Re: [DISCUSS] Drop support for HBase-1.2

2019-05-17 Thread la...@apache.org
+1 On Monday, May 13, 2019, 1:31:35 PM EDT, Vincent Poon wrote: +1 On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 8:18 PM Andrew Purtell wrote: > +1 > > I would think it would be a drain on committer time to keep having to > accommodate interface differences on the EOL line. > > > On May 10, 2019, at 1:28

Handling of HBase version specifics.

2019-05-17 Thread la...@apache.org
Hi all, historically we have a branch of each version of HBase we want to support.As a result we have many branches, committing is a hassle and it is easy to miss a change across branches. Instead we could have a maven module per version of HBase we want to support and move the version dependent

Re: Handling of HBase version specifics.

2019-05-22 Thread la...@apache.org
> The tests would take longer to run (1.3, 1.4, 1.5 and 2.x). We should > make > > sure our precommit build will run the tests for all the modules. > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 11:23 AM la...@apache.org > > wrote: > > > > > Hi all, >

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.14.2 RC1

2019-05-22 Thread la...@apache.org
I just inspected the artifacts. Based on that: +1 On Saturday, May 18, 2019, 12:38:47 AM PDT, Thomas D'Silva wrote: Hello Everyone, This is a call for a vote on Apache Phoenix 4.14.2 RC1. This is a patch release of Phoenix 4.14 and is compatible with Apache HBase 1.3 and 1.4. The rele

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.14.2 RC2

2019-05-23 Thread la...@apache.org
+1 again based on inspection of the release artifacts. On Thursday, May 23, 2019, 2:09:52 PM PDT, Thomas D'Silva wrote: Hello Everyone, This is a call for a vote on Apache Phoenix 4.14.2 RC2. This is a patch release of Phoenix 4.14 and is compatible with Apache HBase 1.3 and 1.4. The

A successful jenkins test run, at last

2019-06-10 Thread la...@apache.org
I finally managed to get a single successful test run. Yeah! :) The fact that this is worth a note to the @dev points to a larger problem, though... Our tests have been failing for months (or years? I don't remember that last successful run.) I'll continue to stabilize the tests (for 4.15.x and

Re: A successful jenkins test run, at last

2019-06-10 Thread la...@apache.org
t. Is this change local only for now? https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-PHOENIX-Build/ On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 8:54 AM la...@apache.org wrote: > I finally managed to get a single successful test run. Yeah! :) > > The fact that this is worth a note to the @dev points to a larger probl

Differences in 4.x branches

2019-06-13 Thread la...@apache.org
Hi all, we have three active 4.x branches: 4.x-HBase-1.3, 4.x-HBase-1.4, 4.x-HBase-1.5. It looks like we're lacking _basic_ discipline here. There are patches in some branches but not in others, some patches are different between these branches for no good reason, different tests fail, etc. I hav

Re: Differences in 4.x branches

2019-06-13 Thread la...@apache.org
l have only the last step to perform, which would be to resolve any lingering test issues. > On Jun 13, 2019, at 7:29 PM, "la...@apache.org" wrote: > > Hi all, > we have three active 4.x branches: 4.x-HBase-1.3, 4.x-HBase-1.4, > 4.x-HBase-1.5. > It looks like we&#x

Re: Differences in 4.x branches

2019-06-15 Thread la...@apache.org
uld be pleased to offer my services for clean up duty. The ginsu > I mean git knives for slicing and dicing history are sharp and at the > ready. At the conclusion of the work you the Phoenix community will have > only the last step to perform, which would be to resolve any lingering t

I'll be pushing some test speed-ups soon

2019-06-16 Thread la...@apache.org
Hi all, I'll be pushing out out a set of changes to speed up various tests.Let's see how these go. If you see something strange, please let me know and I'll revert/fix. Most test runs already finish in around 2h (instead of 3h), but there're still some bad offenders. I'll do each test as a sepa

4.15.0 and 5.1.0 releases

2019-06-27 Thread la...@apache.org
Hi all, we're getting close. The test suite is passing fairly reliably now.(minus some strange failure to archive the artifact in -1.4 and PartialCommitIT failing in -1.3 only). I put a lot of effort into speeding up the tests and making them pass. Let's please (pretty please :) ) keep it that w

Re: 4.15.0 and 5.1.0 releases

2019-06-27 Thread la...@apache.org
#x27;s advanced further than I know about, and we're closer to green than I think. Happy to hear everyone's thoughts. Geoffrey On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 10:26 AM la...@apache.org wrote: > Hi all, > we're getting close. The test suite is passing fairly reliably now.(minus > so

