Andrew, your testing has turned up an issue in HBASE-18233. It is present in the 1.4 candidate patch and in 1.3. The failure is intermittent. I am working on a fix but want to make sure I have it right. So, I withdraw my request that 1.4 include it.
Thanks, S On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> wrote: > TestGlobalThrottler is a problem stemming from the revert of HBASE-9465 > on branch-1.4. The test came in on HBASE-17314 so I'll also revert that > from branch-1.4. For more on this see HBASE-19381 > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > The TestEndToEndSplitTransaction failure will be fixed by HBASE-19379. > > > > The TestGlobalThrottler issue is a hang, which is probably why it slipped > > through the cracks. I went back 32 commits from head and it was still > > stuck. 64 commits back it's good. Somewhere in between. Will get to the > > offending commit shortly. > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > >> Thanks. I'll take a look. They were passing for me before I went out on > >> vacation. > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > >> > >>> Thanks. > >>> > >>> BTW, I noticed this morning that TestGlobalThrottler and > >>> TestEndToEndSplitTransaction > >>> fail locally for me and up on jenkins as part of hadoopqa runs and on > >>> recent 1.4 runs. > >>> > >>> I tried to poke at why. They seem fine in 1.2, 1.3, and 2.0. Got > >>> distracted > >>> and got no further than this.... > >>> > >>> S > >>> > >>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> > Ok, no problem. > >>> > > >>> > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > >>> > > >>> > > May I get HBASE-18233 into 1.4.0 Andrew? It is in 1.2 and 1.3. > >>> Waiting on > >>> > > hadoopqa run. Would be good to have it all up and down branch-1. > >>> > > Thanks Sir, > >>> > > St.Ack > >>> > > > >>> > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Peter Somogyi < > >>> psomo...@cloudera.com> > >>> > > wrote: > >>> > > > >>> > > > HBASE-19188 was just resolved. :) > >>> > > > > >>> > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 8:12 PM, Andrew Purtell < > >>> apurt...@apache.org> > >>> > > > wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > 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 < > bus...@apache.org > >>> > > >>> > > wrote: > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > thanks for all the work as RM on this Andrew! > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Andrew Purtell > >>> > > > > > <andrew.purt...@gmail.com> 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 < > >>> > > > > > andrew.purt...@gmail.com> > >>> > > > > > > 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 < > >>> > > > > > andrew.purt...@gmail.com> > >>> > > > > > >> 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 <car...@gmail.com> > >>> 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 < > >>> > > > apurt...@apache.org > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> 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 > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > -- > >>> > 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 >
