Re: [DISCUSS] 5.0.0-beta release before month's end?
Time is running short for that "end of month", but here's some progress. I've been able to run through most of the ITs on a linux box. Yay! * There are known local index issues PHOENIX-4440. I saw LocalIndexIT, LocalIndexSplitMergeIT, and MutableRollbackIT all fail. Are you tracking PHOENIX-4440 for all of these, Rajeshbabu? * IndexScrutinyToolIT is broken, just filed PHOENIX-4565 for that but it needs to be triaged to determine if we consider it an alpha/beta release blocker or not. I'm leaning "no" * Commit IT @Ignore patches on PHOENIX-4494 and PHOENIX-4561 * Decide what to do with PHOENIX-4482 (IT failure due to WAL impl changing underneath). I'd appreciate those with more insight into WAL-recovery/index-replay test code to comment as to what we should do with WALReplayWithIndexWritesAndCompressedWALIT After this short list, I think we can push out an RC. - Josh On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 7:32 PM, Josh Elser wrote: > I don't think so. We (I use that loosely -- I'd hardly lump my contributions > to this effort in the same room as the contributions of the others) have > been moving fast to get back to functional state. This have definitely > lapsed. > > It is a blocker to make sure 5.x isn't missing stuff from 4.x and vice-versa > before we consider a 5.0.0 "stable" release. I don't think this needs to > block the alpha/beta I was hoping to get to this week. > > > On 1/22/18 3:10 PM, James Taylor wrote: >> >> Have you guys back ported the removal of deprecated APIs patches to the >> 4.x >> branches? That'll probably help minimize the merge conflicts we see going >> forward. >> >> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 1:03 PM, James Taylor >> wrote: >> >>> Awesome! That's great work!! >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Josh Elser wrote: >>> Hah, funny you should ask! I was just thinking that I should send out a note. * Rajeshbabu and Sergey are trying to track down a nasty issue that the IndexScrutiny tool has caught where there are dangling index records (PHOENIX-4534) * Rajeshbabu is also looking into some local index failures * Ankit has done some testing of the phoenix-hive integration, I think phoenix-spark is also looking OK Last I chatted with folks, they were seeing >90% pass rate of the test suite which seems pretty good to me. My plan was to work on a beta release soon now that we have a beta from HBase. Things are generally functional as of now -- I think getting it into the hands of folks to get more people poking it would be great. Maybe rc0 next week? - Josh On 1/18/18 1:11 PM, James Taylor wrote: > How are things looking with the 5.0.0 alpha/beta on HBase 2.x? > > On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 10:57 AM, Josh Elser wrote: > > Good point. Perhaps "alpha" would be a better label? >> >> >> IIUC, the issue is that we need the HBase release, and then a Tephra >> release, and then we can get Tephra fixed for Phoenix5. Perhaps Ankit >> can >> provide some more color to the situation. >> >> >> On 1/4/18 12:07 PM, Nick Dimiduk wrote: >> >> Isn't Tephra integration mandatory for transaction support? What >> happens >>> >>> to >>> a user who has TRANSACTIONAL=true tables when they upgrade? This >>> can't >>> really fail gracefully. I guess transaction support is still marked >>> 'beta', >>> but still, this would be a regression of functionality in "base >>> Phoenix". >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 8:34 AM Josh Elser wrote: >>> >>> Talked to Rajeshbabu and Ankit offline this morning. >>> Sounds like there are a few integration points which are still lacking: * phoenix-hive: PHOENIX-4423 * phoenix-spark: untested (probably broken against newest Spark) * phoenix-kafka: untested (probably broken against newest Kafka -- see PHOENIX-4515 PHOENIX-4516) * Tephra integration: Needs a new release of Tephra with some fixes Ankit helped with. I plan to not consider these 5.0.0-alpha/beta release blockers, we'll just call those out which we don't get tested/fixed. On 1/2/18 1:08 PM, Josh Elser wrote: Happy New Year folks! > > > I'd like to test the waters: what do people think about trying to > get a > 5.0.0 "beta" release out to the community before the end of > January? > > HBase is doing the same right now with 2.0.0. My thinking is that > if > things are stable "enough", getting a base for people to use a 5.0 > Phoenix release more easily, we can catch more bugs and get a > better > product out the door. > > Thoughts/concerns? I'm happy to RM. > > - Josh > > >>>
Re: [DISCUSS] 5.0.0-beta release before month's end?
