On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 11:10 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thanks for putting that document together Stack, that was really helpful. > > > 1.1 New Assignment Manager, AMv2 > > Can we get a virtual show of hands who is working on this and plans to > finish it? It was Stephen and Matteo originally, right? Matteo seems > temporarily sidelined, is that correct? > > Stephen and I have this as our priority. It is about 90% code complete with some big patches just about to land. Will need a mountain of testing thereafter. Yeah, our mighty Matteo, the mastermind, is no longer actively working on the project (I think!). > > 1.3 Offheaping of Write Path > > > 1.4 HBASE-11425 Offheaping of Read Path > > > 1.6 HBASE-15265 AsyncWAL/HBase DFSClient > > Maybe we can organize some efforts to test small deploys of 2.0.0-SNAPSHOT > with these features enabled since they are code complete but need testing > and more doc, which can be generated from notes from testers on setup and > experience. I can stand up a few clusterdock-based virtual clusters on EC2 > D2-class instances running integration tests, PE, and YCSB etc; surface > issues up into JIRA; and provide SSH access on demand. Let me see ... not > sure if 2.0.0-SNAPSHOT is stable enough to get that far. If so hopefully > the developers behind these features will be willing to jump on them and > lead debugging/fix if issues are found. > > This sounds good. For offheaping, we're talking about it being the default for 2.0.0 so could do with a bit of testing first before we actually commit (smile). 2.0.0-SNAPSHOT seems pretty stable to me in my limited testing so far. I could publish a SNAPSHOT on a weekly basis going forward if that'd help. > > 2.3 HBASE-6721 RegionServer Group-based Assignment > > Same as above, although in this case I suspect interested users are on our > own to debug/fix. > > Agree. This would be true of all features in the Ancillary (non-core) section I'd say (though as it happens, I'm interesting in the above in particular). I added a new section to the doc on "Decisions" we need to make for 2.0.0. Primary is a conclusion to the long-running Re: [DISCUSS] No regions on Master node in 2.0 <http://apache-hbase.679495.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-No-regions-on-Master-node-in-2-0-td4079067i20.html#a4084211> thread. St.Ack > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 11:49 PM, Andrew Purtell <andrew.purt...@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > > While I don't disagree that half finished features are undesirable, I'm > > not suggesting that as a strategy so much as we kick out stuff that just > > doesn't seem to be getting done. Pushing 2.0 out another three months is > > fine if there's a good chance this is realistic and we won't be having > this > > discussion again then. Let me have a look at the doc and return with > > specific points for further discussion (if any). > > > > > > On Jan 13, 2017, at 11:25 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 12:16 PM, Stephen Jiang <syuanjiang...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > >> Hello, Andrew, I was a helper on Matteo so that we can help each other > >> while we are focusing on the new Assignment Manager work. Now he is not > >> available (at least in the next few months). I have to be more focused > on > >> the new AM work; plus other work in my company; it would be too much for > >> me > >> to 2.0 RM alone. I am happy someone would help to take primary 2.0 RM > >> role > >> while I am still help to make this 2.0 release smooth. > >> > >> > > (I could help out Stephen. We could co-RM?) > > > > > >> For branch-2, I think it is too early to cut it, as we still have a lot > of > >> moving parts and on-going project that needs to be part of 2.0. For > >> example, the mentioned new AM (and other projects, such as HBASE-14414, > >> HBASE-15179, HBASE-14070, HBASE-14850, HBASE-16833, HBASE-15531, just > name > >> a few). Cutting branch now would add burden to complete those projects. > >> > >> > > Agree with Stephen. A bunch of stuff is half-baked so a '2.0.0' now would > > be all loose ends and it'd make for a messy narrative. > > > > I started a doc listing state of 2.0.0: https://docs.google. > > com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9iEu_ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit?usp= > > sharing > > > > In the doc I made an estimate of what the community considers core 2.0.0 > > items based in part off old lists and after survey of current state of > > JIRA. The doc is open for comment. Please chime in if I am off or if I am > > missing something that should be included. I also make a rough estimate > on > > state of each core item. > > > > I intend to keep up this macro-view doc as we progress on 2.0.0 with > > reflection where pertinent in JIRA . Suggest we branch only when code > > compete on the core set most of which are complete or near-so. > > End-of-February should be time enough (First 2.0.0 RC in at the start of > > May?). > > > > Thanks, > > St.Ack > > > > > > > >> thanks > >> Stephen > >> > >> On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Andrew Purtell < > >> andrew.purt...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > Hi all, > >> > > >> > I've heard a rumor the co-RM situation with 2.0 may have changed. Can > we > >> > get an update from co-RMs Matteo and Steven on their availability and > >> > interest in continuing in this role? > >> > > >> > To assist in moving 2.0 forward I intend to branch branch-2 from > master > >> > next week. Unless there is an objection I will take this action under > >> > assumption of lazy consensus. Master branch will be renumbered to > >> > 3.0.0-SNAPSHOT. Once we have a branch-2 I will immediately begin scale > >> > tests and stabilization (via bug fixes or reverts of unfinished work) > >> and > >> > invite interested collaborators to do the same. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > > - Andy > > If you are given a choice, you believe you have acted freely. - Raymond > Teller (via Peter Watts) >