That said, doing a release (even a point release) is some work. I typically go through every single outstanding issue and decide whether to get that in or push it, teasing out related issues, etc. In this case I would wholesale move all 0.94.7 to 0.94.8 and declare 0.94.7 done.
-- Lars ________________________________ From: lars hofhansl <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 11:12 AM Subject: Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts) Pulling 0.94.6 is another option. ________________________________ From: Stack <[email protected]> To: HBase Dev List <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 11:09 AM Subject: Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts) +1 on 0.94.7 rather than 0.94.6.1. Chatting w/ JD and Aleks, we should pull 0.94.6. I can add note up on webpage to explain the hole. Can I help w/ the 0.94.7 rolling? St.Ack On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected]>wrote: > My problem with delaying getting this patch out there is that people > who adopt 0.94.6 are putting themselves in a hole because you also > can't roll restart out of it. > > J-D > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote: > > Third 0.94.6 RC was cut on Mar. 14th. > > It has been almost 3 weeks since them. Meaning we have sizable goodies > for > > the next release. > > > > I would vote for 0.94.7 release which would come in April anyway. > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > >> We might wanna bring this discussion here on dev@. > >> > >> So right now the questions are: > >> > >> - Should we call a release with just HBASE-8259 as 0.94.6.1 or > >> 0.94.7? How much testing are we expecting from folks? > >> - Should we just cut a release with what's in the branch and call it > >> 0.94.7? > >> > >> My opinion is to release 0.94.6.1 with just HBASE-8259 to replace the > >> current 0.94.6. Have the normal unit test run and release based on the > >> +1s we gather. > >> > >> J-D > >> > >> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Ted Yu (JIRA) <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> > [ > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8259?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13622514#comment-13622514 > ] > >> > > >> > Ted Yu commented on HBASE-8259: > >> > ------------------------------- > >> > > >> > What level of verification effort are you expecting ? > >> > If normal procedure of validating a release is involved, 0.94.7 > release > >> seems to be a better fit. > >> > > >> >> Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts > >> >> --------------------------------------------------- > >> >> > >> >> Key: HBASE-8259 > >> >> URL: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8259 > >> >> Project: HBase > >> >> Issue Type: Bug > >> >> Affects Versions: 0.94.6 > >> >> Reporter: Jean-Daniel Cryans > >> >> Assignee: Matteo Bertozzi > >> >> Priority: Blocker > >> >> Fix For: 0.94.7 > >> >> > >> >> Attachments: HBASE-8259-v0.patch > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> [~aleksshulman] found with his nifty QA tools that 0.94.6 has an > >> incompatible change due to HBASE-7360 (Snapshot 0.94 Backport) that > breaks > >> rolling restarts. > >> >> RegionTransitionData.write() uses eventType.ordinal() that is the > index > >> in the enum and not the value specified in the enum definition. It > means we > >> can't add new states in the middle of the list. This can be fixed by > moving > >> C_M_SNAPSHOT_TABLE and C_M_RESTORE_SNAPSHOT at the end of the list. > Trunk > >> does the right thing already. > >> >> Right now, RIT znodes created with 0.94.6 (or top of the branch) will > >> use the wrong value for the event type. You will see things like: > >> >> {noformat} > >> >> 2013-04-03 14:57:25,197 DEBUG > >> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.zookeeper.ZKAssign: > >> regionserver:60020-0x13dd1e10dbd0004 Attempting to transition node > >> 70236052/-ROOT- from M_ZK_REGION_OFFLINE to RS_ZK_REGION_OPENING > >> >> 2013-04-03 14:57:25,201 WARN > >> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.zookeeper.ZKAssign: > >> regionserver:60020-0x13dd1e10dbd0004 Attempt to transition the > unassigned > >> node for 70236052 from M_ZK_REGION_OFFLINE to RS_ZK_REGION_OPENING > failed, > >> the node existed but was in the state M_SERVER_SHUTDOWN set by the > server > >> 192.168.1.112,60020,1365026237977 > >> >> 2013-04-03 14:57:25,201 WARN > >> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.handler.OpenRegionHandler: Failed > >> transition from OFFLINE to OPENING for region=70236052 > >> >> 2013-04-03 14:57:25,201 WARN > >> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.handler.OpenRegionHandler: Region > was > >> hijacked? It no longer exists, encodedName=70236052 > >> >> {noformat} > >> >> We should roll a 0.94.6.1 or 0.94.7 as soon this is fixed IMO. > >> > > >> > -- > >> > This message is automatically generated by JIRA. > >> > If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA > >> administrators > >> > For more information on JIRA, see: > >> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira > >> >
