Cool, this is my point of view as well. I filed HBASE-25690
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-25690> for specifying and
documenting the criteria (whatever it is) for moving the 'stable' pointer.


On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 9:27 AM Stack <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 1:07 PM Andrew Purtell <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Would they do that before or after we designate it stable? Asking, not
> > trying to be difficult. Kind of a chicken and egg problem?
> >
> >
> Before the release was designated stable.
>
>
> > It would be fine I think to consider reported experience when and if it
> > happens but can't be primary criteria because it has nothing directly to
> do
> > with our PMC or project. We need a criteria we as project and PMC can
> > achieve and implement effectively, and IMHO "one of our project devs has
> it
> > running" does not meet that requirement, because this depends on third
> > party organizations (a dev's employer, and such) and idiosyncratic
> > criteria.
> >
> >
> That's fair.
>
> It would be better if we spec'd what a 'stable release' is and then ran
> candidates through the hoops.
>
> S
>
>
> >
> > > On Mar 18, 2021, at 12:47 PM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > 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
> > >>>>
> > >>
> >
>


-- 
Best regards,
Andrew

Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
decrepit hands
   - A23, Crosstalk

Reply via email to