Michael,

you can try master + latest patch on HBASE-14123 (v29). No need to use
HBASE-7912 branch. I will double check HBASE-7912.

-Vlad

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:

> More info:
>
> stack@ve0524:~/hbase.git$ git checkout origin/HBASE-7912 -b 7912v2
> Branch 7912v2 set up to track remote branch HBASE-7912 from origin.
> Switched to a new branch '7912v2'
> stack@ve0524:~/hbase.git$ java -version
> java version "1.8.0_101"
> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_101-b13)
> Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.101-b13, mixed mode)
> stack@ve0524:~/hbase.git$ mvn clean install -DskipTests &> /tmp/out.txt
>
> ...
>
> St.Ack
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>
> > Interesting. When I try it fails w/ below:
> >
> > [INFO] 26 warnings
> > 322 [INFO] -------------------------------------------------------------
> > 323 [INFO] -------------------------------------------------------------
> > 324 [ERROR] COMPILATION ERROR :
> > 325 [INFO] -------------------------------------------------------------
> > 326 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/
> > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexCodecV2.java:[48,8]
> > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.encoding.rowindexV2.RowIndexCodecV2 is not
> > abstract and does not override abstract method createSeeker(org.ap
> >  ache.hadoop.hbase.CellComparator,org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.encoding.
> HFileBlockDecodingContext)
> > in org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.encoding.DataBlockEncoder
> > 327 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/
> > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexCodecV2.java:[143,3]
> > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype
> > 328 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/
> > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexCodecV2.java:[147,29]
> > incompatible types: java.nio.ByteBuffer cannot be converted to
> > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.nio.ByteBuff
> > 329 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/
> > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexCodecV2.java:[148,33]
> > cannot find symbol
> > 330   symbol:   method getKeyDeepCopy()
> > 331   location: variable seeker of type org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.
> > encoding.DataBlockEncoder.EncodedSeeker
> > 332 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/
> > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexCodecV2.java:[153,3]
> > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype
> > 333 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/
> > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV1/RowIndexCodecV1.java:[45,8]
> > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.encoding.rowindexV1.RowIndexCodecV1 is not
> > abstract and does not override abstract method createSeeker(org.ap
> >  ache.hadoop.hbase.CellComparator,org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.encoding.
> HFileBlockDecodingContext)
> > in org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.encoding.DataBlockEncoder
> > 334 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/
> > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV1/RowIndexCodecV1.java:[145,3]
> > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype
> > 335 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/
> > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV1/RowIndexCodecV1.java:[158,3]
> > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype
> > 336 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/
> > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexSeekerV2.java:[46,8]
> > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.encoding.rowindexV2.RowIndexSeekerV2 is not
> > abstract and does not override abstract method compareKey(org.ap
> >  ache.hadoop.hbase.CellComparator,org.apache.hadoop.hbase.Cell) in
> > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.encoding.DataBlockEncoder.EncodedSeeker
> > 337 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/
> > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexSeekerV2.java:[79,3]
> > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype
> > 338 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/
> > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexSeekerV2.java:[117,3]
> > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype
> > 339 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/
> > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexSeekerV2.java:[190,3]
> > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype
> > 340 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/
> > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexSeekerV2.java:[214,3]
> > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype
> > 341 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/
> > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexSeekerV2.java:[349,3]
> > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype
> > 342 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/
> > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/RowIndexSeekerV2.java:[355,3]
> > method does not override or implement a method from a supertype
> > 343 [ERROR] /home/stack/hbase.git/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/
> > apache/hadoop/hbase/io/encoding/rowindexV2/
> RowIndexSeekerV2.java:[421,36]
> > no suitable method found for uncompressTags(java.nio.
> > ByteBuffer,byte[],int,int)
> > 344     method org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.TagCompressionContext.
> > uncompressTags(java.io.InputStream,byte[],int,int) is not applicable
> > 345       (argument mismatch; java.nio.ByteBuffer cannot be converted to
> > java.io.InputStream)
> > 346     method org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.TagCompressionContext.
> > uncompressTags(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.nio.ByteBuff,byte[],int,int) is
> > not applicable
> > 347       (argument mismatch; java.nio.ByteBuffer cannot be converted to
> > org.apache.hadoop.hbase.nio.ByteBuff)
> >
> > ....
> >
> > St.Ack
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Apekshit Sharma <a...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> @stack, it compiled for me.
> >>
> >> Also tried few commands, and have to say, it's well designed from user
> >> commands perspective.
