> I
> would expect that a committer wanting to use this feature in his company
> for production would do a much more thorough analysis than I did.
I haven't looked at the patch yet. This is early, would be for 0.94 and 0.92
isn't even out yet, etc.
Why make this personal?
> There are other open source projects out
> there that aren't used for as critical data and would love to have that
> next feature that might differentiate them.
Message received. A new level of "maturity". Go elsewhere.
Best regards,
- Andy
On Dec 12, 2011, at 7:12 PM, Nicolas Spiegelberg <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I would really like to see the isolation feature in 0.94+, so I intend to
>> work with Jia and, if there is a successful result, support it going
>> forward in a manner like Stargate, even though I may not run it
>> personally (like I don't run Stargate). I take an expansive view of what
>> open source projects should accept...
>>
>> On the other hand there are users and committers of HBase for whom
>> stability is paramount. I expect the tension :-); it will make us a
>> healthier project.
>>
>> But we cannot have a new feature acceptance criteria that requires
>> several "core users" run it in production.
>
> I think we should be really careful here because a laissez-fare attitude
> will keep the project from reaching a new level of maturity. There are a
> number of committers from various companies who are using this for
> business-critical applications, want to provide users with a build that
> they can use for business-critical applications, and independently coming
> to the same conclusion that we need a more stable trunk. In fact, it was
> important enough for us to discuss in depth at the HBase pow-pow a couple
> weeks ago, with 30+? people. There are other open source projects out
> there that aren't used for as critical data and would love to have that
> next feature that might differentiate them. As a maturing product, we
> don't need a ton of new features as much as we need our features to work
> properly and have some well-thought tweaks for completeness.
>
> That said, this thread has been split between a discussion about
> HBASE-4120 and a discussion about open source inclusivity.
>
> I appreciate the effort that Tao Bao is putting into HBASE-4120. I'm glad
> that they have plans to use this in a production environment. I'm glad to
> hear that there are active companies that also want to use this feature in
> a critical environment. That said, I gave an initial scan for HBASE-4120
> and found race conditions & necessary design refactoring. This was just
> an introductory scan, so I didn't look very hard and expected to find more
> issues in a later scan. I have not looked at the diff recently because of
> prod release issues; but I find it disturbing that other reviewers didn't
> find those issues, since I waited over a month to review that patch. I
> would expect that a committer wanting to use this feature in his company
> for production would do a much more thorough analysis than I did.
>
