+1 (binding)
- Built from source- loaded 100m rows via Phoenix- exercised flushes,
compactions, scans, etc.- nothing undue in the logs
-- Lars
From: Andrew Purtell
To: "dev@hbase.apache.org"
Sent: Monday, August 8, 2016 8:45 PM
Subject: [VOTE] The 2nd HBase 0.98.21 release candidate
We could do a poll.
In the end it will probably happen organically - like it did with 0.94.
It's not a decision to be made per se - it's open source after all.As long as
patches are backported and issues are reported against 0.98 there is a need
and, IMHO, we should continue doing releases. If/Wh
There has been no demand and very few fixes for 0.94.Unless this is very little
work (as in a few hours) it's not worth it, IMHO.
Happy to declare it officially (of course it's open source, so anybody could
spin a new release) dead.
-- Lars
From: Sean Busbey
To: dev
Sent: Tuesday, Jul
Belated +1
From: Nick Dimiduk
To: hbase-dev
Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2016 9:01 PM
Subject: [DISCUSS] Move "stable" pointer to 1.2.x
With the second 1.2 patch release on the way, and 1.3 coming around the
corner, I think it's time to annotate 1.2 as the "stable" release line.
Comment
+1
The usual:- built from source- built with Phoenix- loaded a few 100m rows- did
various experiments (with and without Phoenix)- nothing strange in the logs
From: Andrew Purtell
To: "dev@hbase.apache.org"
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2016 6:26 PM
Subject: [VOTE] The 1st HBase 0.98.20 relea
+1
- built from source (both JDK8 and JDK7)- compiled Phoenix on top- loaded about
50m rows- flushed, compacted, etc.- queried data back- nothing undue in the
logs- no measurable performance degradation
From: Andrew Purtell
To: "dev@hbase.apache.org"
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 7:51
+1
- built from source- tested with latest Phoenix 4.x-0.98 code- locally loaded
100m rows (400m Cells)- briefly tested for perf and correctness.- nothing undue
in the logs
-- Lars
From: Andrew Purtell
To: "dev@hbase.apache.org"
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2016 12:20 AM
Subject: [VOTE]
+1
- build from source- loaded 100m rows- executed some custom scan, load, and
perf tests- nothing undue in the logs
-- Lars
From: Andrew Purtell
To: "dev@hbase.apache.org"
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2016 11:24 PM
Subject: [VOTE] The 1st HBase 0.98.17 release candidate (RC0) is avail
+1
From: Enis Söztutar
To: "dev@hbase.apache.org"
Sent: Monday, January 11, 2016 11:17 AM
Subject: Re: ASF git repository policy update
+1 on re-tagging releases under rel/ and using it going forward.
Enis
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Sean Busbey wrote:
> just to confirm
Cool :)
Is there a jira already? Otherwise I'll file one.
-- Lars
From: Jean-Marc Spaggiari
To: dev
Cc: lars hofhansl
Sent: Thursday, December 31, 2015 6:10 AM
Subject: Re: Compact after manual flush broken in 1.0+?
Indeed. I already informed the list about that months ago ;)
201
Normally HBase triggers a compaction after a manual flush (of a region or
table).
Looks like in 1.0 and later the code is still there but not actually exercised,
because FlushTableSubprocedure calls Region.flush() directly and ignores the
return code.
Was that by design? If so, we can remove th
That's a good call.Need to remove some metrics stuff: TimeStampingFileContext,
which appears not to be used anywhere anyway...?And some minor changes. Will
file a jira.
-- Lars
From: Stack
To: HBase Dev List ; "la...@apache.org"
Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2015 10:36 AM
Subject
Hi All,
thinking about a last 0.94 release (0.94.28), and then I think we should
"officially" EOL 0.94.The blurb on the downloads page still mentioned monthly
updates for 0.94, which hasn't been true.
One change I'm planning is to make it compilable with JDK 8.
Comments?
-- Lars
We already use the ROWCOL BF for the ExplicitColumnTracker.See HBASE-8362 for
my _failed_ attempt a while back to use ROW BFs to optimize seeking a scanner.
-- Lars
From: Jerry He
To: dev
Sent: Saturday, December 5, 2015 12:54 PM
Subject: Re: Would ROWCOL Bloom filter help in Scan
Commented on HBASE-14922, which introduces this class, along with a proposed
fix.
Thanks.
-- Lars
From: "la...@apache.org"
To: HBase Dev List ; Elliott Clark
Sent: Friday, December 4, 2015 11:14 PM
Subject: master unhealthy issue in JitterScheduledThreadPoolExecutorImpl, or
is it just
I see that locally all tests that start a mini cluster fail.
In the log I see 1000's of messages like these:2015-12-04 22:55:48,215 ERROR
[newbunny,41236,1449298547569_ChoreService_107] se
rver.NIOServerCnxnFactory$1(44): Thread
Thread[newbunny,41236,1449298547569_ChoreService_107,5,main] died
ja
+1
Performed same tests I did for 0.98.16RC0. Nothing undue.
-- Lars
From: Andrew Purtell
To: "dev@hbase.apache.org"
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 7:27 PM
Subject: [VOTE] The 1st HBase 0.98.16.1 patch release candidate (RC0) is
available
The 1st HBase 0.98.16.1 patch release cand
Just tried to a HadoopQA build through.
It fails always as shown below.
-- Lars
==
==
Testing patch on branch 0.98.
+1
- Built from source, against Hadoop 2.4.1.- loaded some 100m rows, compacted,
etc.
- ran scan perf tests (scans, gets, puts)- nothing undue in the logs, perf is
on par or better than 0.98.15
-- Lars
From: Andrew Purtell
To: "dev@hbase.apache.org"
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 4
+1
- built from source- loaded 100m rows, some through plain HBase client, some
via Phoenix- flush, compacted, did some perf tests- nothing undue in the logs
All checks out.I would have liked to get HBASE-12911 into this, but next
release it fine too.
-- Lars
From: Andrew Purtell
To: "de
+1
- built from the source tag- installed with a one-node HDFS cluster (2.4.1)-
created a table, loaded 100m rows- checked an older 100m row table that I had
loaded with an earlier version
- ran some tests, gets, large scans, etc, all checks out, correctness and
performance wise.
-- Lars
+1
From: Stack
To: HBase Dev List
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 10:22 AM
Subject: Proposal: Matteo for 2.0.0 RM
Last night at the HBase dev workshop, during discussion of 2.0.0 (what will
be in it, when will it come out), it was noted that there is as yet no RM
for hbase-2.0.0.
A
22 matches
Mail list logo
