(cc dev@)
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote: > Thank you, the release of 0.98.1 will happen on time unless there is a new > development. > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:23 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 on getting this RC3 out as the release and targetting the bug for >> 0.98.2. >> >> Regards >> Ram >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Anoop John <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > >Phoenix 4.0 has no release it can currently run on >> > >Can't we get these additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away >> > >> > I was thinking that for Phoenix 4.0 *release* the 98.1 is needed.. >> Thats >> > why was in favor of correcting the bug in 98.1 itself.. Ya 98.2 can >> come >> > out in a month time and at that time 4.0 can upgrade to that.. Sounds >> > good.. I am ready to again cast my +1 for this RC. >> > >> > >> > >@Anoop - would you mind verifying whether or not >> > the TestSCVFWithMiniCluster written as a Phoenix query returns the >> correct >> > results? >> > >> > I will check this James.. I think it might be there. Any way, even if >> the >> > bug is there, there can be a work around solution in Phoenix filter code >> > which I can try out (If you would like to get) >> > >> > -Anoop- >> > >> > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > That is a feasible option. >> > > >> > > I have changed Fix Version of HBASE-10850 to 0.98.2 >> > > >> > > Cheers >> > > >> > > >> > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:16 PM, lars hofhansl <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > > >> > > > To be fair, Phoenix should not have relied on an unreleased >> dependency. >> > > (I >> > > > know there are corporate timing issues, but they really should not >> > force >> > > us >> > > > into situations like these). >> > > > >> > > > As far as I understand the issue, it not just a performance but can >> > lead >> > > > to incorrect results. >> > > > >> > > > Then again, this issue has existed in all of 0.96 and 0.98 so far >> > (over 5 >> > > > months). >> > > > >> > > > So, I'd be in favor of releasing 0.98.1 now, and doing 0.98.2 soon, >> in >> > 14 >> > > > or 20 days (that would also pull back some of the time lost in the >> > > 0.98.1RC >> > > > cycle). >> > > > >> > > > -- Lars >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > ________________________________ >> > > > From: James Taylor <[email protected]> >> > > > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> > > > Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> > > > Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 8:57 AM >> > > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 4th HBase 0.98.1 release candidate (RC3) is >> > > > available for download >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > I implore you to stick with releasing RC3. Phoenix 4.0 has no >> release >> > it >> > > > can currently run on. Phoenix doesn't use SingleColumnValueFilter, >> so >> > it >> > > > seems that HBASE-10850 has no impact wrt Phoenix. Can't we get these >> > > > additional bugs in 0.98.2 - it's one month away [1]? >> > > > >> > > > James >> > > > >> > > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:34 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan < >> > > > [email protected]> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > 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) >> > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > -- > 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)
