On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Ryan Rawson <ryano...@gmail.com> wrote: > I ran ycsb on it for a while and it looked ok... but we really cant > ship without the fix to that bug, it has the possibility of causing > serious data loss for heavy users of ICV. >
We can ship the DR though, right? 0.90.0RC1 is just around the corner! St.Ack > -ryan > > On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Jonathan Gray <jg...@facebook.com> wrote: >> +1 >> >> I took it for a test drive today and tested all the basic stuff. No >> performance stuff but I think enough for my vote. >> >> JG >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: jdcry...@gmail.com [mailto:jdcry...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Jean- >>> Daniel Cryans >>> Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 10:56 AM >>> To: dev@hbase.apache.org >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 'development release' HBase 0.89.2010924 >>> rc1? >>> >>> My vote is obviously +1, although we hit a bug this weekend regarding >>> HBASE-3008 (for which we'll post a patch soon). Over time, the >>> memstore size of regions with ICVs grows negative, which means that >>> those regions can't flush and when you close them you basically lose >>> all the data since the last flush (since on close it won't flush >>> either). We solved this by disabling ICVs to those tables (basically >>> setting the async ICV queues in the thrift servers to -1), copied the >>> data to another cluster, restarted the cluster with the fix, >>> re-imported the data, then re-enabled the ICVs. >>> >>> I don't think this is a blocker for a DR, as it only affects users >>> doing only tons of ICVs on particular tables, but it should be >>> disclosed somewhere. >>> >>> J-D >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans >>> <jdcry...@apache.org> wrote: >>> > The 0.89.20100830 DR branch was cancelled, here's the new RC off a >>> new branch. >>> > >>> > As discussed, this release candidate contains a revert of HBASE-2694 >>> > which means that it is back on the "very" old master. It is also very >>> > similar to what we run here in production. >>> > >>> > Sources and binaries can be found here: >>> > >>> > http://people.apache.org/~jdcryans/hbase-0.89.20100924-candidate-1/ >>> > >>> > Documentation: >>> > >>> > http://people.apache.org/~jdcryans/hbase-0.89.20100924-candidate- >>> 1/hbase-0.89.20100924/docs/ >>> > >>> > Here's the list of everything I added since moving from 0830: >>> > >>> > HBASE-3008 Memstore.updateColumnValue passes wrong flag to >>> heapSizeChange >>> > HBASE-3035 Bandaid for HBASE-2990 >>> > HBASE-2643 Figure how to deal with eof splitting logs >>> > HBASE-2941 port HADOOP-6713 - threading scalability for RPC reads - >>> to HBase >>> > HBASE-3006 Reading compressed HFile blocks causes way too many DFS >>> RPC calls >>> > severly impacting performance >>> > HBASE-2989 [replication] RSM won't cleanup after locking if 0 peers >>> > HBASE-2992 [replication] MalformedObjectNameException in >>> ReplicationMetrics >>> > HBASE-3034 Revert the regions assignment part of HBASE-2694 (and >>> > pals) for 0.89 >>> > HBASE-3033 [replication] ReplicationSink.replicateEntries >>> improvements >>> > HBASE-2997 Performance fixes - profiler driven >>> > HBASE-2889 Tool to look at HLogs -- parse and tail -f (patch #2 >>> only) >>> > >>> > Unfortunately I forgot to add HBASE-2986 like Stack asked (sorry, I >>> > just figured it while reading the old voting thread). >>> > >>> > Should we release this as the next "Development Release"? Please cast >>> > your vote by Wednesday, September 29th. >>> > >>> > Thanks, >>> > >>> > The HBase Team >>> > >> >