> >>
> >> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Vladimir Rodionov <
> >> vladrodio...@gmail.com
> >> > >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Michael,
> >> > >
> >> > > Its in HBASE-7912
> >> > >
> >> > > This is tip of git log:
> >> > >
> >> > > commit a072f6f49a26a7259ff2aaef6cb56d85eb592482
> >> > > Author: Frank Welsch <fwel...@jps.net>
> >> > > Date:   Fri Sep 23 18:00:42 2016 -0400
> >> > >
> >> > >     HBASE-16574 Book updates for backup and restore
> >> > >
> >> > > commit b14e2ab1c24e65ff88dd4c579acf83cb4ed0605e
> >> > > Author: tedyu <yuzhih...@gmail.com>
> >> > > Date:   Wed Oct 5 16:29:40 2016 -0700
> >> > >
> >> > >     HBASE-16727 Backup refactoring: remove MR dependencies from
> >> HMaster
> >> > > (Vladimir Rodionov)
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > Thanks. I have that. I tried it and it doesn't compile for me. Does it
> >> > compile for you?
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > M
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > -Vlad
> >> > >
> >> > > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Which branch do I check out to try it? HBASE-7912 is not it. I
> don't
> >> > see
> >> > > an
> >> > > > HBASE-16727...
> >> > > > Thanks,
> >> > > > M
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:41 AM, Vladimir Rodionov <
> >> > > > vladrodio...@gmail.com>
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > The last patch is on review board:
> >> > > > > https://reviews.apache.org/r/52748
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Vladimir Rodionov <
> >> > > > vladrodio...@gmail.com
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > >> How hard to put in an hbase-backup module? hbase-server is
> >> fat
> >> > > > enough
> >> > > > > > >> already. Could be done as a follow-up.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-16727?
> >> > > > > > focusedCommentId=15531237&page=com.atlassian.jira.
> >> > > > > > plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-
> 15531237
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Can we do merge first? Then we can discuss separate module.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > -Vlad
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> Looks like the first quote was cut off.
> >> > > > > >> The original sentence was:
> >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >> bq. no mapreduce job launched from master or region server.
> >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >> mapreduce job is launched from the node where command line
> >> tool is
> >> > > > run.
> >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> >> wrote:
> >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >> > bq. launched from master or region server.
> >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > What does this mean please? Has to be run from Master or
> >> > > > RegionServer?
> >> > > > > >> Can
> >> > > > > >> > it be run from another node altogether?
> >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Vladimir Rodionov <
> >> > > > > >> vladrodio...@gmail.com
> >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > wrote:
> >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > >> mapreduce dependency has been moved to client side -
> no
> >> > > > mapreduce
> >> > > > > >> job
> >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > 1. We have no code in the client module anymore, due to
> >> > > dependency
> >> > > > > on
> >> > > > > >> > > internal server API (HFile and WAL access).
> >> > > > > >> > > 2. Backup/ restore are client - driven operations, but
> all
> >> the
> >> > > > code
> >> > > > > >> > resides
> >> > > > > >> > > in the server module
> >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > How hard to put in an hbase-backup module? hbase-server is
> >> fat
> >> > > > enough
> >> > > > > >> > already. Could be done as a follow-up.
> >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > Thanks,
> >> > > > > >> > St.Ack
> >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > 3. No MR in Master, no procedure - driven execution.
> >> > > > > >> > > 4. Old good MR from command-line.
> >> > > > > >> > > 5. Security was simplified and now only super-user is
> >> allowed
> >> > to
> >> > > > run
> >> > > > > >> > > backup/restores.
> >> > > > > >> > > 6. HBase Backup API was gone due to 1. Now only
> >> command-line
> >> > > > access
> >> > > > > to
> >> > > > > >> > > backup tools.
> >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > These consequences of refactoring has been discussed in
> >> > > > HBASE-16727.
> >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > -Vlad
> >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Ted Yu <
> >> yuzhih...@gmail.com>
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > Reviving this thread.
> >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > The following has taken place:
> >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > mapreduce dependency has been moved to client side - no
> >> > > > mapreduce
> >> > > > > >> job
> >> > > > > >> > > > launched from master or region server.
> >> > > > > >> > > > document patch (HBASE-16574) has been integrated.
> >> > > > > >> > > > Updated mega patch has been attached to HBASE-14123:
> this
> >> > > covers
> >> > > > > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > refactor in #1 above and the protobuf 3 merge.
> >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > If community has more feedback on the merge proposal, I
> >> > would
> >> > > > love
> >> > > > > >> to
> >> > > > > >> > > hear
> >> > > > > >> > > > it.
> >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > Thanks
> >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Sean Busbey <
> >> > > > > bus...@cloudera.com>
> >> > > > > >> > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > I'd like to see the docs proposed on HBASE-16574
> >> > integrated
> >> > > > into
> >> > > > > >> our
> >> > > > > >> > > > > project's documentation prior to merge.
