gt; Regards
> Ram
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Ted Yu [mailto:yuzhih...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 9:46 AM
>> To: dev@hbase.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: ANN: The second hbase 0.92.2 release candidate is
>> available for downloa
.
So +1 from my side on the RC.
Regards
Ram
> -Original Message-
> From: Ted Yu [mailto:yuzhih...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 9:46 AM
> To: dev@hbase.apache.org
> Subject: Re: ANN: The second hbase 0.92.2 release candidate is
> available for downlo
Stack:
I take your and J-D's advice.
Cheers
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:12 PM, Stack wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Ted Yu wrote:
> > I went through the following thread:
> > Re: ANN: The 2nd hbase 0.94.1 release candidate is available for download
> >
> > I didn't see 3 binding +1's
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Ted Yu wrote:
> I went through the following thread:
> Re: ANN: The 2nd hbase 0.94.1 release candidate is available for download
>
> I didn't see 3 binding +1's on that RC.
>
So, Ted, why would you even go back to the old releases to do the
above count up of votes
sers to install 0.92.x or 0.94.x? For sure this should
> be 0.94.x.
>
>
> -- Lars
>
>
>
>
> From: Ted Yu
> To: dev@hbase.apache.org
> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 3:13 PM
> Subject: Re: ANN: The second hbase 0.92.2 release
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 3:13 PM
Subject: Re: ANN: The second hbase 0.92.2 release candidate is available for
download
I wasn't fully aware of the 3 binding vote rule.
I have restored the symlink.
Cheers
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans wrote:
> On Wed
I wasn't fully aware of the 3 binding vote rule.
I have restored the symlink.
Cheers
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Ted Yu wrote:
> > J-D:
> > So far we have 2 +1 (binding) and 2 +1 (non-binding), no -1 on RC1.
> >
> > Do you think
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Ted Yu wrote:
> J-D:
> So far we have 2 +1 (binding) and 2 +1 (non-binding), no -1 on RC1.
>
> Do you think I can roll this RC as 0.92.2 ?
Looks like you already did yesterday?
http://apache.cs.utah.edu/hbase/stable/
J-D
Pardon my math.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Ted Yu wrote:
> > I went through the following thread:
> > Re: ANN: The 2nd hbase 0.94.1 release candidate is available for download
> >
> > I didn't see 3 binding +1's on that RC.
> >
>
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Ted Yu wrote:
> I went through the following thread:
> Re: ANN: The 2nd hbase 0.94.1 release candidate is available for download
>
> I didn't see 3 binding +1's on that RC.
>
> FYI
One: http://search-hadoop.com/m/Vqs68Jxybc2
Two: http://search-hadoop.com/m/TDCWTJ
I went through the following thread:
Re: ANN: The 2nd hbase 0.94.1 release candidate is available for download
I didn't see 3 binding +1's on that RC.
FYI
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Ted Yu wrote:
> J-D:
> So far we have 2 +1 (binding) and 2 +1 (non-binding), no -1 on RC1.
>
> Do you thin
J-D:
So far we have 2 +1 (binding) and 2 +1 (non-binding), no -1 on RC1.
Do you think I can roll this RC as 0.92.2 ?
Thanks
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Elliott Clark wrote:
> So it looks like I must have just caught a region as it was moving or
> something. I can't seem to re-produce tha
Thanks Elliot for your validation effort.
Appreciate it.
On Sep 12, 2012, at 12:07 PM, Elliott Clark wrote:
> So it looks like I must have just caught a region as it was moving or
> something. I can't seem to re-produce that error. So I'm fully +1.
> Sorry for the false alarm.
>
> On Wed,
So it looks like I must have just caught a region as it was moving or
something. I can't seem to re-produce that error. So I'm fully +1.
Sorry for the false alarm.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Elliott Clark wrote:
> I'm +1'ish
>
> Spun up a 0.92.1 cluster wrote some data. Then spun up a 0.
I'm +1'ish
Spun up a 0.92.1 cluster wrote some data. Then spun up a 0.92.2RC and
everything worked.
Ran LoadTestTool while killing region servers. Everything recovered well.
Ran PerformanceEvaluation everything went well
However when trying to manually split a table while tests were running
I
We're having more and more releases across 0.92, 0.94 and soon 0.96
branches.
It would be wise to revisit the historical convention.
Thanks for bringing this up, J-D.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans wrote:
> > Usually it takes 3 +1s by committers. Maybe hang a little while t
> Usually it takes 3 +1s by committers. Maybe hang a little while to
> get another one or so?
Little nit, it's actually 3 PMC members. Historically committers were
also PMC members but this changed recently.
I'm referring to http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
We may want to eventually
Thanks for the reminder, Stack.
I have copied the security tar ball to hbase-0.92.2-rc1 directory.
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:24 PM, Stack wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 9:32 PM, Stack wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Ted Yu wrote:
> >> With 3 +1's and no -1, 0.92.2 RC1 passes.
>
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 9:32 PM, Stack wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Ted Yu wrote:
>> With 3 +1's and no -1, 0.92.2 RC1 passes.
>>
I am +1 on releasing this tgz as 0.92.2.
I verified the md5 and the signature. Layout when I untar looks good
(doc, api). Started it standalone. UI l
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Ted Yu wrote:
> With 3 +1's and no -1, 0.92.2 RC1 passes.
>
Usually it takes 3 +1s by committers. Maybe hang a little while to
get another one or so?
St.Ack
With 3 +1's and no -1, 0.92.2 RC1 passes.
I will announce 0.92.2 release tomorrow.
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Aditya wrote:
> I tested 0.92.2 this weekend under heavy workload and induced master/region
> server fail-over. No issues were observed.
>
> Kind regards,
> Aditya Kishore
>
> On
Aditya / Shrijeet:
Thanks for the update.
Appreciate it.
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Aditya wrote:
> I tested 0.92.2 this weekend under heavy workload and induced master/region
> server fail-over. No issues were observed.
>
> Kind regards,
> Aditya Kishore
>
> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:
I tested 0.92.2 this weekend under heavy workload and induced master/region
server fail-over. No issues were observed.
Kind regards,
Aditya Kishore
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Shrijeet Paliwal
wrote:
> 0.92.2 has been running for a couple of weeks on all of our production
> data centers. N
0.92.2 has been running for a couple of weeks on all of our production
data centers. No issues yet.
-Shrijeet
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Ted Yu wrote:
> A gentle reminder that Sept. 12th is approaching.
>
> I am +1 on this RC: I have done some basic checking in a dev cluster and
> everythi
A gentle reminder that Sept. 12th is approaching.
I am +1 on this RC: I have done some basic checking in a dev cluster and
everything was working.
Have a nice weekend.
On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Ted Yu wrote:
> Hi,
> The second 0.92.2 RC is available for download here:
>
> http://peopl
25 matches
Mail list logo
