I pushed a tag for 1.4.0RC0 as 3839a01ddc430f68ad83c6be1317a34cc16cf13d.
Feel free to commit to branch-1 and branch-1.4 as I finish with 1.4.0RC0.
Wednesday.
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> I fixed HBASE-19429 by disabling checkstyle report generation during the
> site
I fixed HBASE-19429 by disabling checkstyle report generation during the
site target. There's something wrong with it. Maybe too many warnings? I
get an inscrutable error on MacOS and a segfault in the JVM on Linux.
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 6:17 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> I am blocked on HBASE-1
I am blocked on HBASE-19429. If someone could help I could really use it.
I'm out of time today and won't make the self-imposed timeline for release
today. I'm out tomorrow. Earliest will be Wednesday but I have no idea how
to proceed with this build failure.
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 12:46 PM, Andre
We need to discuss branch-1 policy regarding builds against Hadoop 3.0.0.
See HBASE-19421
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> I propose to eject hbase-native-client to GitHub on HBASE-19419
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Andrew Purtell
> wrote:
>
>> No problem, please
I propose to eject hbase-native-client to GitHub on HBASE-19419
On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> No problem, please commit it.
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Guanghao Zhang
> wrote:
>
>> Andrew, HBASE-18626 is a document fix for the incompatible change about
>> the
No problem, please commit it.
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Guanghao Zhang wrote:
> Andrew, HBASE-18626 is a document fix for the incompatible change about the
> replication TableCFs' config. Can we include it for 1.4? Thanks.
>
> 2017-12-01 9:19 GMT+08:00 Stack :
>
> > I pushed HBASE-18233.
Andrew, HBASE-18626 is a document fix for the incompatible change about the
replication TableCFs' config. Can we include it for 1.4? Thanks.
2017-12-01 9:19 GMT+08:00 Stack :
> I pushed HBASE-18233. Thanks for finding the issue and patience waiting on
> fix Andrew.
> St.Ack
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 20
I pushed HBASE-18233. Thanks for finding the issue and patience waiting on
fix Andrew.
St.Ack
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> No problem, committing it now
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Sergey Soldatov >
> wrote:
>
> > Andrew,
> >
> > Can we include HBASE-19393 a
No problem, committing it now
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Sergey Soldatov
wrote:
> Andrew,
>
> Can we include HBASE-19393 as well? Quite annoying issue and very simple
> fix.
>
> Thanks,
> Sergey
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Andrew Purtell
> wrote:
>
> > Not too late, no
> >
> > On
Andrew,
Can we include HBASE-19393 as well? Quite annoying issue and very simple
fix.
Thanks,
Sergey
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> Not too late, no
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Stack wrote:
>
> > Fix is up if it is not too late Andrew.
> > St.Ack
> >
> > On
Not too late, no
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 3:31 PM, Stack wrote:
> Fix is up if it is not too late Andrew.
> St.Ack
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Stack wrote:
>
> > Andrew, your testing has turned up an issue in HBASE-18233. It is present
> > in the 1.4 candidate patch and in 1.3. The fail
Fix is up if it is not too late Andrew.
St.Ack
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Stack wrote:
> Andrew, your testing has turned up an issue in HBASE-18233. It is present
> in the 1.4 candidate patch and in 1.3. The failure is intermittent. I am
> working on a fix but want to make sure I have it r
Andrew, your testing has turned up an issue in HBASE-18233. It is present
in the 1.4 candidate patch and in 1.3. The failure is intermittent. I am
working on a fix but want to make sure I have it right. So, I withdraw my
request that 1.4 include it.
Thanks,
S
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Andr
TestGlobalThrottler is a problem stemming from the revert of HBASE-9465
on branch-1.4. The test came in on HBASE-17314 so I'll also revert that
from branch-1.4. For more on this see HBASE-19381
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> The TestEndToEndSplitTransaction failure
The TestEndToEndSplitTransaction failure will be fixed by HBASE-19379.
The TestGlobalThrottler issue is a hang, which is probably why it slipped
through the cracks. I went back 32 commits from head and it was still
stuck. 64 commits back it's good. Somewhere in between. Will get to the
offending c
Thanks. I'll take a look. They were passing for me before I went out on
vacation.
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Stack wrote:
> Thanks.
>
> BTW, I noticed this morning that TestGlobalThrottler and
> TestEndToEndSplitTransaction
> fail locally for me and up on jenkins as part of hadoopqa runs
Thanks.
BTW, I noticed this morning that TestGlobalThrottler and
TestEndToEndSplitTransaction
fail locally for me and up on jenkins as part of hadoopqa runs and on
recent 1.4 runs.
I tried to poke at why. They seem fine in 1.2, 1.3, and 2.0. Got distracted
and got no further than this
S
On
Ok, no problem.
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Stack wrote:
> May I get HBASE-18233 into 1.4.0 Andrew? It is in 1.2 and 1.3. Waiting on
> hadoopqa run. Would be good to have it all up and down branch-1.
> Thanks Sir,
> St.Ack
>
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Peter Somogyi
> wrote:
>
> >
May I get HBASE-18233 into 1.4.0 Andrew? It is in 1.2 and 1.3. Waiting on
hadoopqa run. Would be good to have it all up and down branch-1.
Thanks Sir,
St.Ack
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Peter Somogyi
wrote:
> HBASE-19188 was just resolved. :)
>
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Andrew Pur
HBASE-19188 was just resolved. :)
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> I come back to find HBASE-19188 is a blocker. :-/
> Need to resolve it
>
> On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Sean Busbey wrote:
>
> > thanks for all the work as RM on this Andrew!
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 18,
I come back to find HBASE-19188 is a blocker. :-/
Need to resolve it
On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Sean Busbey wrote:
> thanks for all the work as RM on this Andrew!
>
> On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Andrew Purtell
> wrote:
> > Everything is in and ready to go. I'm out next week for the
thanks for all the work as RM on this Andrew!
On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Andrew Purtell
wrote:
> Everything is in and ready to go. I'm out next week for the Thanksgiving
> holiday, but will be back first week in December.
>
> Here is what I anticipate:
>
>- December 4
> - 1.4.0 R
Everything is in and ready to go. I'm out next week for the Thanksgiving
holiday, but will be back first week in December.
Here is what I anticipate:
- December 4
- 1.4.0 RC0 binaries will be available.
- Voting begins.
- Preflight checks will include RAT check, release audit
On HBASE-19232 we discuss testing the shaded client using YCSB, so I'll use
it to sanity check the shaded client as well as complete a perf comparison
with 1.2.
On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Andrew Purtell
wrote:
> I'll do a PE comparison between 1.4.0 and 1.3 and/or 1.2. Maybe YSCB too
> i
I'll do a PE comparison between 1.4.0 and 1.3 and/or 1.2. Maybe YSCB too if I
have time. Good idea, thanks.
> On Nov 11, 2017, at 5:05 AM, Yu Li wrote:
>
> Great to know, really good progress!
>
> It seems we don't do performance comparison with current stable release
> when releasing the fi
For the performance regression analysis, we can kind of use ITBLL as a poor
man's benchmark.
Let's document the time/hardware/data volume in the release notes. Then we
can start to get a picture across releases, since this is resting we do
anyway.
Mike
On Sat, Nov 11, 2017, 7:06 AM Yu Li wrote:
Great to know, really good progress!
It seems we don't do performance comparison with current stable release
when releasing the first RC of a new branch, but should we do to avoid
issues like HBASE-14460 (write performance regression from 0.98 to 1.1)?
This is a must-have for us to decide new vers
27 matches
Mail list logo