> >> > > > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Ted Yu <
> >> > > yuzhih...@gmail.com>
> >> > > > > >> wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > > This feature can be marked experimental due to some
> >> > > > > limitations
> >> > > > > >> > such
> >> > > > > >> > > as
> >> > > > > >> > > > > > security.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > > Your previous round of comments have been
> addressed.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > > Command line tool has gone through:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > > HBASE-16620 Fix backup command-line tool usability
> >> > issues
> >> > > > > >> > > > > > HBASE-16655 hbase backup describe with incorrect
> >> backup
> >> > id
> >> > > > > >> results
> >> > > > > >> > in
> >> > > > > >> > > > NPE
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > > The updated doc has been attached to HBASE-16574.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > > Cheers
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Stack <
> >> > st...@duboce.net>
> >> > > > > >> wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 7:43 AM, Ted Yu <
> >> > > > yuzhih...@gmail.com
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Are there more (review) comments ?
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Are outstanding comments addressed?
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> I don't see answer to my 'is this
> experimental/will
> >> it
> >> > be
> >> > > > > >> marked
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> experimental' question.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> I ran into some issues trying to use the feature
> and
> >> > > > > suggested
> >> > > > > >> > that
> >> > > > > >> > > a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> feature likes this needs polish else it'll just
> rot,
> >> > > > unused.
> >> > > > > >> Has
> >> > > > > >> > > > polish
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> been applied? All ready for another 'user' test?
> >> > Suggest
> >> > > > that
> >> > > > > >> you
> >> > > > > >> > > > update
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> here going forward for the benefit of those trying
> >> to
> >> > > > follow
> >> > > > > >> along
> >> > > > > >> > > and
> >> > > > > >> > > > > who
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> are not watching JIRA change fly-by.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> It looks like doc got a revision -- I have to
> check
> >> --
> >> > to
> >> > > > > take
> >> > > > > >> on
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> suggestion made above but again, suggest, that
> this
> >> > > thread
> >> > > > > gets
> >> > > > > >> > > > updated.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Thanks,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> St.Ack
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Thanks
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:02 AM, Devaraj Das <
> >> > > > > >> > > d...@hortonworks.com
> >> > > > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Just reviving this thread. Thanks Sean, Stack,
> >> > Dima,
> >> > > > and
> >> > > > > >> > others
> >> > > > > >> > > > for
> >> > > > > >> > > > > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > thorough reviews and testing. Thanks Ted and
> >> Vlad
> >> > for
> >> > > > > >> taking
> >> > > > > >> > > care
> >> > > > > >> > > > of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > feedback. Are we all good to do the merge now?
> >> > Rather
> >> > > > do
> >> > > > > >> > sooner
> >> > > > > >> > > > than
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > later.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > ________________________________________
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > From: saint....@gmail.com <
> saint....@gmail.com>
> >> on
> >> > > > > behalf
> >> > > > > >> of
> >> > > > > >> > > > Stack
> >> > > > > >> > > > > <
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > st...@duboce.net>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Sent: Monday, September 12, 2016 1:18 PM
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > To: HBase Dev List
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Merge Backup /
> >> Restore -
> >> > > > Branch
> >> > > > > >> > > > HBASE-7912
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 12:19 PM, Ted Yu <
> >> > > > > >> yuzhih...@gmail.com
> >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Mega patch (rev 18) is on HBASE-14123.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Please comment on HBASE-14123 on how you
> want
> >> to
> >> > > > > review.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Yeah. That was my lost tab. Last rb was 6
> months
> >> > ago.
> >> > > > > >> Suggest
> >> > > > > >> > > > > updating
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > it.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > RB is pretty good for review. Patch is only
> >> 1.5M so
> >> > > > > should
> >> > > > > >> be
> >> > > > > >> > > > fine.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > St.Ack
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Thanks
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Stack <
> >> > > > > >> st...@duboce.net>
> >> > > > > >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On review of the 'patch', do I just
> compare
> >> the
> >> > > > > branch
> >> > > > > >> to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > master or
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > is
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > there a megapatch posted somewhere (I
> think
> >> I
> >> > saw
> >> > > > one
> >> > > > > >> but
> >> > > > > >> > it
> >> > > > > >> > > > > seemed
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > stale
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > and then I 'lost' the tab). Sorry for dumb
> >> > > > question.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > St.Ack
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 12:01 PM, Stack <
> >> > > > > >> st...@duboce.net
> >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > Late to the game. A few comments after
> >> > > rereading
> >> > > > > this
> >> > > > > >> > > thread
> >> > > > > >> > > > > as a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > 'user'.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > + Before merge, a user-facing feature
> like
> >> > this
> >> > > > > >> should
> >> > > > > >> > > work
> >> > > > > >> > > > > (If
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > this
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > is
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > "higher-bar
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > for new features", bring it on --
> smile).
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > + As a user, I tried the branch with
> tools
> >> > > after
> >> > > > > >> > reviewing
> >> > > > > >> > > > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > just-posted
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > doc. I had an 'interesting' experience
> >> (left
> >> > > > > >> comments up
> >> > > > > >> > > on
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > issue). I
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > think
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > the tooling/doc. important to get right.