4.x-HBase-1.4 jenkins runs

2019-06-27 Thread la...@apache.org
Hi all, in the past weeks we had mostly successful test runs on 4.x-HBase-1.4 Yet when you look at that build it's all read. The reason is that tests all run and finish and then Jenkins just hangs trying to archive the test artifacts for an hour or more. That only happens on the -1.4 branch (doe

Re: 4.15.0 and 5.1.0 releases

2019-06-28 Thread la...@apache.org
ering principles, namely an always releasable code base and small, frequent releases. -- Lars On Thursday, June 27, 2019, 3:07:27 PM PDT, la...@apache.org wrote: Thanks Geoffrey. The damage is already done. We messed up and let it slide (multiple times, this is by no means the first time

Re: 4.15.0 and 5.1.0 releases

2019-06-28 Thread la...@apache.org
t's fine for them to go in 4.14.3. Geoffrey On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 12:20 PM la...@apache.org wrote: >  Any further comments? > I offered to be the RM for 4.15.0, and I stand by that. I can't do it > alone, though. Do we have consensus on the rough course of action below? &g

Re: Volunteering to be RM for 4.15.0/5.1.0

2019-07-18 Thread la...@apache.org
+1 On Monday, July 8, 2019, 12:57:27 PM HST, Thomas D'Silva wrote: I don't think we need to call 4.15/5.1 an alpha or beta release. Lets just follow our usual process and release  4.15 and 5.1, (after ensuring all the ITs pass and any manual testing that needs to be done). If we need t

Jenkins runs failing. Could not resolve host: gitbox.apache.org?

2019-07-18 Thread la...@apache.org
Does anybody know what could cause this? Failed at least the last 10 master builds (which I have deleted). I'll leave one failed build up.

Re: Jenkins runs failing. Could not resolve host: gitbox.apache.org?

2019-07-18 Thread la...@apache.org
Seems to be happening in H35 only. Removed it from the build rotation (for master for now) On Thursday, July 18, 2019, 8:42:03 AM HST, la...@apache.org wrote: Does anybody know what could cause this? Failed at least the last 10 master builds (which I have deleted). I'll leav

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.15.0 RC0

2019-10-17 Thread la...@apache.org
+1 (binding) - Built from source - Went through a simple 4.14 to 4.15 upgrade- Loaded a few dozens of millions of rows.- Tried global and local indexes.- Tried HBase 1.5.0- Nothing weird in the logs. Looks good. On a related note: I'd really love us to go back to a monthly release train. That w

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.15.0 RC0

2019-10-18 Thread la...@apache.org
ropTable(MetaDataEndpointImpl.java:2153) > > > On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 2:36 PM Chinmay Kulkarni < > chinmayskulka...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> *REMINDER - [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.15.0 RC0* >> >> Just sending out a friendly reminder to everyone to pleas

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.15.0 RC0

2019-10-19 Thread la...@apache.org
atibility issue. > > On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 4:25 PM la...@apache.org wrote: > > >  Did you use one of the provided tarballs (in that case, which one)? Or > > build from source (in that case, which branch?). > > Also was that before or after the first 4.15 client

Re: [VOTE] Accept Tephra and Omid podlings as Phoenix sub-projects

2019-10-31 Thread la...@apache.org
+1 On Wednesday, October 30, 2019, 8:27:36 AM PDT, Josh Elser wrote: Hi, As was previously discussed[1][2], there is a motion to "adopt" the Tephra and Omid podlings as sub-projects to Apache Phoenix. A sub-project is a distinct software project from some top-level project (TLP) bu

Re: Nested Record

2019-11-19 Thread la...@apache.org
The slightly longer answer is that HBase is very well equipped to handle this case.Row for inner/nested relationships can be stored inline with the parent relation, by extending the key by one more part indicating the identity of inner rows.The trick is to teach Phoenix to understand this - suc

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.15.0 RC1

2019-11-19 Thread la...@apache.org
I responded yesterday, but somehow didn't appear to go through. Trying again... +1 (Binding) - built from source (4.x-HBase-1.5) with latest branch-1 HBase (also built from source) - loaded a few million rows - tried with local indexes - issued upserts and deletes while splitting in HBase. - ch

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.15.0 RC1

2019-11-21 Thread la...@apache.org
NDER - [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.15.0 RC1* > > Just sending out a friendly reminder to everyone to please vote on Apache > Phoenix 4.15.0 RC1 (thanks Lars). > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 2:49 PM la...@apache.org wrote: > >>  I responded yesterday, but somehow

