On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Devaraj Das <d...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> Stack, as things stand, Ted Yu has a patch that is a backport of MOB. He > told me offline he has taken a look at the jiras that went in in the master > that is to do with MOB, and got them in the backport. On the issue, a near 800k blob is dumped which is described as "...a backport of MOB... " but w/o attribution of provenance nor any other description of what it contains. Only when this is pointed-out in the issue do we get a short listing of supposed JIRAs included with no justification of what is covered, what is included/excluded, and what machinations were done to make it fit branch-1 (Yet you offline were given this info?). Such poor practice only makes me more intent on my objection. > Now, to your point, I agree that someone familiar with MOB code should do > the backport but the question is, is that dev available to do it now? The > next best thing is to get Ted Yu's patch reviewed by someone familiar with > the feature. I really hope that we can get cycles from the original MOB > devs on this. > MOB is unsupported? If so, lets for sure not backport it. Agree that we shouldn't be adding flaky tests. The question is if the > failures on master to do with MOB are really MOB related or something else > (for argument's sake, let's say, procv2).. > > Sounds like we need to spend a bit of time digging in on the flakey tests then. Branch-1 is pretty stable now after a bunch of expended effort by a few folks. Would be a pity taking a step back. St.Ack > On the point about the DISCUSS thread, yeah, it's fine to do it if folks > feel it's the right way to go. > ________________________________________ > From: saint....@gmail.com <saint....@gmail.com> on behalf of Stack < > st...@duboce.net> > Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 10:55 AM > To: HBase Dev List > Subject: Re: MOB in branch-1? (Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Merge branch hbase-11339 > HBase MOB to trunk) > > (Doing another resend...) > > I have objection to you, Ted Yu, doing it. MOB has spread all about master > branch. Backport should be done by someone who knows MOB. > > Higher up in this thread, Sean asks: "Can we get a [DISCUSS] flagged thread > to see what, if anything, folks > would like to see gate inclusion in branch-1?" Shouldn't we do this before > we 'create a backport...'. > > For me, there should be no new flakies in branch-1. Branch-1 builds are a > hard-won stable(-ish). Looking at master build, MOB seems quiet lately but > going by HBASE-15012, our flakies umbrella issue, I see notes that > TestMobExportSnapshot has failed a few times (that is probably because the > test it derives from is flakey) and TestMobRestoreFlushSnapshotFromClient > gets a mention. > > St.Ack > > > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > > > (Doing a resend of below... it doesn't seem to have gone through) > > > > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 8:20 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> If there is no objection, I will create a backport JIRA tomorrow and > >> attach patch. > >> > >> > > I have objection to you doing it. MOB has spread all about master branch. > > Backport should be done by someone who knows MOB. > > > > Higher up in this thread, Sean asks: "Can we get a [DISCUSS] flagged > > thread to see what, if anything, folks > > would like to see gate inclusion in branch-1?" Shouldn't we do this > > before we 'create a backport...'. > > > > For me, there should be no new flakies in branch-1. Branch-1 builds are a > > hard-won stable(-ish). Looking at master build, MOB seems quiet lately > but > > going by HBASE-15012, our flakies umbrella issue, I see notes that > > TestMobExportSnapshot has failed a few times (that is probably because > the > > test it derives from is flakey) and TestMobRestoreFlushSnapshotFromClient > > gets a mention. > > > > St.Ack > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 8:20 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> If there is no objection, I will create a backport JIRA tomorrow and > >>> attach patch. > >>> > >>> > >> I have objection to you doing it. MOB has spread all about master > branch. > >> Backport should be done by someone who knows MOB. > >> > >> Higher up in this thread, Sean asks: "Can we get a [DISCUSS] flagged > >> thread to see what, if anything, folks > >> would like to see gate inclusion in branch-1?" Shouldn't we do this > >> before we 'create a backport...'. > >> > >> For me, there should be no new flakies in branch-1. Branch-1 builds are > a > >> hard-won stable(-ish). Looking at master build, MOB seems quiet lately > but > >> going by HBASE-15012, our flakies umbrella issue, I see notes that > >> TestMobExportSnapshot has failed a few times (that is probably because > the > >> test it derives from is flakey) and > TestMobRestoreFlushSnapshotFromClient > >> gets a mention. > >> > >> St.Ack > >> > > >
