We need to figure out how to fix the routing issue that came up with the console when we downgraded Jetty from 9 to 8. On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 7:24 AM Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> wrote:
> There are a few code updates from the merge testing that need to be > applied. I will try to have them applied later today. > > On Tuesday, December 2, 2014, Tim Williams <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Ok, so we have: > > > > 1) pom file changes - seems like everyone is ok with this for 0.2.4, > > so I'll make those changes in the next day or so. > > 2) documentation - there's still a bit left on the command stuff that > > I'll try to finish off in the next day or so; we also need to just go > > through the rest of the documentation and make sure it's all still > > accurate. > > 3) ? > > > > Thanks, > > --tim > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected] > > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > I have helped them out on this issue. It turns out that several of the > > > thread pools were configured with too many threads. I will check back > > with > > > them tomorrow to make sure that everything is still running well. > > > > > > Aaron > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 8:58 PM, Tim Williams <[email protected] > > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > > > >> Ok, let's crash on this issue then. Chris, do you wanna open up a > > >> JIRA issue for it? Any ideas how we might craft a test for it? It > > >> seems like it might have to be an integration test, but can you say > > >> more about the conditions that precede it? Any sorting? Any filters? > > >> Large number of fields? Large number of column families? If you can > > >> open up a ticket, I'm wondering if we can iterate on a test until we > > >> find the right scenario that reproduces it or maybe you don't know > > >> enough about it quite yet? > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > >> --tim > > >> > > >> On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 8:22 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected] > > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > >> > The issue that Chris has mentioned is the only blocker in my mind. I > > >> would > > >> > like to resolve the merge performance issue but I agree with Tim > that > > >> > should not hold up the release. > > >> > > > >> > Aaron > > >> > > > >> > On Thursday, November 20, 2014, Chris Rohr <[email protected] > > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> Tim, > > >> >> > > >> >> Thanks for starting this list. I am cool with being the RM for > this. > > >> >> I just got a new computer so I'll make sure my keys are still good > to > > >> >> go. > > >> >> > > >> >> As for remaining issues: > > >> >> > > >> >> 1. We are having a back pressure issue under the following > scenario: > > >> >> * column families are cold > > >> >> * concurrent queries (more than 10) are issued against the cold > > >> >> families > > >> >> This basically makes the system unusable very quickly and runs > the > > >> >> cluster to the point where it has to be restarted. Aaron has been > > >> >> brought into the conversation to help review things on our end as > > >> >> well. > > >> >> > > >> >> 2. The console was updated to support SSL connections, however, > there > > >> >> is no way currently to actually enable ssl on Jetty through > > >> >> configuration. We may want to get that done prior to the release. > > >> >> > > >> >> Current In-work console issues that would be nice to have: > > >> >> > > >> >> 1. Facets on the search tab > > >> >> 2. Top in the console > > >> >> > > >> >> Chris > > >> >> > > >> >> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 7:14 PM, Tim Williams < > [email protected] > > <javascript:;> > > >> >> <javascript:;>> wrote: > > >> >> > I'd like to chart out what needs to be done to kick 0.2.4 out the > > >> >> > door. On core blur, I'm only aware of slow merging under certain > > >> >> > [extreme-ish?] conditions. > > >> >> > > > >> >> > o) I pushed a new archetype for new Commands yesterday that has > > some > > >> >> > slightly funky version bug/behavior. The archetype just creates a > > >> >> > sample command so I think we're fine shipping with that as is. > > >> >> > > > >> >> > o) I think we're ok shipping with the merge weirdness because > we've > > >> >> > been unable to hunt it down so far and it's pretty rock solid and > > only > > >> >> > presents under certain circumstances. > > >> >> > > > >> >> > o) ? > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Also, Chris, you still cool with being RM for this one? > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Thanks, > > >> >> > --tim > > >> >> > > >> > > >