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.15.0 RC1

2019-11-25 Thread la...@apache.org
LECT * FROM VIEW` at 4.14 client. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Xinyi Yan > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 11:52 AM Neha Gupta > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> +1 (Non-B

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.15.0 RC2

2019-12-03 Thread la...@apache.org
+1 (binding) I did the following: - built from source - verified tar ball - ran with tip of HBase branch-1 - created tables, global and local ndexes, views, and indexes on views with both 4.15.0 and older client - upserted data alternately with a 4.15.0 and older client - queried while upserting

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Omid & Tephra Migration to Phoenix LDAP

2019-12-03 Thread la...@apache.org
That leads me to a general question: (1) Will OMID and TEPHRA continue to be usable standalone without Phoenix? In that case we should keep the OMID and TEPHRA projects in Jira. Or (2) do we envision to tightly integrate those into the Phoenix and have them only work in the Phoenix contexts?

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.15.0 RC2

2019-12-06 Thread la...@apache.org
reate a > > table > > > > > with a > > > > > > > few indexes and ran some queries. > > > > > > > Everything looks good. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 11:35 AM C

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.15.0 RC2

2019-12-07 Thread la...@apache.org
unity we seem to fail following well known software engineering principles (always releasable code base, agile principles, frequent releases, comprehensive test suite, etc, etc). Cheers. -- Lars On Friday, December 6, 2019, 1:57:50 PM PST, la...@apache.org wrote: Sigh. Agreed. I chan

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.15.0 RC3

2019-12-09 Thread la...@apache.org
+1 (Binding) Did the same tests as in RC2. :) Cheers and crossing fingers. -- Lars On Monday, December 9, 2019, 02:48:41 PM PST, Chinmay Kulkarni wrote: Hello Everyone, This is a call for a vote on Apache Phoenix 4.15.0 RC3. This is the next minor release of Phoenix 4, compatible with

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.15.0 RC2

2019-12-09 Thread la...@apache.org
at, Dec 7, 2019 at 10:39 AM la...@apache.org wrote: >  I filed a blocker bug for 4.16.0 to improve backward compatibility and > tests for the same.And I wow to veto any 4.16 release without that in > place. We've almost reached the point at which Phoenix becomes > unreleasable, thi

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.15.0 RC3

2019-12-10 Thread la...@apache.org
PMC, please test and vote on this :) On Monday, December 9, 2019, 4:43:02 PM PST, la...@apache.org wrote: +1 (Binding) Did the same tests as in RC2. :) Cheers and crossing fingers. -- Lars     On Monday, December 9, 2019, 02:48:41 PM PST, Chinmay Kulkarni wrote:  Hello

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.15.0 RC4

2019-12-18 Thread la...@apache.org
+1 (binding) Again... This time I did the following: - Ran through upgrade and various test scripts using phoenix_sandbox.py (with PHOENIX-5617 applied). This started with 4.14, created some tables, views, and indexes, then with a 4.15 client, added/removed views, columns, and indexes, then wit

Re: Multiple rows with same key

2019-12-18 Thread la...@apache.org
You mean you see multiple rows with the same primary key? I have not see this - or heard about this before. Could you post your schema? -- Lars On Tuesday, December 17, 2019, 7:42:13 PM GMT+1, Francesco Malerba wrote: Hi all, we are having some troubles with Phoenix 4.14 on top of H

Re: Moving Phoenix master to Hbase 2.2

2019-12-18 Thread la...@apache.org
This is really hard to follow. I think we should do the same with HBase dependencies in Phoenix that HBase does with Hadoop dependencies. That is:  We could have a maven module with the specific HBase version dependent code. Btw. Tephra does the same... A module for HBase version specific code.

Re: Moving Phoenix master to Hbase 2.2

2019-12-19 Thread la...@apache.org
Elser wrote: To clarify, you think that compat modules are better than that separate-branches model in 4.x? On 12/18/19 11:29 AM, la...@apache.org wrote: > This is really hard to follow. > > I think we should do the same with HBase dependencies in Phoenix that HBase > does

Re: Moving Phoenix master to Hbase 2.2

2019-12-20 Thread la...@apache.org
rit HBase classes or implement HBase interfaces, and those can vary between minor versions. (See my above example of a new coprocessor hook on BaseRegionObserver.) Geoffrey On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 10:54 AM la...@apache.org wrote: >  Yep. The differences are pretty minimal - provided they can be isol