I don't think so. We (I use that loosely -- I'd hardly lump my contributions to this effort in the same room as the contributions of the others) have been moving fast to get back to functional state. This have definitely lapsed. It is a blocker to make sure 5.x isn't missing stuff from 4.x and vice-versa before we consider a 5.0.0 "stable" release. I don't think this needs to block the alpha/beta I was hoping to get to this week. On 1/22/18 3:10 PM, James Taylor wrote: Have you guys back ported the removal of deprecated APIs patches to the 4.x branches? That'll probably help minimize the merge conflicts we see going forward. On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 1:03 PM, James Taylor wrote: Awesome! That's great work!! On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Josh Elser wrote: Hah, funny you should ask! I was just thinking that I should send out a note. * Rajeshbabu and Sergey are trying to track down a nasty issue that the IndexScrutiny tool has caught where there are dangling index records (PHOENIX-4534) * Rajeshbabu is also looking into some local index failures * Ankit has done some testing of the phoenix-hive integration, I think phoenix-spark is also looking OK Last I chatted with folks, they were seeing >90% pass rate of the test suite which seems pretty good to me. My plan was to work on a beta release soon now that we have a beta from HBase. Things are generally functional as of now -- I think getting it into the hands of folks to get more people poking it would be great. Maybe rc0 next week? - Josh On 1/18/18 1:11 PM, James Taylor wrote: How are things looking with the 5.0.0 alpha/beta on HBase 2.x? On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 10:57 AM, Josh Elser wrote: Good point. Perhaps "alpha" would be a better label? IIUC, the issue is that we need the HBase release, and then a Tephra release, and then we can get Tephra fixed for Phoenix5. Perhaps Ankit can provide some more color to the situation. On 1/4/18 12:07 PM, Nick Dimiduk wrote: Isn't Tephra integration mandatory for transaction support? What happens to a user who has TRANSACTIONAL=true tables when they upgrade? This can't really fail gracefully. I guess transaction support is still marked 'beta', but still, this would be a regression of functionality in "base Phoenix". On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 8:34 AM Josh Elser wrote: Talked to Rajeshbabu and Ankit offline this morning. Sounds like there are a few integration points which are still lacking: * phoenix-hive: PHOENIX-4423 * phoenix-spark: untested (probably broken against newest Spark) * phoenix-kafka: untested (probably broken against newest Kafka -- see PHOENIX-4515 PHOENIX-4516) * Tephra integration: Needs a new release of Tephra with some fixes Ankit helped with. I plan to not consider these 5.0.0-alpha/beta release blockers, we'll just call those out which we don't get tested/fixed. On 1/2/18 1:08 PM, Josh Elser wrote: Happy New Year folks! I'd like to test the waters: what do people think about trying to get a 5.0.0 "beta" release out to the community before the end of January? HBase is doing the same right now with 2.0.0. My thinking is that if things are stable "enough", getting a base for people to use a 5.0 Phoenix release more easily, we can catch more bugs and get a better product out the door. Thoughts/concerns? I'm happy to RM. - Josh
Re: [DISCUSS] 5.0.0-beta release before month's end?
