Thanks, Rajeshbabu. I think all of those JIRAs can be pushed to the
next release. The only one that's a must fix is PHOENIX-1930. Thomas
is looking at it now and should be able to give you a time estimate
tomorrow for it.
Thanks,
James

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 7:37 PM, [email protected]
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Devs,
>
> Thanks folks for picking up the JIRAs and fixing most of them in the list
> quickly.
>
> PHOENIX-628 & PHOENIX-1710 are in progress. James any idea how much time
> they will take to commit?
> I can wait for one more day to complete the work.
>
> Still no work started at below JIRAs and since they are improvements I
> think we can move them to next version.
> - PHOENIX-1673
> - PHOENIX-1727
> - PHOENIX-1819
>
> Thanks,
> Rajeshbabu.
>
> On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 12:57 AM, [email protected] <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Devs,
>>
>> I have created branches  4.4-HBase-1.0 and 4.4-HBase-1.1  from master to
>> work with 1.0.x and 1.1.x respectively.
>> If any changes further should be committed to the branches as well. Please
>> don't miss.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Rajeshbabu.
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 4:35 AM, Sergey Belousov <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I am interested in it (kind of show stopper for us) but I am totally
>>> swamp.
>>> at work at home... just one of thouse periods.
>>>
>>> hopefully will have some brake next month or earlier.
>>>
>>> sorry
>>> On Apr 22, 2015 4:38 PM, "[email protected]" <
>>> [email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Thanks all for pointing and working on the JIRA.
>>> > Some of them already committed. Thanks Eli, Samarth Jain,Cody Marcel for
>>> > quick turn around.
>>> >
>>> > @Samarth
>>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-1819
>>> > When we can expect the patch for this?
>>> >
>>> > If we are not able to complete the list by tomorrow then I can take RC
>>> > around next Tuesday.
>>> > By the mean time I will create branches for 1.0.x and 1.1(If it's ok) as
>>> > well and see the health of it(do some testing).
>>> > What do you say?
>>> >
>>> > I think no progress for PHOENIX-1673. Any one want to take it?
>>> > @Sergey Belousov are you interested in it?
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> > Rajeshbabu.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 9:38 PM, Sergey Belousov <
>>> > [email protected]>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > would be  nice if
>>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-1673
>>> > > makes to 4.4
>>> > >  On Apr 22, 2015 11:42 AM, "Cody Marcel" <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > I have sort of combined PHOENIX-1728
>>> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-1728> and
>>> PHOENIX-1729
>>> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-1729>. I hopefully
>>> will
>>> > > > have
>>> > > > a pull request today for those. PHOENIX-1727
>>> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-1727> will likely
>>> be a
>>> > > bit
>>> > > > before I can work on. Work internally, particularly support for
>>> mixed
>>> > r/w
>>> > > > workloads (not sure if there is a Jira yet) seems to be higher
>>> > priority.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 4:32 PM, James Taylor <
>>> [email protected]>
>>> > > > wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > Another couple that need to go into 4.4.0 release IMO are
>>> > PHOENIX-1728
>>> > > > > (Pherf - Make tests use mini cluster so that unit test run at
>>> build
>>> > > > > time) and PHOENIX-1727 (Pherf - Port shell scripts to python).
>>> > > > > Thanks,
>>> > > > > James
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:19 AM, James Taylor <
>>> > [email protected]
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > wrote:
>>> > > > > > You're welcome (and Samarth did the work). Thanks,
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > >     James
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 1:19 AM, [email protected]
>>> > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > > > > >> That's really great work James. Thanks for pointing.
>>> > > > > >>
>>> > > > > >> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:47 AM, James Taylor <
>>> > > > [email protected]>
>>> > > > > >> wrote:
>>> > > > > >>
>>> > > > > >>> Good list, Rajeshbabu. Thanks for starting the RC process. One
>>> > more
>>> > > > of
>>> > > > > >>> note that's already in:
>>> > > > > >>>
>>> > > > > >>> - 7.5x performance improvement for non aggregate, unordered
>>> > queries
>>> > > > > >>> (PHOENIX-1779).
>>> > > > > >>>
>>> > > > > >>> Thanks,
>>> > > > > >>> James
>>> > > > > >>>
>>> > > > > >>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 2:02 PM, [email protected]
>>> > > > > >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > > > > >>> > That's good to have Eli. I have marked 4.4.0 as fix version
>>> for
>>> > > the
>>> > > > > JIRA.
>>> > > > > >>> >
>>> > > > > >>> > Thanks,
>>> > > > > >>> > Rajeshbabu.
>>> > > > > >>> >
>>> > > > > >>> > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 2:27 AM, Eli Levine <
>>> > [email protected]
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > wrote:
>>> > > > > >>> >
>>> > > > > >>> >> Rajesh, I'm harboring hopes of getting PHOENIX-900
>>> completed
>>> > by
>>> > > > > >>> Thursday.
>>> > > > > >>> >> Hopefully it'll end up in 4.4. I'll keep you posted.
>>> > > > > >>> >>
>>> > > > > >>> >> Thanks
>>> > > > > >>> >>
>>> > > > > >>> >> Eli
>>> > > > > >>> >>
>>> > > > > >>> >> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 1:42 PM, [email protected] <
>>> > > > > >>> >> [email protected]> wrote:
>>> > > > > >>> >>
>>> > > > > >>> >> > I'd like to propose we can have 4.4.0 RC on Thursday.
>>> > > > > >>> >> > We have got a lot of great stuff in 4.4.0 already:
>>> > > > > >>> >> > - 60 bug fixed(which includes fixes from 4.3.1)
>>> > > > > >>> >> > - Spart integration
>>> > > > > >>> >> > - Query server
>>> > > > > >>> >> > - Union All support
>>> > > > > >>> >> > - Pherf - load tester measures throughput
>>> > > > > >>> >> > - Many math and date/time buit-in functions
>>> > > > > >>> >> > - MR job to populate indexes
>>> > > > > >>> >> > - Support for 1.0.x (create new 4.4.0 branch for this)
>>> > > > > >>> >> >
>>> > > > > >>> >> > - PHOENIX-538 Support UDFs JIRA is very close.
>>> > > > > >>> >> >
>>> > > > > >>> >> > Is there any others that we should try to get in?
>>> > > > > >>> >> >
>>> > > > > >>> >> > Thanks,
>>> > > > > >>> >> > Rajeshbabu.
>>> > > > > >>> >> >
>>> > > > > >>> >>
>>> > > > > >>>
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>

Reply via email to