Re: Moving Phoenix master to Hbase 2.2

2019-12-20 Thread la...@apache.org
herit HBase classes or implement > HBase interfaces, and those can vary between minor versions. (See my above > example of a new coprocessor hook on BaseRegionObserver.) > > Geoffrey > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 10:54 AM la...@apache.org > wrote: > > >  Yep. The d

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Phoenix 4.15.0 released

2019-12-21 Thread la...@apache.org
Yeah! Finally. Let's use this time to stabilize; especially the metadata management and upgrade testing (and perhaps the HBase compatibility), so that we can have a smooth 4.16.0 release. On Saturday, December 21, 2019, 1:19:34 AM GMT+1, Chinmay Kulkarni wrote: Hello Everyone, The A

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Phoenix 4.15.0 released

2019-12-31 Thread la...@apache.org
en 1 and 2 is good enough for normal client operations. If the version check didn’t throw an exception I wonder if there would be any issue. For your consideration. > On Dec 21, 2019, at 2:40 AM, "la...@apache.org" wrote: > >  Yeah! Finally. > Let's use this time

Python2 EOL

2020-01-09 Thread la...@apache.org
Hi all, python2 is officially EOL'd. No more changes, improvements, or fixes will be done by the developers. Some Linux distributions stopped shipping Python2. It turns out our scripts do not work with Python3, see: [PHOENIX-5656] Make Phoenix scripts work with Python 3 - ASF JIRA. [PHOENIX-56

Re: Python2 EOL

2020-01-12 Thread la...@apache.org
ndier than bash but sometimes the > right tool for the job is the right tool for the job. Unlike python, bash > has a very stable grammar. > > On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 12:34 PM la...@apache.org wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> python2 is officially EOL'd. No more changes,

Committers please look at the Phoenix tests and fix your failures

2020-01-12 Thread la...@apache.org
... Not much else to say here... The tests have been failing again for a while... I will NOT fix them again this time! Sorry folks. -- Lars

Re: Committers please look at the Phoenix tests and fix your failures

2020-01-14 Thread la...@apache.org
eople will presumably start to care. :)If I hear no objects I'll start doing that a while. Cheers. -- Lars On Monday, January 13, 2020, 06:23:01 PM PST, Josh Elser wrote: How do we keep getting into this mess: unreliable QA, people ignoring QA, or something else? On 1/12/20 9:24 PM

Re: Moving Phoenix master to Hbase 2.2

2020-01-14 Thread la...@apache.org
st too frustrating and > error-prone. > > It would also be great if we could have a single Phoenix jar that works > across HBase versions, but would not die on that hill :) > > On 12/20/19 5:04 AM, la...@apache.org wrote: > >  I said _provided_ they can be isolated easily

Re: Committers please look at the Phoenix tests and fix your failures

2020-01-14 Thread la...@apache.org
lways* passing. It's impossible to maintain a stable code base the size of Phoenix otherwise. -- Lars On Tuesday, January 14, 2020, 10:04:12 AM PST, la...@apache.org wrote: I spent a lot of time making QA better. It can be better, but it's stable enough. There're now

No builds on Phoenix-Master jenkins since Feb 19th?

2020-04-08 Thread la...@apache.org
Just looking at the Phoenix Jenkins jobs I noticed that was no build on master since for 3 weeks. Is that in purpose? There were clearly changes on the master branch since then. Cheers. -- Lars

Re: No builds on Phoenix-Master jenkins since Feb 19th?

2020-04-08 Thread la...@apache.org
/Phoenix-master/ [2] https://builds.apache.org/view/M-R/view/Phoenix/job/Phoenix-master-matrix/ On 4/8/20 2:00 PM, la...@apache.org wrote: > Just looking at the Phoenix Jenkins jobs I noticed that was no build on > master since for 3 weeks. > Is that in purpose? There were clearly chan

Re: No builds on Phoenix-Master jenkins since Feb 19th?

2020-04-09 Thread la...@apache.org
.apache.org/view/M-R/view/Phoenix/job/PhoenixFindTestTimeout/ though I haven't looked into the last one. István On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 1:30 AM la...@apache.org wrote: > Thanks Josh. > > unfortunately > > https://builds.apache.org/view/M-R/view/Phoenix/job/Phoenix-master-matr

Latest Phoenix built from 4.x prevent HBase from starting

2020-05-15 Thread la...@apache.org
This is the exception I'm seeing. 2020-05-15 15:35:36,098 FATAL [RS_OPEN_PRIORITY_REGION-think:16201-1] regionserver.HRegionServer: ABORTING region server think,16201,1589581955446: The coprocessor org.apache.phoenix.coprocessor.UngroupedAggregateRegionObserver threw java.lang.NoClassDefFoundEr

