Re: [DISCUSSION] Merge Backup / Restore - Branch HBASE-7912

[Stack]

I did a super-clean and recheck out. Now it works. Sorry for the noise.
St.Ack

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Vladimir Rodionov <vladrodio...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> checked out HBASE-7912
>
> ran:
>
> mvn clean install -DskipTests
>
> successfully.
>
> -Vlad
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Vladimir Rodionov <vladrodio...@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > I usually use:
> >
> > mvn clean install -DskipTests
> >
> > and it works.
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Vladimir Rodionov <
> vladrodio...@gmail.com
> > > wrote:
> >
> >> 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.j
> >>> ava:[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.j
> >>> ava:[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.j
> >>> ava:[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.j
> >>> ava:[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.j
> >>> ava:[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.j
> >>> ava:[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:c
> >>> omment-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
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>