I will set zk-less assignment off by default so that your change is not affected. But zk-less assignment won't support replica, at least for now.
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Enis Söztutar <enis....@gmail.com> wrote: > BTW, I would really prefer to finish the merge before HBASE-11059. The > replica assignment has been working with the new patches and zk-based > assignment for many months. > > Enis > > > On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 7:07 PM, Jimmy Xiang <jxi...@cloudera.com> wrote: > > > First of all, I have not looked into the patches recently. I remember > there > > are some changes to the public interface. I was wondering if it is > backward > > compatible. Enis mentioned that it's rolling upgradable. Just want to > > confirm if it is backward compatible. For existing applications, do they > > need to recompile? > > > > Second, there should be some conflict with HBASE-11059 I am working on > now, > > which is almost finished. How should we resolve this issue? ZK-less > region > > assignment doesn't know region replica yet. > > > > Thanks, > > Jimmy > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Jeffrey Zhong <jzh...@hortonworks.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > +1. It brings goodies such as region replica, cross region server > > > scan&get, anti-affinity of regions, and pave the way for sync region > > > replication. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > -Jeffrey > > > > > > On 6/6/14 2:42 PM, "Devaraj Das" <d...@hortonworks.com> wrote: > > > > > > >+1 > > > > > > > >On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> > > > >wrote: > > > >> +1, thanks Enis > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Enis Söztutar <enis....@gmail.com> > > > >>wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> Sorry, I was mostly out for HadoopSummit. > > > >>> > > > >>> Yes, the git flow would be very similar to what you propose: > > > >>> > > > >>> $ git checkout HBASE-10070 > > > >>> $ git rebase --ignore-date master > > > >>> (fixups, git add, git rebase --continue, etc, etc, etc) > > > >>> $ git checkout master > > > >>> > > > >>> $ git push origin HBASE-10070 HBASE-10070-rebase-date > > > >>>(optionally) > > > >>> $ git merge HBASE-10070 > > > >>> > > > >>> We can either go --ignore-date or not depending on what we want. If > > > >>>needed > > > >>> I am fine with pushing the rebased master branch for review to main > > > >>>repo > > > >>> before the merge to another branch. If not, I can just rebase the > > > >>>branch > > > >>> locally and merge + push to main repo. > > > >>> > > > >>> Creating final patches and attaching them to jira might be > > cumbersome. > > > >>>If > > > >>> we do the rebased-branch on repo, we might not need it. But if we > > need > > > >>>that > > > >>> for review, I can do it. > > > >>> > > > >>> Thanks, > > > >>> Enis > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Andrew Purtell < > apurt...@apache.org > > > > > > >>> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> > I realize this is a vote thread but I need a satisfactory answer > to > > > >>>the > > > >>> > below inquiries before feeling comfortable casting a vote. Or > > perhaps > > > >>> that > > > >>> > means we need to cancel this vote and move back to discussion. > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Andrew Purtell < > > apurt...@apache.org > > > > > > > >>> > wrote: > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Also after the merge process is completed, do you plan to use > git > > > >>> > > format-patch to break out the per-JIRA changes into updated > > > >>>patches for > > > >>> > > those JIRAs representing in effect the final commit? > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Andrew Purtell > > > >>><apurt...@apache.org> > > > >>> > > wrote: > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Enis Söztutar < > e...@apache.org> > > > >>> wrote: > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> This VOTE is for merging back the remaining changes in branch > to > > > >>> trunk. > > > >>> > If > > > >>> > >>> passes, we will rebase the branch on top of current trunk, in > > > >>>which > > > >>> we > > > >>> > >>> will > > > >>> > >>> keep the commit-per-issue log history. After that we will do > a > > > >>>git > > > >>> > merge > > > >>> > >>> for the branch keeping the history clean and not squashing > the > > > >>> > commits. I > > > >>> > >>> expect rebasing to be straightforward, however with some > manual > > > >>> > conflict > > > >>> > >>> resolution. After the merge we'll keep running the tests to > > make > > > >>>sure > > > >>> > >>> everything is ok. > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> Just to clarify that would look something like this: > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> $ git checkout HBASE-10070 > > > >>> > >> $ git rebase --ignore-date master > > > >>> > >> (fixups, git add, git rebase --continue, etc, etc, etc) > > > >>> > >> $ git checkout master > > > >>> > >> $ git merge HBASE-10070 > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> ? > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> That sounds good to me, the final merge should be a fast > forward > > > >>> merge. > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> Use of ' --ignore-date' could be mildly controversial. It's > not > > > >>> strictly > > > >>> > >> necessary because the commits for 10070 will appear grouped in > > > >>> history, > > > >>> > but > > > >>> > >> then dates on commits will be discontiguous in that section of > > > >>> history. > > > >>> > I > > > >>> > >> suggest using that option so the order of commits and dates > sort > > > >>>the > > > >>> > same > > > >>> > >> on master. > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Enis Söztutar < > e...