Re: Latest Phoenix built from 4.x prevent HBase from starting

2020-05-15 Thread la...@apache.org
PHOENIX-5808 looks suspicious (I do like the change, it just may introduce this problem) On Friday, May 15, 2020, 3:48:02 PM PDT, la...@apache.org wrote: This is the exception I'm seeing. 2020-05-15 15:35:36,098 FATAL [RS_OPEN_PRIORITY_REGION-think:16201-1] regionserver.HRegionS

Re: Latest Phoenix built from 4.x prevent HBase from starting

2020-05-15 Thread la...@apache.org
I can fix that by copying phoenix-hbase-compat-1.5.0-4.16.0-SNAPSHOT.jar from phoenix/lib to hbase/lib. That is not intended I assume. There used to be just the Phoenix server jar needed. On Friday, May 15, 2020, 3:55:32 PM PDT, la...@apache.org wrote: PHOENIX-5808 looks suspicious (I

Re: Latest Phoenix built from 4.x prevent HBase from starting

2020-05-16 Thread la...@apache.org
ppropriate compatibility module and add it too. At the least installation documentation should be updated. On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 3:48 PM la...@apache.org wrote: > This is the exception I'm seeing. > > 2020-05-15 15:35:36,098 FATAL [RS_OPEN_PRIORITY_REGION-think:16201-1] >

Re: No builds on Phoenix-Master jenkins since Feb 19th?

2020-06-13 Thread la...@apache.org
Thanks Istvan. Just checked the builds. Looks like the 4.x builds have not passed a single time since May 20th. I hope I am missing something... Otherwise this would be pretty frustrating. :) (Since pleading doesn't appear to help, maybe we should automatically block all commits until all tests

public shaming on slow tests :)

2020-07-15 Thread la...@apache.org
Hi All, I won't have time to go through various tests again to speed them up as I did last year. Instead let me at least publicly shame the slowest tests that take more than 10 minutes to run: 1,620.111 org.apache.phoenix.end2end.InListIT 1,486.974 org.apache.phoenix.end2end.ParameterizedIndex

Re: Roadmap to releasing Phoenix 5.1, PQS 6.0 and Connectors 6.0

2020-10-31 Thread la...@apache.org
Geoffrey did the forward port for consistent indexes. I'll add PHOENIX-5712 to the list of blockers - we've gotten ourselves into a bind there with backwards compatibility, and there's still not clear fix in sight as far as I can see. That same problem exists for4.16. On the HBase front all inn

Re: [DISCUSS] Suggestions for Phoenix from HBaseCon Asia notes

2018-09-11 Thread la...@apache.org
Sorry for coming a bit late to this. I've been thinking about some of lines for a bit. It seems Phoenix serves 4 distinct purposes: 1. Query parsing and compiling.2. A type system3. Query execution4. Efficient HBase interface Each of these is useful by itself, but we do not expose these as stabl

Re: Salting based on partial rowkeys

2018-09-16 Thread la...@apache.org
I added some comments on the PHOENIX-4757 On Thursday, September 13, 2018, 6:42:12 PM PDT, Josh Elser wrote: Ahh, I get you now. For a composite primary key made up of columns 1 through N, you want similar controls to compute the value of the salt based on a sequence of the columns

Re: [DISCUSS] Suggestions for Phoenix from HBaseCon Asia notes

2018-09-16 Thread la...@apache.org
Lars. I like it very much. Just the easy part of doing it... ;) On 9/11/18 4:53 PM, la...@apache.org wrote: >  Sorry for coming a bit late to this. I've been thinking about some of lines >for a bit. > It seems Phoenix serves 4 distinct purposes: > 1. Query parsing and compilin

Re: [DISCUSS] Suggestions for Phoenix from HBaseCon Asia notes

2018-09-23 Thread la...@apache.org
I will point out that the thin client can have advantages too:1. The query engine pool can be sized independently of clients and region servers now.2. Appropriate machine/VM configurations can be picked that are optimal for query execution.3. Client and (region) servers can be upgraded entirely

Re: [DISCUSS] Suggestions for Phoenix from HBaseCon Asia notes

2018-09-23 Thread la...@apache.org
ot; API as opposed to an annotation-based approach. I find a separate module helps to catch problematic API design faster, and make it crystal clear what users should (and should not) be relying upon). On 9/17/18 1:00 AM, la...@apache.org wrote: >  I think we can start by implementing a ti