Have you guys back ported the removal of deprecated APIs patches to the 4.x branches? That'll probably help minimize the merge conflicts we see going forward. On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 1:03 PM, James Taylor wrote: > Awesome! That's great work!! > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Josh Elser wrote: > >> Hah, funny you should ask! I was just thinking that I should send out a >> note. >> >> * Rajeshbabu and Sergey are trying to track down a nasty issue that the >> IndexScrutiny tool has caught where there are dangling index records >> (PHOENIX-4534) >> * Rajeshbabu is also looking into some local index failures >> * Ankit has done some testing of the phoenix-hive integration, I think >> phoenix-spark is also looking OK >> >> Last I chatted with folks, they were seeing >90% pass rate of the test >> suite which seems pretty good to me. My plan was to work on a beta release >> soon now that we have a beta from HBase. Things are generally functional as >> of now -- I think getting it into the hands of folks to get more people >> poking it would be great. >> >> Maybe rc0 next week? >> >> - Josh >> >> >> On 1/18/18 1:11 PM, James Taylor wrote: >> >>> How are things looking with the 5.0.0 alpha/beta on HBase 2.x? >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 10:57 AM, Josh Elser wrote: >>> >>> Good point. Perhaps "alpha" would be a better label? IIUC, the issue is that we need the HBase release, and then a Tephra release, and then we can get Tephra fixed for Phoenix5. Perhaps Ankit can provide some more color to the situation. On 1/4/18 12:07 PM, Nick Dimiduk wrote: Isn't Tephra integration mandatory for transaction support? What happens > to > a user who has TRANSACTIONAL=true tables when they upgrade? This can't > really fail gracefully. I guess transaction support is still marked > 'beta', > but still, this would be a regression of functionality in "base > Phoenix". > > On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 8:34 AM Josh Elser wrote: > > Talked to Rajeshbabu and Ankit offline this morning. > >> >> Sounds like there are a few integration points which are still >> lacking: >> >> * phoenix-hive: PHOENIX-4423 >> * phoenix-spark: untested (probably broken against newest Spark) >> * phoenix-kafka: untested (probably broken against newest Kafka -- see >> PHOENIX-4515 PHOENIX-4516) >> * Tephra integration: Needs a new release of Tephra with some fixes >> Ankit helped with. >> >> I plan to not consider these 5.0.0-alpha/beta release blockers, we'll >> just call those out which we don't get tested/fixed. >> >> On 1/2/18 1:08 PM, Josh Elser wrote: >> >> Happy New Year folks! >>> >>> I'd like to test the waters: what do people think about trying to >>> get a >>> 5.0.0 "beta" release out to the community before the end of January? >>> >>> HBase is doing the same right now with 2.0.0. My thinking is that if >>> things are stable "enough", getting a base for people to use a 5.0 >>> Phoenix release more easily, we can catch more bugs and get a better >>> product out the door. >>> >>> Thoughts/concerns? I'm happy to RM. >>> >>> - Josh >>> >>> >> >> > >>> >
Re: [DISCUSS] 5.0.0-beta release before month's end?
Awesome! That's great work!! On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 1:00 PM, Josh Elser wrote: > Hah, funny you should ask! I was just thinking that I should send out a > note. > > * Rajeshbabu and Sergey are trying to track down a nasty issue that the > IndexScrutiny tool has caught where there are dangling index records > (PHOENIX-4534) > * Rajeshbabu is also looking into some local index failures > * Ankit has done some testing of the phoenix-hive integration, I think > phoenix-spark is also looking OK > > Last I chatted with folks, they were seeing >90% pass rate of the test > suite which seems pretty good to me. My plan was to work on a beta release > soon now that we have a beta from HBase. Things are generally functional as > of now -- I think getting it into the hands of folks to get more people > poking it would be great. > > Maybe rc0 next week? > > - Josh > > > On 1/18/18 1:11 PM, James Taylor wrote: > >> How are things looking with the 5.0.0 alpha/beta on HBase 2.x? >> >> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 10:57 AM, Josh Elser wrote: >> >> Good point. Perhaps "alpha" would be a better label? >>> >>> IIUC, the issue is that we need the HBase release, and then a Tephra >>> release, and then we can get Tephra fixed for Phoenix5. Perhaps Ankit can >>> provide some more color to the situation. >>> >>> >>> On 1/4/18 12:07 PM, Nick Dimiduk wrote: >>> >>> Isn't Tephra integration mandatory for transaction support? What happens to a user who has TRANSACTIONAL=true tables when they upgrade? This can't really fail gracefully. I guess transaction support is still marked 'beta', but still, this would be a regression of functionality in "base Phoenix". On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 8:34 AM Josh Elser wrote: Talked to Rajeshbabu and Ankit offline this morning. > > Sounds like there are a few integration points which are still lacking: > > * phoenix-hive: PHOENIX-4423 > * phoenix-spark: untested (probably broken against newest Spark) > * phoenix-kafka: untested (probably broken against newest Kafka -- see > PHOENIX-4515 PHOENIX-4516) > * Tephra integration: Needs a new release of Tephra with some fixes > Ankit helped with. > > I plan to not consider these 5.0.0-alpha/beta release blockers, we'll > just call those out which we don't get tested/fixed. > > On 1/2/18 1:08 PM, Josh Elser wrote: > > Happy New Year folks! >> >> I'd like to test the waters: what do people think about trying to get >> a >> 5.0.0 "beta" release out to the community before the end of January? >> >> HBase is doing the same right now with 2.0.0. My thinking is that if >> things are stable "enough", getting a base for people to use a 5.0 >> Phoenix release more easily, we can catch more bugs and get a better >> product out the door. >> >> Thoughts/concerns? I'm happy to RM. >> >> - Josh >> >> > > >>
Re: [DISCUSS] 5.0.0-beta release before month's end?
