On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 11:55 AM Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote:
> And how would we know we have one? We don't track usage telemetry. > > Someone of us w/ standing volunteers that they have made the move (was what I was thinking). S > > > On Mar 18, 2021, at 11:29 AM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 1:49 PM Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> I would like to propose we update the 'stable' release pointer, > currently > >> pointing at 2.3.4, to 2.4.2. > >> > >> In my testing with aggressive chaos and ITBLL (but in, unfortunately, > due > >> to resource constraints, in small cluster settings of approximately 10 > >> nodes) 2.4.2 is very stable. > >> > >> Our sister project Phoenix has updated their build system to support > >> building against 2.4.1 and later, and the stability of their unit and > >> integration test suite is not impacted by any known HBase issue. > >> > >> If there is other criteria that should be considered, I'd like for us to > >> discuss it. Does there need to be public acknowledgement of a production > >> user? At scale? (How would we know?) Would you like me to attempt an > >> at-scale test? On the order of 100 nodes might be possible? If so, what > >> should be the test scenario and criteria for success? What distinguishes > >> 2.3.x (2.3.4) from 2.4.x (2.4.2) at this point? What would be the > area(s) > >> of concern with respect to moving the stable pointer forward? > >> > >> > > I suggest a happy production deploy as a prerequisite to moving the > pointer. > > S > > > > > > > >> -- > >> Best regards, > >> Andrew > >> > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's > >> decrepit hands > >> - A23, Crosstalk > >> >