> >> If
> >> > it
> >> > > > > breaks
> >> > > > > >> > > easily
> >> > > > > >> > > > > or
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> is
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > inconsistent (or lacks 'polish'),
> >> operators
> >> > > will
> >> > > > > >> judge
> >> > > > > >> > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > whole
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > backup/restore tooling chain as not
> >> > trustworthy
> >> > > > and
> >> > > > > >> > > abandon
> >> > > > > >> > > > > it.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Lets
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > not
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > have this happen to this feature.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > + Matteo's suggestion (with a helpful
> >> starter
> >> > > > list)
> >> > > > > >> that
> >> > > > > >> > > > there
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > needs
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > be
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > explicit qualification on what is
> actually
> >> > > being
> >> > > > > >> > delivered
> >> > > > > >> > > > --
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > including a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > listing of limitations (some look
> serious
> >> > such
> >> > > as
> >> > > > > >> data
> >> > > > > >> > > bleed
> >> > > > > >> > > > > from
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > other
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > regions in WALs, but maybe I don't care
> >> for
> >> > my
> >> > > > use
> >> > > > > >> > > case...)
> >> > > > > >> > > > --
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > needs
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > accompany the merge. Lets fold them into
> >> the
> >> > > user
> >> > > > > >> doc.
> >> > > > > >> > in
> >> > > > > >> > > > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > technical
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > overview area as suggested so user
> >> > expectations
> >> > > > are
> >> > > > > >> > > properly
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > managed
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > (otherwise, they expect the world and
> will
> >> > just
> >> > > > > give
> >> > > > > >> up
> >> > > > > >> > > when
> >> > > > > >> > > > > we
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > fall
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > short). Vladimir did a list of what is
> in
> >> > each
> >> > > of
> >> > > > > the
> >> > > > > >> > > phases
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> above
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > which
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > would serve as a good start.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > + Is this feature 'experimental' (Matteo
> >> asks
> >> > > > > above).
> >> > > > > >> > I'd
> >> > > > > >> > > > > prefer
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> it
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > is
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > not. If it is, it should be labelled all
> >> over
> >> > > > that
> >> > > > > >> it is
> >> > > > > >> > > > so. I
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> see
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > current
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > state called out as a '... technical
> >> preview
> >> > > > > >> feature'.
> >> > > > > >> > > Does
> >> > > > > >> > > > > this
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > mean
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > not-for-users?
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > St.Ack
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 8:03 AM, Ted Yu
> <
> >> > > > > >> > > > yuzhih...@gmail.com>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Sean:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Do you have more comments ?
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Cheers
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 1:42 PM,
> Vladimir
> >> > > > Rodionov
> >> > > > > <
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > vladrodio...@gmail.com
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Sean,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Backup/Restore can fail due to
> various
> >> > > > reasons:
> >> > > > > >> > network
> >> > > > > >> > > > > outage
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > (cluster
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > wide), various time-outs in HBase and
> >> HDFS
> >> > > > > layer,
> >> > > > > >> M/R
> >> > > > > >> > > > > failure
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > due
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> "HDFS
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > exceeded quota", user error (manual
> >> > deletion
> >> > > > of
> >> > > > > >> data)
> >> > > > > >> > > and
> >> > > > > >> > > > > so
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> on
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > so
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > on.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> That
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > is impossible to enumerate all
> possible
> >> > > types
> >> > > > of
> >> > > > > >> > > failures
> >> > > > > >> > > > > in a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> distributed
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > system - that is not our goal/task.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > We focus completely on backup system
> >> table
> >> > > > > >> > consistency
> >> > > > > >> > > > in a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > presence
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> any
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > type of failure. That is what I call
> >> > > > "tolerance
> >> > > > > to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > failures".
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > On a failure:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > BACKUP. All backup system information
> >> > (prior
> >> > > > to
> >> > > > > >> > backup)
> >> > > > > >> > > > > will
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> be
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > restored
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > and all temporary data, related to a
> >> > failed
> >> > > > > >> session,
> >> > > > > >> > in
> >> > > > > >> > > > > HDFS
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > will
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > be
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > deleted
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > RESTORE. We do not care about system
> >> data,
> >> > > > > because
> >> > > > > >> > > > restore
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> does
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > not
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> change
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > it. Temporary data in HDFS will be
> >> cleaned
> >> > > up
> >> > > > > and
> >> > > > > >> > table
> >> > > > > >> > > > > will
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> be
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > in a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> state
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > back to where it was before operation
> >> > > started.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > This is what user should expect in
> case
> >> > of a
> >> > > > > >> failure.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > -Vlad
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > -Vlad
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 12:56 PM, Sean
> >> > > Busbey <
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> bus...@apache.org
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Failing in a consistent way, with
> >> docs
> >> > > that
> >> > > > > >> explain
> >> > > > > >> > > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > various
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > expected failures would be
> >> sufficient.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 12:16 PM,
> >> > Vladimir
> >> > > > > >> Rodionov
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > <vladrodio...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Do not worry Sean, doc is coming
> >> today
> >> > > as
> >> > > > a
> >> > > > > >> > preview
> >> > > > > >> > > > and
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> our
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > writer
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Frank
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > will be working on a putting  it
> >> into
> >> > > > Apache
> >> > > > > >> > repo.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Timeline
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > depends
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> on
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Franks schedule but I hope we
> will
> >> get
> >> > > it
> >> > > > > >> rather
> >> > > > > >> > > > sooner
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> than
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > later.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > As for failure testing, we are
> >> > focusing
> >> > > > only
> >> > > > > >> on a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> consistent
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > state
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > backup system data in a presence
> of
> >> > any
> >> > > > type
> >> > > > > >> of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > failures,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> We
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > are
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > not
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > going
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > to implement  anything more
> >> "fancy",
> >> > > than
> >> > > > > >> that.
