run ITBLL with Chaos Monkies > using this feature. > > * YCSB (load) indicates a slight performance improvement when using S3 > as the storage system for HBase as compared to using HBOSS [3] > > * A new section was added to the HBase book which covers the feature and > how to use it. > > * There is some follow-on work expected, tracked in HBASE-26584 [4], > which includes things like making user consumption easier and additional > metrics to measure effectiveness of the feature. > > > > As is customary, this vote will be open for at least 3 days (2021/12/19 > 2130 GMT). We'll follow the standard ASF lazy-consensus rules for code > modification (though I do not expect to need the lazy-consensus caveat). > Please vote: > > > > +1: Merge the changes from HBASE-26067 to master and branch-2 > > -1: Do not merge these changes because ... > > > > Big thank you to all of the super hard work that Duo, Wellington, and > Szabolcs have put into this feature. > > > > - Josh > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26067 > > [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/6dblom3tc2oz05d263pvmrywlthqq1c1 > > [3] > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26067?focusedCommentId=17448499=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-17448499 > > [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26584 > >
Re: [VOTE] Merge HBASE-26067 (storefile tracking) into master and branch-2
+1 (non-binding) Andor > On 2021. Dec 16., at 22:30, Josh Elser wrote: > > Hi! > > I'm extremely pleased to send this official vote to merge the feature branch > for HBASE-26067[1] into master and backport into branch-2 (2.x, not 2.5.x). > This feature branch introduces the pluggable StoreFileTracker interface. > > The StoreFileTracker allows the StoreFileEngine to be decoupled from where > the HFiles can be found. The DEFAULT implementation of this StoreFileTracker > (e.g. files in a family's directory) is still the default implementation. > This merge would introduce a FILE implementation which uses a flat-file in > each column family to track the files which make up this Store. This feature > is notable for HBase as it invalidate the need for HBOSS (a distributed > locking layer in hbase-filesystem) when Amazon S3 is used for HBase data. > > We had a DISCUSS thread [2] in which the overall sentiment was positive to > merge. > > Covering some high-level details/FAQ on this work: > * Wellington and Szabolcs have successfully run ITBLL with Chaos Monkies > using this feature. > * YCSB (load) indicates a slight performance improvement when using S3 as the > storage system for HBase as compared to using HBOSS [3] > * A new section was added to the HBase book which covers the feature and how > to use it. > * There is some follow-on work expected, tracked in HBASE-26584 [4], which > includes things like making user consumption easier and additional metrics to > measure effectiveness of the feature. > > As is customary, this vote will be open for at least 3 days (2021/12/19 2130 > GMT). We'll follow the standard ASF lazy-consensus rules for code > modification (though I do not expect to need the lazy-consensus caveat). > Please vote: > > +1: Merge the changes from HBASE-26067 to master and branch-2 > -1: Do not merge these changes because ... > > Big thank you to all of the super hard work that Duo, Wellington, and > Szabolcs have put into this feature. > > - Josh > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26067 > [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/6dblom3tc2oz05d263pvmrywlthqq1c1 > [3] > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26067?focusedCommentId=17448499=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-17448499 > [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26584
[VOTE] Merge HBASE-26067 (storefile tracking) into master and branch-2
Hi! I'm extremely pleased to send this official vote to merge the feature branch for HBASE-26067[1] into master and backport into branch-2 (2.x, not 2.5.x). This feature branch introduces the pluggable StoreFileTracker interface. The StoreFileTracker allows the StoreFileEngine to be decoupled from where the HFiles can be found. The DEFAULT implementation of this StoreFileTracker (e.g. files in a family's directory) is still the default implementation. This merge would introduce a FILE implementation which uses a flat-file in each column family to track the files which make up this Store. This feature is notable for HBase as it invalidate the need for HBOSS (a distributed locking layer in hbase-filesystem) when Amazon S3 is used for HBase data. We had a DISCUSS thread [2] in which the overall sentiment was positive to merge. Covering some high-level details/FAQ on this work: * Wellington and Szabolcs have successfully run ITBLL with Chaos Monkies using this feature. * YCSB (load) indicates a slight performance improvement when using S3 as the storage system for HBase as compared to using HBOSS [3] * A new section was added to the HBase book which covers the feature and how to use it. * There is some follow-on work expected, tracked in HBASE-26584 [4], which includes things like making user consumption easier and additional metrics to measure effectiveness of the feature. As is customary, this vote will be open for at least 3 days (2021/12/19 2130 GMT). We'll follow the standard ASF lazy-consensus rules for code modification (though I do not expect to need the lazy-consensus caveat). Please vote: +1: Merge the changes from HBASE-26067 to master and branch-2 -1: Do not merge these changes because ... Big thank you to all of the super hard work that Duo, Wellington, and Szabolcs have put into this feature. - Josh [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26067 [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/6dblom3tc2oz05d263pvmrywlthqq1c1 [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26067?focusedCommentId=17448499=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-17448499 [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26584
[jira] [Resolved] (HBASE-26265) Update ref guide to mention the new store file tracker implementations
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26265?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Josh Elser resolved HBASE-26265. Resolution: Fixed > Update ref guide to mention the new store file tracker implementations > -- > > Key: HBASE-26265 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26265 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Sub-task > Components: documentation >Reporter: Duo Zhang >Assignee: Wellington Chevreuil >Priority: Major > Fix For: HBASE-26067 > > > For example, when to use these store file trackers. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Created] (HBASE-26590) Hbase-client Meta lookup performance regression between hbase-1 and hbase-2
