I come back to find HBASE-19188 is a blocker. :-/
Need to resolve it

On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote:

> thanks for all the work as RM on this Andrew!
>
> On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Andrew Purtell
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Everything is in and ready to go. I'm out next week for the Thanksgiving
> > holiday, but will be back first week in December.
> >
> > Here is what I anticipate:
> >
> >    - December 4
> >       - 1.4.0 RC0 binaries will be available.
> >       - Voting begins.
> >       - Preflight checks will include RAT check, release audits, and 25
> >       iterations of the unit test suite.
> >    - December 5 - 8
> >       - 24 hours ITBLL
> >       - PE and YCSB on cluster perf comparison with 1.2
> >       - PE and YCSB single server profiling with JFR, comparison with 1.2
> >    - December 11
> >       - Voting concludes
> >       - Release, or RC1 depending on testing outcome
> >       - December 18
> >       - RC1 voting concludes and release, if we need a RC1
> >
> >
> > From now until the 1.4.0 release, please refrain from committing
> > potentially destabilizing changes or changes to public APIs to
> branch-1.4.
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> [email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On HBASE-19232 we discuss testing the shaded client using YCSB, so I'll
> >> use it to sanity check the shaded client as well as complete a perf
> >> comparison with 1.2.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, Nov 11, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> [email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I'll do a PE comparison between 1.4.0 and 1.3 and/or 1.2. Maybe YSCB
> too
> >>> if I have time. Good idea, thanks.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> > On Nov 11, 2017, at 5:05 AM, Yu Li <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > Great to know, really good progress!
> >>> >
> >>> > It seems we don't do performance comparison with current stable
> release
> >>> > when releasing the first RC of a new branch, but should we do to
> avoid
> >>> > issues like HBASE-14460 (write performance regression from 0.98 to
> 1.1)?
> >>> > This is a must-have for us to decide new version for product env
> here,
> >>> and
> >>> > I wonder whether this applies for most users (please forgive my
> >>> ignorance
> >>> > if there's any existing policy for this). Thanks.
> >>> >
> >>> > bq. Back when we first discussed branching for 1.4 Yu Li asked for
> >>> this...
> >>> > Thanks for remembering this and keeping the promise boss (smile).
> >>> >
> >>> > Best Regards,
> >>> > Yu
> >>> >
> >>> >> On 11 November 2017 at 03:30, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> The march to 1.4.0 is progressing.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I've run the unit test suite on a C4 class AWS instance 25 times and
> >>> there
> >>> >> are no failures. This is ongoing. I'm aiming for 100 runs.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Fix versions are now set up for constructing a reasonable change
> log.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> With HBASE-19232 applied a build with release audits enabled will
> pass.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I backported error-prone support yesterday and will now look at
> >>> checkstyle
> >>> >> and error-prone analyses for important issues.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I'll probably do HBASE-19238 before 1.4.0 goes out so that neat
> utility
> >>> >> will be available.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Back when we first discussed branching for 1.4 Yu Li asked for this:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>> One naive question here: from the book
> >>> >>> <http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hbase.versioning> we will add
> >>> >>> functionality (in a backwards-compatible manner) in minor versions,
> >>> but
> >>> >> it
> >>> >>> seems we don't have any one-line description on the differences
> (what
> >>> >>> main functionalities have been added) between
> branch-1.1/1.2/1.3/1.4
> >>> so
> >>> >>> user could better decide which version to choose/upgrade. Should we
> >>> >>> add some explicit document on this? Or release note of the first
> >>> release
> >>> >>> for each branch is enough? Thanks.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> and I still agree to do it. I'll write it up while the RC is under
> >>> >> evaluation.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> ITBLL and replication testing to be performed on a small cluster
> once
> >>> we
> >>> >> have the RC binaries.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Anything else? (Within reason...)
> >>> >>
> >>> >> --
> >>> >> Best regards,
> >>> >> Andrew
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> truth's
> >>> >> decrepit hands
> >>> >>   - A23, Crosstalk
> >>> >>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Best regards,
> >> Andrew
> >>
> >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> >> decrepit hands
> >>    - A23, Crosstalk
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Andrew
> >
> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> > decrepit hands
> >    - A23, Crosstalk
>



-- 
Best regards,
Andrew

Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
decrepit hands
   - A23, Crosstalk

Reply via email to