> >> > > > > >> > We
> >> > > > > >> > > > > allow
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > both:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> backup
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > and
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > restore to fail. What we do not
> >> allow
> >> > is
> >> > > > to
> >> > > > > >> have
> >> > > > > >> > > > system
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> data
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> corrupted.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Will it suffice for you? Do you
> >> have
> >> > any
> >> > > > > other
> >> > > > > >> > > > > concerns,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> you
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > want
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> us to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > address?
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > -Vlad
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 10:56 AM,
> >> Sean
> >> > > > > Busbey <
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > bus...@apache.org
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> "docs will come to Apache soon"
> >> does
> >> > > not
> >> > > > > >> address
> >> > > > > >> > > my
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> concern
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > around
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > docs
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > at
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> all, unless said docs have
> already
> >> > made
> >> > > > it
> >> > > > > >> into
> >> > > > > >> > > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> project
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > repo. I
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > don't
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> want third party resources for
> >> using
> >> > a
> >> > > > > major
> >> > > > > >> and
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> important
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > feature
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> project, I want us to provide
> end
> >> > users
> >> > > > > with
> >> > > > > >> > what
> >> > > > > >> > > > they
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> need
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > get
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > job
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> done.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> I see some calls for patience on
> >> the
> >> > > > > failure
> >> > > > > >> > > > testing,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > but
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> appeal
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > us
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> having done a bad job of
> requiring
> >> > > proper
> >> > > > > >> tests
> >> > > > > >> > of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> previous
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> features
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > just
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> makes me more concerned about
> not
> >> > > getting
> >> > > > > >> them
> >> > > > > >> > > > here. I
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > don't
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > want
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > set
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> yet another bad example that
> will
> >> > then
> >> > > be
> >> > > > > >> > pointed
> >> > > > > >> > > to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > in
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > future.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> On Sep 8, 2016 10:50, "Ted Yu" <
> >> > > > > >> > > yuzhih...@gmail.com
> >> > > > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > Is there any concern which is
> >> not
> >> > > > > >> addressed ?
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > Do we need another Vote
> thread ?
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > Thanks
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:21
> AM,
> >> > > Andrew
> >> > > > > >> > Purtell <
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> apurt...@apache.org
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > Vlad,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > I apologize for using the
> term
> >> > > > > >> 'half-baked'
> >> > > > > >> > > in a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > way
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > that
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > could
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > seem a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > description of HBASE-7912. I
> >> > meant
> >> > > > that
> >> > > > > >> as a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > general
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> hypothetical.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 9:36
> >> AM,
> >> > > > > Vladimir
> >> > > > > >> > > > Rodionov
> >> > > > > >> > > > > <
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > vladrodio...@gmail.com>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >> I'm not sure that
> "There
> >> is
> >> > > > > already
> >> > > > > >> > lots
> >> > > > > >> > > of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > half-baked
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> code
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > in
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > branch,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > so what's the harm in
> adding
> >> > > more?"
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > I meant - not production -
> >> > ready
> >> > > > yet.
> >> > > > > >> This
> >> > > > > >> > > is
> >> > > > > >> > > > > 2.0
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > development
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > branch
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > and,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > hence many features are in
> >> > works,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > not being tested well etc.
> >> I do
> >> > > not
> >> > > > > >> > consider
> >> > > > > >> > > > > backup
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > as
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > half
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > baked
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > feature -
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > it has passed our internal
> >> QA
> >> > and
> >> > > > has
> >> > > > > >> very
> >> > > > > >> > > > good
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> doc,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > which
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > we
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > will
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > provide
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > to Apache shortly.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > -Vlad
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at
> 9:13
> >> AM,
> >> > > > > Andrew
> >> > > > > >> > > > Purtell <
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > apurt...@apache.org>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > We shouldn't admit half
> >> baked
> >> > > > > changes
> >> > > > > >> > that
> >> > > > > >> > > > > won't
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> be
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> finished.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> However
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > in
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > this case the crew
> >> working on
> >> > > > this
> >> > > > > >> > feature
> >> > > > > >> > > > are
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> long
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > timers
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> and
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > less
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > likely
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > than just about anyone
> to
> >> > leave
> >> > > > > >> > something
> >> > > > > >> > > > in a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> half
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > baked
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > state. Of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > course
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > there is no guarantee
> how
> >> > > > anything
> >> > > > > >> will
> >> > > > > >> > > turn
> >> > > > > >> > > > > out,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > but I
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > am
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > willing
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > take
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > a little on faith if
> they
> >> > feel
> >> > > > > their
> >> > > > > >> > best
> >> > > > > >> > > > path
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > forward
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > now
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> is
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > merge
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > trunk. I only wish I had
> >> > > > bandwidth
> >> > > > > to
> >> > > > > >> > have
> >> > > > > >> > > > > done
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > some
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > real
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > kicking
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > tires by now. Maybe this
> >> > week.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > (Yes, I'm using some of
> >> that
> >> > > time
> >> > > > > for
> >> > > > > >> > this
> >> > > > > >> > > > > email
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > :-)
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > but
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > I
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > type
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > fast.)
