Pulling B&R off 2.0 release 5-6 weeks in advance (beta1 timeframe)? I would say that we have enough time to run scalability tests and finish doc before beta1 release.
Can we return to this discussion in a 4-5 weeks and then, based on the B&R state, make a decision? -Vlad On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote: > Hurm. Operator facing documentation is a blocker, IMHO, on a feature > being ready to ship. Incomplete documentation is part of why we're > pulling the Spark integration from 2.0. Good documentation takes a > large amount of work. The fact that there's no docs in the guide > already makes me think this needs more bake time. (I'm presuming I > haven't just ended up in the wrong part of the ref guide, please let > me know if I have.) > > Ideally, we'd also have an appendix explaining how things work > internally for folks digging in as contributors on the project. But > that'd be a nice to have. > > > > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 7:39 PM, Vladimir Rodionov > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Sean > > > > No, this is not our backup description, it is pre-backup era guideline > how > > to do backup in HBase, using snapshots, copy table etc. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Vlad, > >> > >> As someone who hasn't spent much time with the backup/restore feature > >> yet, could you help me out on getting a foothold? > >> > >> Which of these Backup/Restore options is it we're specifically talking > >> about: > >> > >> http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#ops.backup > >> > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Vladimir Rodionov > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >>> hbase-backup: Not done and it doesn't look like it will be done for > >> > beta-1. > >> >>>It can come in later in a 2.1 or 3.0 when it is finished. > >> > > >> > That is not correct. All blockers have been resolved, the last one > has a > >> > patch which is ready to be commited. > >> > > >> > Salesforce team has conducted independent testing and found no issues > >> with > >> > a functionality to my best knowledge. > >> > > >> > Explain please, Stack. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> >> I want to purge the below list of modules, features, and abandoned > code > >> >> from branch-2 before we make a beta-1 (4-5 weeks I'm thinking). Lets > >> >> discuss. Some are already scheduled for removal but listing anyways > for > >> >> completeness sake. Pushback or other suggestions on what else we > should > >> >> remove are welcome. > >> >> > >> >> Distributed Log Replay: Just last week, I heard of someone scheduling > >> >> testing of DLR. We need to better message that this never worked and > >> was/is > >> >> not supported. It's a good idea that we should implement but built > on a > >> >> different chasis (procedurev2?). Meantime, DLR is still scattered > about > >> the > >> >> codebase as an optional code path. Lets remove it. > >> >> > >> >> hbase-native-client: It is not done and won't be for 2.0.0. It can > come > >> in > >> >> later when it is done (2.1 or 3.0). > >> >> > >> >> hbase-prefix-tree: A visionary effort that unfortunately has had no > >> uptake > >> >> since its original wizard-author moved on. I don't believe it is used > >> >> anywhere. It has become a drag as global changes need to be applied > in > >> here > >> >> too by folks who are not up on how it works probably doing damage > along > >> the > >> >> way. This is like DLR in it should be first class but we've not done > the > >> >> work to keep it up. > >> >> > >> >> hbase-backup: Not done and it doesn't look like it will be done for > >> beta-1. > >> >> It can come in later in a 2.1 or 3.0 when it is finished. > >> >> > >> >> hbase-spark: Purging this makes me tear-up. > >> >> > >> >> What else? > >> >> > >> >> Thanks, > >> >> St.Ack > >> >> > >> >