Phoenix developer Meetup

2018-09-28 Thread la...@apache.org
Hi all, I'm planning to put together a Phoenix developer meetup at the Salesforce office (with video conference for those who cannot attend in person) in the next few weeks. If you're interested please put your name in this spreadsheet:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1j4QSk53B0ZIl_qq1XX3o

Re: Phoenix developer Meetup

2018-10-01 Thread la...@apache.org
10 people signed up so far.This is a good chance to make your voice heard, give input, and help point the project in the right direction going forward. -- Lars On Friday, September 28, 2018, 10:39:41 AM PDT, la...@apache.org wrote: Hi all, I'm planning to put together a Ph

Re: Phoenix developer Meetup

2018-10-05 Thread la...@apache.org
Last call :) On Monday, October 1, 2018, 10:15:07 AM PDT, la...@apache.org wrote: 10 people signed up so far.This is a good chance to make your voice heard, give input, and help point the project in the right direction going forward. -- Lars     On Friday, September 28, 2018, 10:39

Re: Phoenix developer Meetup

2018-10-23 Thread la...@apache.org
er 5, 2018, 1:01:06 PM PDT, la...@apache.org wrote: Last call :)     On Monday, October 1, 2018, 10:15:07 AM PDT, la...@apache.org wrote:    10 people signed up so far.This is a good chance to make your voice heard, give input, and help point the project in the right direction going f

Re: Phoenix developer Meetup

2018-11-06 Thread la...@apache.org
would be great for planning food, etc. I will send out an agenda. Thanks. -- Lars On Tuesday, October 23, 2018, 4:01:33 PM PDT, la...@apache.org wrote: This is still on. I'm trying to get us a spot in the Salesforce tower top floor. As you can imagine it's a coveted spot.If I c

Re: Phoenix developer Meetup

2018-11-09 Thread la...@apache.org
ically! Marked myself as a "M" for maybe on the spreadsheet :) On 11/6/18 7:07 PM, la...@apache.org wrote: >  Ok. The room is booked for Wednesday November 14th from 4-7pm, in the >Salesforce Tower (but not the top floor :( ) > If you can confirm your attendance here (see the e

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.14.1 RC0

2018-11-09 Thread la...@apache.org
Belated +1 Ran my usually tests. With upserts, deleted, global and local indexes, larger upsert/selects, etc. Nothing undue in the logs, all works. -- Lars On Thursday, November 8, 2018, 3:55:07 PM PST, Vincent Poon wrote: The vote is now closed and passes with 4 binding +1s and no 0

Re: Phoenix developer Meetup

2018-11-09 Thread la...@apache.org
let you up) Thanks. -- Lars On Friday, November 9, 2018, 10:30:09 AM PST, la...@apache.org wrote: Great. And sorry for the folks in other TZs, it's impossible to find a time for everyone.I'll try to record the session via hangouts and post the recording here, and I will post

Re: Phoenix developer Meetup

2018-11-14 Thread la...@apache.org
om On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 11:50 PM Jaanai Zhang wrote: > How to connect video conference? > > >    Jaanai Zhang >    Best regards! > > > > la...@apache.org 于2018年11月10日周六 上午6:48写道: > > >  To confirm: > > Phoenix

Re: [DISCUSS] Support incompatible patch release of HBase

2021-02-17 Thread la...@apache.org
FWIW, I agree. As I'm experiencing with the Trino (formerly Presto) Phoenix connector, it is hard as is to support different versions of Phoenix (and HBase)... To the point where I'm adding a second Phoenix connector to Trino just for Phoenix 5.1.0+ support (and Phoenix 5.0 cannot be supported a

Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing Phoenix 5.1.1

2021-02-17 Thread la...@apache.org
Actually it was relatively easy to work around PHOENIX-6377 - at least with Trino (formerly Presto) where we discovered the problem in the first place. That said, I'll hold off Phoenix 5.x support for Trino until after Phoenix 5.1.1 as long as we can get a release out soon'ish. On Sunday, Febr

Re: Release of Apache Phoenix 5.1.1 RC0

2021-03-01 Thread la...@apache.org
-1 (binding) See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-6400 I'm testing a bit more, but that looks wrong. -- Lars On Sunday, February 28, 2021, 7:32:09 PM PST, Xinyi Yan wrote: +1 (non-binding) based on the signature, checksum and mvn clean install/verify. On Sun, Feb 28, 202