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > That said, I would like
> to
> >> > > > agitate
> >> > > > > >> for
> >> > > > > >> > > > making
> >> > > > > >> > > > > 2.0
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > more
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > real
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > and
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> spend
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > some
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > time on it now that I'm
> >> > winding
> >> > > > > down
> >> > > > > >> > with
> >> > > > > >> > > > > 0.98. I
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > think
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> that
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > means
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > branching for 2.0 real
> >> soon
> >> > now
> >> > > > and
> >> > > > > >> even
> >> > > > > >> > > > > evicting
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > things
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> from
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > 2.0
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > branch
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > that aren't finished or
> >> > stable,
> >> > > > > >> leaving
> >> > > > > >> > > them
> >> > > > > >> > > > > only
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > once
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> again
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > in
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > master
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > branch. Or, maybe just
> >> > evicting
> >> > > > > them.
> >> > > > > >> > > Let's
> >> > > > > >> > > > > take
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> it
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > case
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > by
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > case.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > I think this feature can
> >> come
> >> > > in
> >> > > > > >> > > relatively
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> safely.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > As
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> added
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > insurance,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > let's admit the
> >> possibility
> >> > it
> >> > > > > could
> >> > > > > >> be
> >> > > > > >> > > > > reverted
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> on
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > 2.0
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > branch
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> if
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > folks
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > working on stabilizing
> 2.0
> >> > > decide
> >> > > > > to
> >> > > > > >> > evict
> >> > > > > >> > > > it
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > because
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > it
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > is
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > unfinished
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > or
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > unstable, because that
> >> > > certainly
> >> > > > > can
> >> > > > > >> > > > happen. I
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > would
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> expect if
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > talk
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > like
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > that starts, we'd get
> help
> >> > > > > finishing
> >> > > > > >> or
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> stabilizing
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > what's
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > under
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > discussion
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > for revert. Or, we'd
> have
> >> a
> >> > > > revert.
> >> > > > > >> > Either
> >> > > > > >> > > > way
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > outcome
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> is
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > acceptable.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at
> >> 8:56
> >> > AM,
> >> > > > > Dima
> >> > > > > >> > > Spivak
> >> > > > > >> > > > <
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > dimaspi...@apache.org
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > I'm not sure that
> >> "There is
> >> > > > > already
> >> > > > > >> > lots
> >> > > > > >> > > > of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > half-baked
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> code
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > in
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > branch,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > so what's the harm in
> >> > adding
> >> > > > > more?"
> >> > > > > >> > is a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > good
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > code
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > commit
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > philosophy
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > for
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > fault-tolerant
> >> distributed
> >> > > data
> >> > > > > >> store.
> >> > > > > >> > > ;)
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > More seriously, a lack
> >> of
> >> > > test
> >> > > > > >> > coverage
> >> > > > > >> > > > for
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > existing
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > features
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > shouldn't
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > be
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > used as justification
> >> for
> >> > > > > >> introducing
> >> > > > > >> > > new
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > features
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > with
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > same
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > shortcomings.
> >> Ultimately,
> >> > > it's
> >> > > > > the
> >> > > > > >> end
> >> > > > > >> > > > user
> >> > > > > >> > > > > who
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > will
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > feel
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> pain,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > so
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > shouldn't we do
> >> everything
> >> > we
> >> > > > can
> >> > > > > >> to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > mitigate
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > that?
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > -Dima
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at
> >> 8:46
> >> > > AM,
> >> > > > > >> > Vladimir
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > Rodionov <
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > vladrodio...@gmail.com>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > Sean,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > * have docs
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > Agree. We have a doc
> >> and
> >> > > > backup
> >> > > > > >> is
> >> > > > > >> > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > most
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > documented
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > feature
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > :),
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > we
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > will
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > release it shortly
> to
> >> > > Apache.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > * have sunny-day
> >> > > correctness
> >> > > > > >> tests
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > Feature has  close
> to
> >> 60
> >> > > test
> >> > > > > >> cases,
> >> > > > > >> > > > which
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> run
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > for
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> approx
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > 30
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> min.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > We
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > can
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > add more, if
> >> community do
> >> > > not
> >> > > > > >> mind
> >> > > > > >> > :)
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > * have
> >> > > > > >> > correctness-in-face-of-failure
> >> > > > > >> > > > > tests
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > Any examples of
> these
> >> > tests
> >> > > > in
> >> > > > > >> > > existing
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > features?
