Will target HBASE-10899 also then by that time. Regards Ram
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote: > Understood, Andy. > > I have integrated fix for HBASE-10850 to 0.98 > > Cheers > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > I will sink this RC and roll a new one tomorrow. > > > > However, I may very well release the next RC even if I am the only +1 > vote > > and testing it causes your workstation to catch fire. So please take the > > time to commit whatever you feel is needed to the 0.98 branch or file > > blockers against 0.98.1 in the next 24 hours. This is it for 0.98.1. > > 0.98.2 will happen a mere 30 days from the 0.98.1 release. > > > > > On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I agree with Anoop's assessment. > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 2:19 AM, Anoop John <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > >> After analysing HBASE-10850 I think better we can fix this in 98.1 > > release > > >> itself. Also Phoenix plan to use this 98.1 and Phoenix uses essential > > CF > > >> optimization. > > >> > > >> Also HBASE-10854 can be included in 98.1 in such a case, > > >> > > >> Considering those we need a new RC. > > >> > > >> -Anoop- > > >> > > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:19 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan < > > >> [email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > >>> +1 on the RC. > > >>> Checked the signature. > > >>> Downloaded the source, built and ran the testcases. > > >>> Ran Integration Tests with ACL and Visibility labels. Everything > looks > > >>> fine. > > >>> Compaction, flushes etc too. > > >>> > > >>> Regards > > >>> Ram > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Elliott Clark <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> +1 > > >>>> > > >>>> Checked the hash > > >>>> Checked the tar layout. > > >>>> Played with a single node. Everything seemed good after ITBLL > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> +1 > > >>>>> > > >>>>> The hash is good. Doc. and layout looks good. UI seems fine. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Ran on small cluster w/ default hadoop 2.2 in hbase against a tip > of > > >>> the > > >>>>> branch hadoop 2.4 cluster. Seems to basically work (small big > linked > > >>>> list > > >>>>> test worked). > > >>>>> > > >>>>> TSDB seems to work fine against this RC. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I don't mean to be stealing our Jon's thunder but in case he is too > > >>>>> occupied to vote here, I'll note that he has gotten our internal > rig > > >>>>> running against the tip of the 0.98 branch and it has been passing > > >>> green > > >>>>> running IT tests on a small cluster over hours. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> St.Ack > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 12:49 AM, Andrew Purtell < > > [email protected] > > >>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is available for > > >>> download > > >>>> at > > >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~apurtell/0.98.1RC3/ and Maven artifacts > > >>> are > > >>>>> also > > >>>>>> available in the temporary repository > > >>> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehbase-1016 > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> 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 > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Please try out the candidate and vote +1/-1 by midnight Pacific > Time > > >>>>> (00:00 > > >>>>>> PDT) on April 6 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) > > >>> > > >