Hah, funny you should ask! I was just thinking that I should send out a note. * Rajeshbabu and Sergey are trying to track down a nasty issue that the IndexScrutiny tool has caught where there are dangling index records (PHOENIX-4534) * Rajeshbabu is also looking into some local index failures * Ankit has done some testing of the phoenix-hive integration, I think phoenix-spark is also looking OK Last I chatted with folks, they were seeing >90% pass rate of the test suite which seems pretty good to me. My plan was to work on a beta release soon now that we have a beta from HBase. Things are generally functional as of now -- I think getting it into the hands of folks to get more people poking it would be great. Maybe rc0 next week? - Josh On 1/18/18 1:11 PM, James Taylor wrote: How are things looking with the 5.0.0 alpha/beta on HBase 2.x? On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 10:57 AM, Josh Elser wrote: Good point. Perhaps "alpha" would be a better label? IIUC, the issue is that we need the HBase release, and then a Tephra release, and then we can get Tephra fixed for Phoenix5. Perhaps Ankit can provide some more color to the situation. On 1/4/18 12:07 PM, Nick Dimiduk wrote: Isn't Tephra integration mandatory for transaction support? What happens to a user who has TRANSACTIONAL=true tables when they upgrade? This can't really fail gracefully. I guess transaction support is still marked 'beta', but still, this would be a regression of functionality in "base Phoenix". On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 8:34 AM Josh Elser wrote: Talked to Rajeshbabu and Ankit offline this morning. Sounds like there are a few integration points which are still lacking: * phoenix-hive: PHOENIX-4423 * phoenix-spark: untested (probably broken against newest Spark) * phoenix-kafka: untested (probably broken against newest Kafka -- see PHOENIX-4515 PHOENIX-4516) * Tephra integration: Needs a new release of Tephra with some fixes Ankit helped with. I plan to not consider these 5.0.0-alpha/beta release blockers, we'll just call those out which we don't get tested/fixed. On 1/2/18 1:08 PM, Josh Elser wrote: Happy New Year folks! I'd like to test the waters: what do people think about trying to get a 5.0.0 "beta" release out to the community before the end of January? HBase is doing the same right now with 2.0.0. My thinking is that if things are stable "enough", getting a base for people to use a 5.0 Phoenix release more easily, we can catch more bugs and get a better product out the door. Thoughts/concerns? I'm happy to RM. - Josh
Re: [DISCUSS] 5.0.0-beta release before month's end?
How are things looking with the 5.0.0 alpha/beta on HBase 2.x? On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 10:57 AM, Josh Elser wrote: > Good point. Perhaps "alpha" would be a better label? > > IIUC, the issue is that we need the HBase release, and then a Tephra > release, and then we can get Tephra fixed for Phoenix5. Perhaps Ankit can > provide some more color to the situation. > > > On 1/4/18 12:07 PM, Nick Dimiduk wrote: > >> Isn't Tephra integration mandatory for transaction support? What happens >> to >> a user who has TRANSACTIONAL=true tables when they upgrade? This can't >> really fail gracefully. I guess transaction support is still marked >> 'beta', >> but still, this would be a regression of functionality in "base Phoenix". >> >> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 8:34 AM Josh Elser wrote: >> >> Talked to Rajeshbabu and Ankit offline this morning. >>> >>> Sounds like there are a few integration points which are still lacking: >>> >>> * phoenix-hive: PHOENIX-4423 >>> * phoenix-spark: untested (probably broken against newest Spark) >>> * phoenix-kafka: untested (probably broken against newest Kafka -- see >>> PHOENIX-4515 PHOENIX-4516) >>> * Tephra integration: Needs a new release of Tephra with some fixes >>> Ankit helped with. >>> >>> I plan to not consider these 5.0.0-alpha/beta release blockers, we'll >>> just call those out which we don't get tested/fixed. >>> >>> On 1/2/18 1:08 PM, Josh Elser wrote: >>> Happy New Year folks! I'd like to test the waters: what do people think about trying to get a 5.0.0 "beta" release out to the community before the end of January? HBase is doing the same right now with 2.0.0. My thinking is that if things are stable "enough", getting a base for people to use a 5.0 Phoenix release more easily, we can catch more bugs and get a better product out the door. Thoughts/concerns? I'm happy to RM. - Josh >>> >>> >>
Re: [DISCUSS] 5.0.0-beta release before month's end?