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > In
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > works,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > we
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > have a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > clear
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > understanding of
> what
> >> > > should
> >> > > > be
> >> > > > > >> done
> >> > > > > >> > > by
> >> > > > > >> > > > > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > time
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > 2.0
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> release.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > That is very close
> >> goal
> >> > for
> >> > > > us,
> >> > > > > >> to
> >> > > > > >> > > > verify
> >> > > > > >> > > > > IT
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > monkey
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > for
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> existing
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > code.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > * don't rely on
> things
> >> > > > outside
> >> > > > > of
> >> > > > > >> > > HBase
> >> > > > > >> > > > > for
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > normal
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > operation
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > (okay
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > for
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > advanced operation)
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > We do not.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > Enormous time has
> been
> >> > > spent
> >> > > > > >> already
> >> > > > > >> > > on
> >> > > > > >> > > > > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > development
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > and
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > testing
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > feature, it has
> passed
> >> > our
> >> > > > > >> internal
> >> > > > > >> > > > tests
> >> > > > > >> > > > > and
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > many
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> rounds
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> code
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > reviews
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > by HBase committers.
> >> We
> >> > do
> >> > > > not
> >> > > > > >> mind
> >> > > > > >> > if
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> someone
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > from
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> HBase
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > community
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > (outside of HW) will
> >> > review
> >> > > > the
> >> > > > > >> > code,
> >> > > > > >> > > > but
> >> > > > > >> > > > > it
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > will
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> probably
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> takes
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > forever
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > wait for volunteer?,
> >> the
> >> > > > > feature
> >> > > > > >> is
> >> > > > > >> > > > quite
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> large
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > (1MB+
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> cumulative
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > patch)
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > 2.0 branch is full
> of
> >> > half
> >> > > > > baked
> >> > > > > >> > > > features,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> most
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > them
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > are
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > in
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > active
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > development,
> >> therefore I
> >> > am
> >> > > > not
> >> > > > > >> > > > following
> >> > > > > >> > > > > you
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > here,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Sean?
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Why
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > HBASE-7912
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > is
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > not good enough yet
> >> to be
> >> > > > > >> integrated
> >> > > > > >> > > > into
> >> > > > > >> > > > > 2.0
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > branch?
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > -Vlad
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2016
> at
> >> > 8:23
> >> > > > AM,
> >> > > > > >> Sean
> >> > > > > >> > > > > Busbey <
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > bus...@apache.org
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 6,
> 2016
> >> at
> >> > > > 10:36
> >> > > > > >> PM,
> >> > > > > >> > > Josh
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Elser <
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > josh.el...@gmail.com>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > So, the answer
> to
> >> > > Sean's
> >> > > > > >> > original
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> question
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > is
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > "as
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > robust as
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > snapshots
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > presently are"?
> >> > > > > >> (independence of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > backup/restore
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > failure
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > tolerance
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > from
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > snapshot failure
> >> > > > tolerance)
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > Is this just a
> >> > question
> >> > > > WRT
> >> > > > > >> > > context
> >> > > > > >> > > > of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > change,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> or
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > is it
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > means
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > for a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > veto
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > from you, Sean?
> >> Just
> >> > > > trying
> >> > > > > >> to
> >> > > > > >> > > make
> >> > > > > >> > > > > sure
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > I'm
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> following
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> along
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > adequately.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > I'd say ATM I'm
> -0,
> >> > > > bordering
> >> > > > > >> on
> >> > > > > >> > -1
> >> > > > > >> > > > but
> >> > > > > >> > > > > not
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > for
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> reasons
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > I
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > can
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > articulate
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > well.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > Here's an attempt.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > We've been trying
> to
> >> > > move,
> >> > > > > as a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > community,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > towards
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > minimizing
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > risk
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > downstream folks
> by
> >> > > getting
> >> > > > > >> > > "complete
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> enough
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > for
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > use"
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > gates
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> in
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > place
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > before we
> introduce
> >> new
> >> > > > > >> features.
> >> > > > > >> > > This
> >> > > > > >> > > > > was
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > spurred
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> by a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > some
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > features
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > getting in
> >> half-baked
> >> > and
> >> > > > > never
> >> > > > > >> > > making
> >> > > > > >> > > > > it
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > "can
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> really
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > use"
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > status
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > (I'm thinking of
> >> > > > distributed
> >> > > > > >> log
> >> > > > > >> > > > replay
> >> > > > > >> > > > > and
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> zk-less
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > assignment
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > stuff, I don't
> >> recall
> >> > if
> >> > > > > there
> >> > > > > >> was
> >> > > > > >> > > > > more).
