Since last Sunday, 6 checkins have gone in under 0.92.0 section in CHANGES.txt
I am fine with re-categorizing them to go under 0.92.1 Or should we evaluate the 6 checkins ? I personally think the current 0.92 Jenkins build would be more robust than RC3. Cheers On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 5:10 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected]>wrote: > +1 > > I've been testing this under heavy write loads and I also looked at > replication. On previous RCs I did many read tests and AFAIK that > didn't change so I didn't go through that again. I think this is a > solid release, and 0.92.1 will take care of bugs that didn't make it > in time. > > J-D > > On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > > The fourth hbase 0.92.0 release candidate is available for download: > > > > http://people.apache.org/~stack/hbase-0.92.0-candidate-3/ > > > > I've posted a secure and an insecure tarball built by jenkins. > > > > This RC bundles hadoop 1.0.0 and zookeeper 3.4.2. > > > > As said previous, HBase 0.92.0 includes a wagon-load of new features > > including coprocessors, security, a new (self-migrating) file format, > > distributed log splitting, etc. There's been > 660 fixes since 0.90. > > See the list here: http://su.pr/1VZzl5 > > > > See the hbase manual for the low-down on what hadoop version this > > release will run on: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hadoop > > > > There is no migration necessary. A shutdown and restart after putting > > in place the new HBase should be all thats involved (A rolling restart > > from 0.90.x to 0.92.0 will not work). That said, once you have moved > > to 0.92.x, there is no going back to 0.90.x after the transition has > > been made. > > > > Should we release this candidate as hbase 0.92.0? Take it for a spin. > > Check out the doc. Vote +1/-1 by Martin Luther King Day, January 16th, > 2012. > > > > Yours, > > The HBasistas > > > > P.S. This candidate is looking pretty good. If you are thinking of > using 0.92.0 > > any time soon, we would suggest that you dig in now and try it. Thanks. >
