on my list there are mainly major changes.
HBASE-13153 seems small enough that may also be considered for a branch-1.

it will take at least 3 months to have a branch-2,
I don't want this thread to end up pointing out all minor jiras.
so, my rule is: if it is not a major architectural change and people +1 it,
it is in.

Matteo


On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 9:14 PM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote:

> Design for the following is being finalized:
> HBASE-13153 enable bulkload to support replication
>
> Do you think it should be included ?
>
> Cheers
>
> On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Matteo Bertozzi <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hey folks,
> >
> > my list for 2.0 looks quite full, but I'm probably missing something.
> >
> > main point is probably that we want to be rolling upgradable.
> > a direct rolling upgrade may be not easy, so the option is to do it in
> two
> > phases.
> > more or less: "after all the machines are on the new version trigger an
> > update" (the new AM can help with it)
> >
> >  * HBASE-14350 New Assignment Manager (based on proc-v2)
> >  * Table Descriptor is not compatible with branch-1 due to HBASE-7767
> >  ** this may be reverted/removed/fixed with the new AM
> >  * HBASE-11425 Off heaping read path. write path?
> >  * HBASE-14090 redofs, fix 1M region. file moving around and so on
> >  * HBASE-14123 HBase Backups
> >  * Replication
> >  ** move znodes to replication table
> >  ** speedup replication by streaming data
> >  ** ability to run an endpoint as "user" and receive only "user" events?
> >  * HBASE-13936 Dynamic configuration
> >  * HBASE-14070 HLC, was mentioned for branch-1. but maybe we can try to
> get
> > seqid merged?
> >
> > Other stuff like the C++ client from facebook, or improvement to the
> > Lawlor’s scanner work, spark integration, missing proc-v2 conversion and
> > more can probably make it in a branch-1.
> >
> > cutting a branch-2 will probably happen when we have the new AM, but we
> > will see how things evolve.
> >
> > Anything else folks want to see called out?
> >
>

Reply via email to