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > The gates,
> >> generally,
> >> > > > > included
> >> > > > > >> > > things
> >> > > > > >> > > > > like:
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > * have docs
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > * have sunny-day
> >> > > > correctness
> >> > > > > >> tests
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > * have
> >> > > > > >> > > correctness-in-face-of-failure
> >> > > > > >> > > > > tests
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > * don't rely on
> >> things
> >> > > > > outside
> >> > > > > >> of
> >> > > > > >> > > > HBase
> >> > > > > >> > > > > for
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > normal
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > operation
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > (okay
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > for
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > advanced
> operation)
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > As an example, we
> >> kept
> >> > > the
> >> > > > > MOB
> >> > > > > >> > work
> >> > > > > >> > > > off
> >> > > > > >> > > > > in
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > branch
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> and
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > out
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > master
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > until it could
> pass
> >> > these
> >> > > > > >> > criteria.
> >> > > > > >> > > > The
> >> > > > > >> > > > > big
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > exemption
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > we've
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> had
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > this was the
> >> > hbase-spark
> >> > > > > >> > > integration,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > where
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > we
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > all
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > agreed
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > it
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > could
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > land in master
> >> because
> >> > it
> >> > > > was
> >> > > > > >> very
> >> > > > > >> > > > well
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > isolated
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > (the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > slide
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > away
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > from
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > including docs as
> a
> >> > > > > first-class
> >> > > > > >> > part
> >> > > > > >> > > > of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > building
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > up
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> that
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > integration
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > has led me to
> doubt
> >> the
> >> > > > > wisdom
> >> > > > > >> of
> >> > > > > >> > > this
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > decision).
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > We've also been
> >> > treating
> >> > > > > >> inclusion
> >> > > > > >> > > in
> >> > > > > >> > > > a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > "probably
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> will
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > be
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > released
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > downstream"
> branches
> >> > as a
> >> > > > > >> higher
> >> > > > > >> > > bar,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > requiring
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > * don't moderately
> >> > impact
> >> > > > > >> > > performance
> >> > > > > >> > > > > when
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> feature
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > isn't
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> in
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > use
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > * don't severely
> >> impact
> >> > > > > >> > performance
> >> > > > > >> > > > when
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > feature
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> is
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > in
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> use
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > * either
> >> default-to-on
> >> > or
> >> > > > > show
> >> > > > > >> > > enough
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> demand
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > to
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> believe
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > non-trivial
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > number of folks
> will
> >> > turn
> >> > > > the
> >> > > > > >> > > feature
> >> > > > > >> > > > on
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > The above has kept
> >> MOB
> >> > > and
> >> > > > > >> > > hbase-spark
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > integration
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> out
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > branch-1,
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > presumably while
> >> > they've
> >> > > > > >> "gotten
> >> > > > > >> > > more
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> stable"
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > in
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> master
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > from
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > odd
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > vendor inclusion.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > Are we going to
> >> have a
> >> > > 2.0
> >> > > > > >> release
> >> > > > > >> > > > > before
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > end
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> year?
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > We're
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > coming up on 1.5
> >> years
> >> > > > since
> >> > > > > >> the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > release of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > version
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> 1.0;
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> seems
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > like
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > it's about time,
> >> > though I
> >> > > > > >> haven't
> >> > > > > >> > > seen
> >> > > > > >> > > > > any
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > concrete
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > plans
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> this
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > year.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > Presuming we are
> >> going
> >> > to
> >> > > > > have
> >> > > > > >> one
> >> > > > > >> > > by
> >> > > > > >> > > > > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> end
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > of
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > year, it
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > seems a
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > bit close to still
> >> be
> >> > > > adding
> >> > > > > in
> >> > > > > >> > > > > "features
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > that
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > need
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > maturing"
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > on
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > the
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > branch.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > The lack of a
> >> concrete
> >> > > plan
> >> > > > > for
> >> > > > > >> > 2.0
> >> > > > > >> > > > > keeps
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> me
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > from
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > considering
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > these
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > things blocker at
> >> the
> >> > > > moment.
> >> > > > > >> But
> >> > > > > >> > I
> >> > > > > >> > > > know
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > first
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > hand
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> how
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > much
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > trouble
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > folks have had
> with
> >> > other
> >> > > > > >> features
> >> > > > > >> > > > that
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> have
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > gone
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> into
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > downstream
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > facing releases
> >> without
> >> > > > > >> robustness
> >> > > > > >> > > > > checks
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > (i.e.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > replication),
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > and
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > I'm
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > concerned about
> what
> >> > > we're
> >> > > > > >> setting
> >> > > > > >> > > up
> >> > > > > >> > > > if
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> 2.0
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > goes
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > out
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > with
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> this
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > feature in its
> >> current
> >> > > > state.
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > --
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > 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)
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > > > --
> >> > > > > >> > > > > busbey
> >> > > > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > > >> > >
> >> > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > >>
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> -- Appy
> >>
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to