Good point. Perhaps "alpha" would be a better label? IIUC, the issue is that we need the HBase release, and then a Tephra release, and then we can get Tephra fixed for Phoenix5. Perhaps Ankit can provide some more color to the situation. On 1/4/18 12:07 PM, Nick Dimiduk wrote: Isn't Tephra integration mandatory for transaction support? What happens to a user who has TRANSACTIONAL=true tables when they upgrade? This can't really fail gracefully. I guess transaction support is still marked 'beta', but still, this would be a regression of functionality in "base Phoenix". On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 8:34 AM Josh Elser wrote: Talked to Rajeshbabu and Ankit offline this morning. Sounds like there are a few integration points which are still lacking: * phoenix-hive: PHOENIX-4423 * phoenix-spark: untested (probably broken against newest Spark) * phoenix-kafka: untested (probably broken against newest Kafka -- see PHOENIX-4515 PHOENIX-4516) * Tephra integration: Needs a new release of Tephra with some fixes Ankit helped with. I plan to not consider these 5.0.0-alpha/beta release blockers, we'll just call those out which we don't get tested/fixed. On 1/2/18 1:08 PM, Josh Elser wrote: Happy New Year folks! I'd like to test the waters: what do people think about trying to get a 5.0.0 "beta" release out to the community before the end of January? HBase is doing the same right now with 2.0.0. My thinking is that if things are stable "enough", getting a base for people to use a 5.0 Phoenix release more easily, we can catch more bugs and get a better product out the door. Thoughts/concerns? I'm happy to RM. - Josh
Re: [DISCUSS] 5.0.0-beta release before month's end?
Isn't Tephra integration mandatory for transaction support? What happens to a user who has TRANSACTIONAL=true tables when they upgrade? This can't really fail gracefully. I guess transaction support is still marked 'beta', but still, this would be a regression of functionality in "base Phoenix". On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 8:34 AM Josh Elser wrote: > Talked to Rajeshbabu and Ankit offline this morning. > > Sounds like there are a few integration points which are still lacking: > > * phoenix-hive: PHOENIX-4423 > * phoenix-spark: untested (probably broken against newest Spark) > * phoenix-kafka: untested (probably broken against newest Kafka -- see > PHOENIX-4515 PHOENIX-4516) > * Tephra integration: Needs a new release of Tephra with some fixes > Ankit helped with. > > I plan to not consider these 5.0.0-alpha/beta release blockers, we'll > just call those out which we don't get tested/fixed. > > On 1/2/18 1:08 PM, Josh Elser wrote: > > Happy New Year folks! > > > > I'd like to test the waters: what do people think about trying to get a > > 5.0.0 "beta" release out to the community before the end of January? > > > > HBase is doing the same right now with 2.0.0. My thinking is that if > > things are stable "enough", getting a base for people to use a 5.0 > > Phoenix release more easily, we can catch more bugs and get a better > > product out the door. > > > > Thoughts/concerns? I'm happy to RM. > > > > - Josh >
Re: [DISCUSS] 5.0.0-beta release before month's end?
Talked to Rajeshbabu and Ankit offline this morning. Sounds like there are a few integration points which are still lacking: * phoenix-hive: PHOENIX-4423 * phoenix-spark: untested (probably broken against newest Spark) * phoenix-kafka: untested (probably broken against newest Kafka -- see PHOENIX-4515 PHOENIX-4516) * Tephra integration: Needs a new release of Tephra with some fixes Ankit helped with. I plan to not consider these 5.0.0-alpha/beta release blockers, we'll just call those out which we don't get tested/fixed. On 1/2/18 1:08 PM, Josh Elser wrote: Happy New Year folks! I'd like to test the waters: what do people think about trying to get a 5.0.0 "beta" release out to the community before the end of January? HBase is doing the same right now with 2.0.0. My thinking is that if things are stable "enough", getting a base for people to use a 5.0 Phoenix release more easily, we can catch more bugs and get a better product out the door. Thoughts/concerns? I'm happy to RM. - Josh