@apache.org> > > > >>> wrote: > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >>> Hi, > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> Last week we started some discussion[4] for merging branch > > > >>> > hbase-10070[1] > > > >>> > >>> into trunk. It seems like the consensus there is to do the > > merge > > > >>> sooner > > > >>> > >>> rather than later. > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> We had branched hbase-10070 in Feb out of trunk[5]. The > branch > > > >>> contains > > > >>> > >>> 55 > > > >>> > >>> jiras committed[2]. Out of these 55, 15 has already been > > > >>>committed to > > > >>> > >>> trunk > > > >>> > >>> and backported to hbase-10070 branch[3]. > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> This VOTE is for merging back the remaining changes in branch > > to > > > >>> trunk. > > > >>> > >>> If > > > >>> > >>> passes, we will rebase the branch on top of current trunk, in > > > >>>which > > > >>> we > > > >>> > >>> will > > > >>> > >>> keep the commit-per-issue log history. After that we will do > a > > > >>>git > > > >>> > merge > > > >>> > >>> for the branch keeping the history clean and not squashing > the > > > >>> > commits. I > > > >>> > >>> expect rebasing to be straightforward, however with some > manual > > > >>> > conflict > > > >>> > >>> resolution. After the merge we'll keep running the tests to > > make > > > >>>sure > > > >>> > >>> everything is ok. > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> An overview of the changes, and the status of the work can be > > > >>>found > > > >>> > under > > > >>> > >>> [4], [6] and [7].In summary, with the code in branch, you can > > > >>>create > > > >>> > >>> tables > > > >>> > >>> with region replicas, do gets / multi gets and scans using > > > >>>TIMELINE > > > >>> > >>> consistency with high availability. Region replicas > > periodically > > > >>>scan > > > >>> > the > > > >>> > >>> files of the primary and pick up flushed / committed files. > The > > > >>>RPC > > > >>> > >>> paths / > > > >>> > >>> assignment, balancing etc are pretty stable. However some > more > > > >>> > >>> performance > > > >>> > >>> analysis and tuning is needed. Phase 2 work is being worked > on > > > >>>under > > > >>> > >>> HBASE-11183, and we have some working prototype for > > > >>>async-replicating > > > >>> > and > > > >>> > >>> region splits. However, we believe even without those > features, > > > >>>this > > > >>> > work > > > >>> > >>> is useable (especially for read-only/bulk load tables) , and > > can > > > >>>be > > > >>> > >>> released as an experimental feature in 1.0. > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> Please indicate your choice: > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> [ ] +1 on yes, merge branch hbase-10070 to trunk. > > > >>> > >>> [ ] 0 on don't care > > > >>> > >>> [ ] -1 don't merge, because ... > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> I'll keep the vote running for 7 days, and close it Mon 9th > of > > > >>>June, > > > >>> > PDT. > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> Here is my official +1. > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> Thanks, > > > >>> > >>> Enis > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> [1] > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=hbase.git;a=log;h=refs/heads/h > > > >>>base-10070 > > > >>> > >>> [2] > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-11214?jql=fixVersion%20%3D%2 > > > > > > >>>0hbase-10070%20AND%20project%20%3D%20HBASE%20AND%20status%20%3D%20resolv > > > >>>ed > > > >>> > >>> [3] > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10792?jql=fixVersion%20%3D%2 > > > > > > >>>0hbase-10070%20and%20fixversion%20%3D%200.99.0%20AND%20project%20%3D%20H > > > >>>BASE%20AND%20status%20%3D%20resolved > > > >>> > >>> [4] > > > >>>https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@hbase.apache.org/msg25795.html > > > >>> > >>> [5] > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > https://github.com/apache/hbase/commit/e22c7efeac02efde3451a0c9ff9bdcd27 > > > >>>25576d0 > > > >>> > >>> [6] > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > > http://www.slideshare.net/enissoz/hbase-high-availability-for-reads-with > > > >>>-time > > > >>> > >>> [7] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10070 > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> -- > > > >>> > >> 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) > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> -- > > > >> Best regards, > > > >> > > > >> - Andy > > > >> > > > >> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet > > Hein > > > >> (via Tom White) > > > > > > > >-- > > > >CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > > > >NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or > entity > > > >to > > > >which it is addressed and may contain information that is > confidential, > > > >privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the > > reader > > > >of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified > > > >that > > > >any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or > > > >forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have > > > >received this communication in error, please contact the sender > > > >immediately > > > >and delete it from your system. Thank You. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or > entity > > to > > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, > > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the > reader > > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified > > that > > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or > > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have > > > received this communication in error, please contact the sender > > immediately > > > and delete it from your system. Thank You. > > > > > >