Huaxiang Sun created HBASE-26590: Summary: Hbase-client Meta lookup performance regression between hbase-1 and hbase-2 Key: HBASE-26590 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26590 Project: HBase Issue Type: Improvement Components: meta Affects Versions: 2.3.7, 3.0.0-alpha-1 Environment: ||Version ||Meta Replica Load Balance Enabled||Time || ||2.4.5-with-fixed||Yes||336458ms|| ||2.4.5-with-fixed||No||333253ms|| ||2.4.5||Yes||469980ms|| ||2.4.5||No||470515ms|| | *cdh-5.16.2*| *No* | *323412ms*| Reporter: Huaxiang Sun Assignee: Huaxiang Sun One of our users complained higher latency after application upgrades from hbase-1.2 client (CDH-5.16.2) to hbase-2.4.5 client with meta replica Load Balance mode during app restart. I reproduced the regression by a test for meta lookup. At my test cluster, there are 160k regions for the test table, so there are 160k entries in meta region. Used one thread to do 1 million meta lookup against the meta region server. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Resolved] (HBASE-26472) Adhere to semantic conventions regarding table data operations
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26472?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Nick Dimiduk resolved HBASE-26472. -- Resolution: Fixed The problem is actually HBASE-26542. > Adhere to semantic conventions regarding table data operations > -- > > Key: HBASE-26472 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26472 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Sub-task >Reporter: Nick Dimiduk >Assignee: Nick Dimiduk >Priority: Major > Fix For: 2.5.0, 2.6.0, 3.0.0-alpha-3 > > > Follow the guidance outlined in > https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/3e380e2/specification/trace/semantic_conventions/database.dm -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Reopened] (HBASE-26542) Apply a `package` to test protobuf files
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26542?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Nick Dimiduk reopened HBASE-26542: -- This breaks an RPC test. Reopening for addendum. > Apply a `package` to test protobuf files > > > Key: HBASE-26542 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26542 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Test > Components: Protobufs, test >Reporter: Nick Dimiduk >Assignee: Nick Dimiduk >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 2.5.0, 2.4.9, 2.6.0, 3.0.0-alpha-3 > > > This is needed in a couple places in order to test that traces over the IPC > layer carry correct span names, and it's good hygiene anyway. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Created] (HBASE-26589) Protobuf Services should be resolved by their full name
Nick Dimiduk created HBASE-26589:
Summary: Protobuf Services should be resolved by their full name
Key: HBASE-26589
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26589
Project: HBase
Issue Type: Task
Components: IPC/RPC
Affects Versions: 2.5.0, 3.0.0-alpha-2, 2.6.0
Reporter: Nick Dimiduk
I noticed this while investigating test failures resulting from HBASE-26472.
The test in question ({{TestRpcServerSlowConnectionSetup}}) builds a connection
header by populating the {{serviceName}} field with the service descriptor's
{{getFullName()}} method. The value returned by {{getFullName()}} is the
protobuf service's package and name. However, down in {{RpcServer}}, we resolve
the service named by the connection header using the service descriptor's
{{getName()}} method. {{getName()}} returns the protobuf service's name,
without the package.
It is my opinion that this is a bug in the {{RpcServer}}, it should resolve
services using their fully qualified name.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Reopened] (HBASE-26472) Adhere to semantic conventions regarding table data operations
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26472?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Nick Dimiduk reopened HBASE-26472: -- Broken test on branch-2.5 looks related. Investigating. > Adhere to semantic conventions regarding table data operations > -- > > Key: HBASE-26472 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26472 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Sub-task >Reporter: Nick Dimiduk >Assignee: Nick Dimiduk >Priority: Major > Fix For: 2.5.0, 2.6.0, 3.0.0-alpha-3 > > > Follow the guidance outlined in > https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/3e380e2/specification/trace/semantic_conventions/database.dm -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Created] (HBASE-26588) Implement a migration tool to help users migrate SFT implementation for a large set of tables
Duo Zhang created HBASE-26588: - Summary: Implement a migration tool to help users migrate SFT implementation for a large set of tables Key: HBASE-26588 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26588 Project: HBase Issue Type: Sub-task Components: tooling Reporter: Duo Zhang It will be very useful for our users who deploy HBase on S3 like systems. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Created] (HBASE-26587) Introduce a new Admin API to change SFT implementation
Duo Zhang created HBASE-26587: - Summary: Introduce a new Admin API to change SFT implementation Key: HBASE-26587 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26587 Project: HBase Issue Type: Sub-task Components: Admin, API Reporter: Duo Zhang Now changing SFT implementation requires two MTP, and there are also lots of rules on how to correctly set the MIGRATION SFT, I think we'd better introduce a special method to implement the complicated logic by code,to make our users life easier. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Created] (HBASE-26586) The MigrateStoreFileTrackerProcedure should not rely on the global config when setting SFT implementation for a table
Duo Zhang created HBASE-26586: - Summary: The MigrateStoreFileTrackerProcedure should not rely on the global config when setting SFT implementation for a table Key: HBASE-26586 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26586 Project: HBase Issue Type: Sub-task Components: HFile Reporter: Duo Zhang If a table does not have a SFT implementation in its table descriptor, it means we are upgrading from an older version where SFT is not implemented, so the SFT implementation for the table should always be DEFAULT. A misconfigure here could cause data loss. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
[jira] [Created] (HBASE-26585) Add SFT configuration to META table descriptor when creating META
Wellington Chevreuil created HBASE-26585: Summary: Add SFT configuration to META table descriptor when creating META Key: HBASE-26585 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26585 Project: HBase Issue Type: Sub-task Reporter: Wellington Chevreuil Assignee: Wellington Chevreuil META doesn't get created via CreateTableProcedure, but rather during master initialisation on cluster's first run, so changes implemented on HBASE-26246 don't take effect for meta table. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.20.1#820001)