Running tests locally

2021-03-01 Thread la...@apache.org
My apologies if this is dumb question - I've been working on other projects for a while, now coming back to some Phoenix work. I'm trying to simply run mvn test -Dtest=LocalIndexIT locally. And the test always fails with: [ERROR] org.apache.phoenix.end2end.index.LocalIndexIT  Time elapsed: 39.41

Re: Running tests locally

2021-03-01 Thread la...@apache.org
AHA... Looks like hadoop-ci is failing with the same exception, since Feb 18th, looks like PHOENIX-6359 is the culprit. So it's not me. On Monday, March 1, 2021, 5:46:51 PM PST, la...@apache.org wrote: My apologies if this is dumb question - I've been working on other proje

Re: Running tests locally

2021-03-01 Thread la...@apache.org
On 2021/03/02 02:03:03, "la...@apache.org" wrote: > AHA... > Looks like hadoop-ci is failing with the same exception, since Feb 18th, > looks like PHOENIX-6359 is the culprit. > > So it's not me. > > > On Monday, March 1, 2021, 5:46:51 PM PST, la...@apa

Re: Release of Apache Phoenix 5.1.1 RC0

2021-03-07 Thread la...@apache.org
I have a real fix ready in PHOENIX-6402. Let's wait for that and then do a 5.1.1 release. On Monday, March 1, 2021, 4:15:40 PM PST, la...@apache.org wrote: -1 (binding) See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-6400 I'm testing a bit more, but that looks wrong

Re: Release of Apache Phoenix 5.1.1 RC0

2021-03-09 Thread la...@apache.org
I just committed PHOENIX-6402 Let's have another attempt at an RC for 5.1.1. (Assuming all tests continue to pass) -- Lars On Sunday, March 7, 2021, 3:30:46 PM PST, la...@apache.org wrote: I have a real fix ready in PHOENIX-6402. Let's wait for that and then do a 5.1

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 5.1.1 RC1

2021-03-13 Thread la...@apache.org
Just came here to say the same. While we're at it, let's also pull in PHOENIX-6409, as it bring better visibility into local index plans. -- Lars On Thursday, March 11, 2021, 11:41:52 PM PST, Viraj Jasani wrote: Thanks Istvan. I believe we can get in PHOENIX-6385 with 5.1.1 since it is

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 5.1.1 RC2

2021-03-16 Thread la...@apache.org
+1 (binding) Built from source, ran some test loads with a few million rows on a local install. Ran some choice tests. Nothing weird in the logs. -- Lars On Tuesday, March 16, 2021, 8:28:43 AM PDT, Istvan Toth wrote: Please vote on this Apache phoenix release candidate, phoenix-5.1.

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 5.1.1 RC2

2021-03-17 Thread la...@apache.org
> > at org.junit.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:117) > > at > org.apache.phoenix.end2end.ViewTTLIT.verifyRowsBeforeTTLExpiration(ViewTTLIT.java:2462) > > at > org.apache.phoenix.end2end.ViewTTLIT.validateExpiredRowsAreNotReturnedUsingData(ViewTTLIT.java:2390) > > at > org.apache.phoenix.end2end.ViewTTLIT.upsertDataAndRunVa

Re: Topic suggestions for April Tech Talk

2021-03-19 Thread la...@apache.org
In addition to the technical implementation of the PQS an interesting topic for the PQS would be how to scale it. How many PQSs compared to the number of region servers? How to size the machine/VM? Etc. I think just that could take more than 15 minutes. :) On Thursday, March 18, 2021, 9:18:40 AM

Re: Topic suggestions for April Tech Talk

2021-03-19 Thread la...@apache.org
An interesting topic would BigData ecosystem integration, which is clearly one of the strengths of Phoenix. I.e. with Trino (formerly Presto), Spark, and classical MapReduce. Perhaps this could cover also HBase snapshot support. I'm happy to cover this. But I can't to that for April 1st - juggl

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 5.1.1 RC2

2021-03-19 Thread la...@apache.org
If 5.1.1 is sunk for any reason, I'd like to get PHOENIX-6421 in. (By itself it's not enough to sink the release, I think) On Wednesday, March 17, 2021, 8:53:59 PM PDT, Xinyi Yan wrote: +1 (non-binding) Besides the signature, checksum, and mvn install/verify, I built from the source and

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 5.1.1 RC2

2021-03-20 Thread la...@apache.org
M PDT, la...@apache.org wrote: If 5.1.1 is sunk for any reason, I'd like to get PHOENIX-6421 in. (By itself it's not enough to sink the release, I think) On Wednesday, March 17, 2021, 8:53:59 PM PDT, Xinyi Yan wrote: +1 (non-binding) Besides the signature, checksum,

