HBASE-10863 is a fix that should be included in 0.98.1 W.r.t. Conclusion of voting period of RC3, it is reasonable to have some flexibility.
Cheers On Mar 29, 2014, at 4:14 AM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote: > If we need another RC, then I can do this in the evening Amsterdam time today > or tomorrow and run a new vote. I guess at this point it should conclude on > April 6? > > I wanted to hit a release date of March 31 because Phoenix's 4.0.0 RC depends > on having a 0.98.1 available. Of course if there is a veto worthy issue then > downstream will be better served by waiting. > > Also, I will be spinning a 0.98.2 to hit a release date target +30 days from > .1. > > >> On Mar 29, 2014, at 12:00 PM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> After some more testing in secure deployment of 0.98, I found some issue >> with cell visibility labels. >> Namely: >> HBASE-10863 Scan doesn't return rows for user who has authorization by >> visibility label in secure deployment >> HBASE-10857 clear_auths command gives exception on existing label and user >> in secure deployment >> >> Underneath, they are actually caused by one defect: >> DefaultScanLabelGenerator#dropLabelsNotInUserAuths() would erroneously drop >> labels due to mismatching username. >> >> The fix, attached to HBASE-10863, switches to calling user.getShortName() >> which is consistent with AccessController in working with Kerberos >> principals. >> >> From users' point of view, it would be expected that cell visibility labels >> work in secure deployment. >> >> I want to solicit opinion on whether RC3 is needed. >> If RC3 comes out, I would expect a quick vote. >> >> Cheers >> >> >>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> - checked documentation and tarball >>> >>> - Ran unit test suite which passed >>> >>> - Ran in local and distributed mode >>> - checked the UI pages >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 9:27 AM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> Unit test suite passes 100% 25 times out of 25 runs. >>>> >>>> Cluster testing looks good with LoadTestTool, YCSB, ITI, and ITIBLL. >>>> >>>> An informal performance test on a small cluster comparing 0.98.0 and >>>> 0.98.1 >>>> indicates no serious perf regressions. See email to dev@ titled >>>> "Comparsion >>>> between 0.98.0 and 0.98.1RC1 using YCSB". The results are still relevant >>>> to >>>> this RC. >>>> >>>> Some of the integration tests have issues when run in local mode but this >>>> test only problem can be fixed later. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected] >>>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> The 3rd HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC2) is available for download >>>> at >>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC2/ and Maven artifacts are >>>>> also available in the temporary repository >>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1014 >>>>> >>>>> Signed with my code signing key D5365CCD. >>>>> >>>>> The issues resolved in this release can be found here: >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12325664 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This is the last RC expected for this version unless we find a new >>>>> blocker. >>>>> >>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific Time >>>>> (00:00 -0800 GMT) on March 31 on whether or not we should release this >>>> as >>>>> 0.98.1. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> >>>>> - Andy >>>>> >>>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein >>>>> (via Tom White) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> - Andy >>>> >>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein >>>> (via Tom White) >>> >>>
