bq. As I volunteered to be the release manager for the 2.1 release line I guess we could expect another great release line (smile)
bq. For the 2.1 release line... I could see more "Punted out of 2.0" features in our 2.0 doc <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WCsVlnHjJeKUcl7wHwqb4z9iEu_ktczrlKHK8N4SZzs/edit#heading=h.v21r9nz8g01j>, such as C++ client, HLC, etc. I guess we also need to decide whether to include them into 2.1 or 3.0? And how about rolling upgrade from 1.x to 2.x? This is extremely important for operators running product environment I guess bq. And for the 3.0.0 release, I think the new features should be decided ASAP. We'll check and see how to upstream our staged-event-driven optimization on write pipeline (now WAL *really* persists before MemStore insertion so we need to re-evaluate the effect of our work). Let me try to create a JIRA asap. (Is there any deadline for this please?) Best Regards, Yu On 7 May 2018 at 15:07, 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> wrote: > Let's do big features in 3.0.0 only. > > Ideally there will no big new features for a minor release, so that we can > move the stable pointer to newer minor versions quickly and retire the old > branches. It will be a nightmare if we have lots of active minor release > lines... > > 2018-05-07 14:53 GMT+08:00 Guanghao Zhang <zghao...@gmail.com>: > > > Why 2.1 doesn't contatin synchronous replication? This can be a > experiment > > feature in 2.1? > > > > 2018-05-07 14:41 GMT+08:00 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com>: > > > > > 2018-05-07 14:38 GMT+08:00 Chia-Ping Tsai <chia7...@apache.org>: > > > > > > > > As I volunteered to be the release manager for the 2.1 release line > > so > > > > let > > > > > me bring this up. > > > > +1 to Duo be RM of 2.1 release. > > > > > > > > > disabled from 2.0.0 release, for example, serial replication, and > in > > > > memory compaction > > > > IIRC, in memory compaction is enabled in 2.0 and the default policy > is > > > > BASIC. (please correct me if I misunderstand something.) > > > > > > > We disabled it by default in the end due to some performance issues... > > > > > > > > > > > > For the 2.1 release line, I would like to define it as the 'real' > 2.x > > > > Seems the release date between 2.0 and 2.1 will be very close. Is it > > > > related to our new release plan? (IIRC, Andrew had suggested some > great > > > > release plan based time. But I fail to find the thread...) > > > > > > > > > And for the 3.0.0 release, I think the new features should be > decided > > > > ASAP. > > > > > We need to avoid the same thing happens again, i.e, spending 2 > years > > to > > > > > release a major version... > > > > agreed! > > > > > > > > On 2018/05/07 00:52:07, 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > As I volunteered to be the release manager for the 2.1 release line > > so > > > > let > > > > > me bring this up. > > > > > > > > > > For the 2.1 release line, I would like to define it as the 'real' > 2.x > > > > > version of HBase. It should include the features which are reverted > > or > > > > > disabled from 2.0.0 release, for example, serial replication, and > in > > > > memory > > > > > compaction. And also, the performance issues. And no more new > > features. > > > > If > > > > > no objections, I will start the release work soon. > > > > > > > > > > And for the 3.0.0 release, I think the new features should be > decided > > > > ASAP. > > > > > We need to avoid the same thing happens again, i.e, spending 2 > years > > to > > > > > release a major version... > > > > > > > > > > For now, the new features > > > > > Synchronous replication > > > > > CCSMap > > > > > Backup > > > > > Spark connector(is it still active?) > > > > > > > > > > And I suggest that we include this: > > > > > The read path refactoring(HBASE-20525) > > > > > > > > > > Suggestions are welcomed. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