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 5.1.1 RC2

2021-03-22 Thread la...@apache.org
leave the decision to the PMC. We have two binding +2s at the moment, so I'll just follow procedure, and make the decision based on the next binding vote. Istvan On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 7:30 PM la...@apache.org wrote: > PHOENIX-6423 could be blocker...? > > What happens is that SEL

On duplicate column names

2021-03-26 Thread la...@apache.org
As you may or may not know, Phoenix allows for duplicate column names as long as they are placed in different column families. You can create a table such as CREATE TABLE t (pk1 ..., x.v1, y.v1, ...). Now each time you want to refer to v1 you need to qualify it with its column family or you get

Re: On duplicate column names

2021-03-27 Thread la...@apache.org
gt; aliasing the columns may solve that) > Another thing to consider is how this would affect dynamic column use cases > for either native Phoenix tables of views on HBase tables. > > Istvan > > On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 12:20 AM la...@apache.org > wrote: > > > As yo

Re: On duplicate column names

2021-03-29 Thread la...@apache.org
column features are not affected. We may or may not want to add a property to override it (with the default being disallowing the duplicate column names) Istvan On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 5:59 PM la...@apache.org wrote: > Viraj, yeah similar discussion. > > Istvan, good point. Of course y

Re: On duplicate column names

2021-03-30 Thread la...@apache.org
Please comment on the Jira if you have an opinion :) On Monday, March 29, 2021, 10:48:34 AM PDT, la...@apache.org wrote: Filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-6433 We can discuss there. In the end, IMHO, placing columns in distinct column families is a physical

Re: [DISCUSS] Separating client and server side code

2021-04-18 Thread la...@apache.org
There is also another angle to look at. A long time ago I wrote this: " It seems Phoenix serves 4 distinct purposes: 1. Query parsing and compiling. 2. A type system 3. Query execution 4. Efficient HBase interface Each of these is useful by itself, but we do not expose these as stable interfaces

Don't forget about branch-5.1

2021-05-12 Thread la...@apache.org
Hi all, I noticed some changes that went into both master and the 4.x branch, but not into branch-5.1. Unfortunately I do not have time to check each edit. When you commit changes, please do not forget about branch-5.1, which will produce our next version of Phoenix. Cheers. -- Lars

Re: Don't forget about branch-5.1

2021-05-13 Thread la...@apache.org
d hence can't go out in 4.16.2 or 5.1.2. (See PHOENIX-6247 > -- which should be marked Resolved -- and PHOENIX-6457). > > Do we need the dual maintenance of a 5.1 patch branch? > > Geoffrey > > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 12:55 PM la...@apache.org > wrote: > > > Hi

Time for 5.1.2?

2021-05-25 Thread la...@apache.org
There are 17 resolved issues against it. PHOENIX-6436 is needed for further integration with Trino (formerly Presto). It is time for another point release? -- Lars

Re: Time for 5.1.2?

2021-05-26 Thread la...@apache.org
y. I will also look for missing fixes before release, but if anyone is aware of any fix that is needed in 5.1.2 , but hasn't been backported, then please try to get it resolved by Monday. regards Istvan On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 4:19 AM la...@apache.org wrote: > There are 17 resolved issu

Re: [DISCUSS] Unbundling Sqlline and slf4j backend from phoenix-client and phoenix-client embedded

2021-05-26 Thread la...@apache.org
Will sqlline still be part of the Phoenix "distribution"? Or will it become a separate package to install? On Wednesday, May 26, 2021, 1:07:17 AM PDT, Istvan Toth wrote: Hi! The current purpose of the phoenix-client JAR is twofold: - It servers as a generic JDBC driver for embedding

Re: Time for 5.1.2?

2021-05-26 Thread la...@apache.org
- if so - should not be in 5.1.2. -- Lars On Wednesday, May 26, 2021, 10:15:31 AM PDT, la...@apache.org wrote: Awesome. Thanks Istvan. I'll do a pass through the issues too. -- Lars On Tuesday, May 25, 2021, 8:45:00 PM PDT, Istvan Toth wrote: I am not aware of any blockers i

Re: [DISCUSS] Unbundling Sqlline and slf4j backend from phoenix-client and phoenix-client embedded

2021-05-27 Thread la...@apache.org
ded is great, so I'd lean towards #2. > > We can see what adoption of phoenix-client-embedded looks like now that > we have it in releases. I imagine most folks haven't yet realized that > it's even an option that's available. > > On 5/26/21 1:16 PM, la...@

  1   2   >