Question about scanid in ActiveScan - is it valid?

something? (Thought I should ask before opening a ticket) Ed Coleman

Proposal for splitting ACCUMULO-1242 into subtasks.

I am willing to take another run at the Consistent Logging ticket, ACCUMULO-1242, but I'd like to achieve a consensus on an approach before starting. The tl;dr version - I would like to split ACCUMULO-1242 into subtasks. Target version would be 1.7.0 (or whatever it gets called, would not mind

RE: Accumulo Monitoring Page Improvements/redesign?

out. Ed Coleman Arshak Navruzyan wrote: Along these lines curious where and how monitor stores its stats currently. I imagine some of it comes from !METADATA but guessing not all of it does (for example the time series). If there was a clean way to access the stats there is no shortage

RE: Proposal for splitting ACCUMULO-1242 into subtasks.

to see how it could be leveraged. And with a request for internationalized logging in ACCUMULO-2797, well slf4j (http://www.slf4j.org/localization.html) seems like it would position us to support that too. Ed Coleman (sorry if this gets duplicated, but my first reply seems to be wandering

RE: Proposal for splitting ACCUMULO-1242 into subtasks.

to see how it could be leveraged. And with a request for internationalized logging in ACCUMULO-2797, well slf4j (http://www.slf4j.org/localization.html) seems like it would position us to support that too. Ed Coleman On Tuesday, May 13, 2014 12:18 AM, William Slacum wrote: Sounds good, Ed

Concern regarding cache (ACCUMULO-3549 and ACCUMULO-3547) in Apache Accumulo 1.6.2 RC3

that it be removed - I just want to make sure that I understand the other side effects and know our options. Ed Coleman

RE: [GitHub] accumulo pull request: ACCUMULO-3681 modified log statements that ...

The basic issue was pointed out that the original - using just e.getMessage() could cause problems because the log message is expecting a format string, so if e.getMessage() had {} in the message it would be interrupted for parameter replacement / expansion but there would be no parameter. The {}

Review Request 36186: ACCUMULO-3840 Replace OpTImer to remove direct log4j dependencies

/accumulo/test/NativeMapStressTest.java 72831d8 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/36186/diff/ Testing --- passes mvn verify -DskipITs mvn package -P assemble Thanks, Ed Coleman

Re: Review Request 36186: ACCUMULO-3840 Replace OpTImer to remove direct log4j dependencies

/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/server/client/HdfsZooInstance.java 0d7aaf1 test/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/test/NativeMapStressTest.java 72831d8 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/36186/diff/ Testing --- passes mvn verify -DskipITs mvn package -P assemble Thanks, Ed Coleman

RE: [DISCUSS] EOL 1.5

+1 for EOL of 1.5 with the release of 1.5.3 -Original Message- From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org] Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 1:18 PM To: Accumulo Dev List Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] EOL 1.5 So, at this point, I'm willing to do a 1.5.3 release and can start that today. It

RE: New committers!

looking forward to working with all of you and thank you for extending me committer status. Ed Coleman My current interests -Original Message- From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org] Sent: Saturday, May 16, 2015 9:51 AM To: Accumulo Dev List Subject: Re: New committers! He also

Discussion: Address binding for monitor.

other considerations / requirements and services that should be considered before any change is recommended. Ed Coleman

RE: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.8.0-rc2

+1 Verified git hash. (e5694cfa5ec3861e6f8f764e2b8477716e3072b9) mvn clean verify -Psunny passes all tests. -Original Message- From: Michael Wall [mailto:mjw...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2016 12:22 PM To: dev@accumulo.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.8.0-rc2

[DISCUSS] Time to RELEASE 1.7.3?

that are not in progress and have been moved to from 1.8.1 to 1.8.2 also be moved to 1.7.4. This would leave just a few issues that are in progress or have been already been merged (thanks to Keith Turner) Ed Coleman

Release preparation for 1.7.3

chatted with Mike Wall and he gave me some pointers. More of a warning and apologies up front. This is my first attempt at creating a release, so expect the worst and hope for the best. Ed Coleman

RE: Accumulo 1.8.1-rc0

In case this helps: Confirmed checksum. Passed: mvn clean verify -Psunny Running: mvn clean verify Environment: Maven 3.3.9 jdk -openjdk-1.8.0.212-0.b13.el7_3.x86_64 Centos 7 (3.10.0-514.6.1.el7.x86_64) Ed Coleman -Original Message- From: Michael Wall [mailto:mjw...@gmail.com] Sent

Accumulo 1.7.3 pre-release preparation - Jira ticket clean-up.

is released. Ed Coleman

RE: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.8.0-rc4

in downloaded built artifact. Checksums of scripts and packaged jars match. (Checksums of built artifact differ - assuming this is I'm because building with openjdk-1.8.0_101) [Pending update from Keith Turner - adding sampling info to release notes.] Ed Coleman -Original Message- From

RE: [VOTE] Plan for next release

t release 1.8, instead release a 2.0 version of that code base with the additional change of requiring Java 8. v/r Ed Coleman Josh wrote -Original Message- From: Dylan Hutchison [mailto:dhutc...@cs.washington.edu] Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 8:49 PM To: Accumulo Dev List <dev@accumu

RE: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.3-rc2 - vote closed (passed)

Thanks - The delay was mainly due to my time constraints and I've also been fighting getting sick. There are some comments that need incorporated into the release notes which I'll try to get wrapped up tonight or tomorrow. Ed Coleman -Original Message- From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb

RE: Accumulo 1.7.3 release notes preview

the door :) Keith Turner wrote: > The release notes look good. > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Ed Coleman<d...@etcoleman.com> wrote: >> I have completed a first pass of the release notes - they are >> available at >> https://github.com/EdColeman/accumulo/blob/1

Accumulo 1.7.3 release notes preview

to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4496 Ed Coleman -Original Message- From: Ed Coleman [mailto:d...@etcoleman.com] Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 9:01 PM To: dev@accumulo.apache.org Subject: RE: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.3-rc2 - vote closed (passed) The vote to release 1.7.3.rc2 has

RE: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.3-rc1 - failed

The vote for 1.7.3-rc1 fails. Waiting for https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4600 to be fixed / merged and then will start rc2. The results: +1 - 0 0 - 0 -1 - 4 -Original Message- From: Ed Coleman [mailto:d...@etcoleman.com] Sent: Monday, March 06, 2017 7:11 AM

[VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.3-rc2

Accumulo Developers, Please consider the following candidate for Accumulo 1.7.3. This candidate contains two changes from 1.7.3-rc1: - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4600 - shell does not fall back to accumulo-site.xml when on classpath. -

Intermittent IT failures - was RE: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.3-rc2

ith Turner < <mailto:ke...@deenlo.com> > ke...@deenlo.com> wrote: > > +1 > > > > Did the following : > > > > * Was able to build Fluo against jars in staging repo. > > * Sigs checkout for tarballs > > * No diffs between src ta

RE: Intermittent IT failures - was RE: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.3-rc2

Sorry, the formatting seemed to get lost. It was a pretty chart - had colors and everything. -Original Message- From: Ed Coleman [mailto:d...@etcoleman.com] Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2017 7:06 AM To: dev@accumulo.apache.org Subject: Intermittent IT failures - was RE: [VOTE] Accumulo

RE: Intermittent IT failures - was RE: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.3-rc2

released, but I also would like it to be as correct as possible - so whatever can facilitate meeting these two somewhat conflicting goals, +1 from me, and of course, whatever is the will of the group. Ed Coleman -Original Message- From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org] Sent: Monday,

RE: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.3-rc2 - vote closed (passed)

The vote to release 1.7.3.rc2 has met the voting criteria (+72 hours, at least 3 +1 votes) and has passed. Vote results: +1 - 3 0 - 0 -1 - 0 I will begin working on the release notes and other release artifacts forthwith. Ed Coleman -Original Message- From: Ed Coleman [mailto:d

[VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.3-rc1

Accumulo Developers, Please consider the following candidate for Accumulo 1.7.3. (This branch is based on the same commit as the pre-release rc0 test candidate, commit c3a0d1d5e2f810ebcda346977009ab0fd1bd34f7) Release notes, java docs and other non-code artifacts are still in-progress and not

RE: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.3-rc1

My keys show up at pgp.mit.edu (https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=vindex=0xFC4368E0864BCC36) Is there something else I need to do? I closed the staging repository this morning - and it is showing closed now - has this resolved for you? Ed Coleman -Original Message- From: Michael

RE: [DRAFT][ANNOUNCE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.1 (Critical Bug Fixes)

+1 -Original Message- From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org] Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 3:50 AM To: accumulo-dev Subject: Re: [DRAFT][ANNOUNCE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.1 (Critical Bug Fixes) If there is consensus, I could publish late Monday. I just want to

RE: Let's do a 1.9.1 release

+1 Thanks for the quick turnaround on this. Ed Coleman -Original Message- From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org] Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2018 1:39 PM To: accumulo-dev <dev@accumulo.apache.org> Subject: Let's do a 1.9.1 release Hi Devs, I'd like to do a 1.9.1 release

RE: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.1-rc1

(org.apache.accumulo.test.replication.UnorderedWorkAssignerReplicationIT) - FastBulkImportIT.test:110 The timing issues are mentioned only for completeness are not a concern for me in accepting this release. Ed Coleman -Original Message- From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org] Sent

RE: Additional options for issue tracking

der, different? I'm not opposed to a change if there are clear, demonstrable benefits beyond personal preferences - but I also have an affinity to continuity and consistency. Ed Coleman -Original Message- From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 14,

RE: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.2-rc2

not prevent the release of this candidate. Aditionally, rc1 was installed on bare hardware and validated with bulk ingest and some simple scans - did not have time to repeat with rc2. Ed Coleman -Original Message- From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org] Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2018

RE: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.2-rc1

correctly (issue #551). I will try to do more once rc2 is available. Ed Coleman -Original Message- From: Keith Turner [mailto:ke...@deenlo.com] Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2018 5:24 PM To: Accumulo Dev List Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.2-rc1 -1 because of the following bug I found

RE: [DISCUSS] tracing framework updates

For general discussion - Facebook recently (Oct 28, 2017) published a paper on tracing: Canopy: An End-to-End Performance Tracing and Analysis System (https://research.fb.com/publications/canopy-end-to-end-performance-tracing-at-scale/) As a bonus, they referenced Accumulo and HTrace in section

RE: [VOTE] Switch to GitHub issues

+0 I defer to others. -Original Message- From: Keith Turner [mailto:ke...@deenlo.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2018 12:53 PM To: Accumulo Dev List Subject: [VOTE] Switch to GitHub issues Accumulo PMC, Please vote on initiating the transition from JIRA to

RE: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

+1 I verified the md5, sha1 and asc signatures of the artifacts and the git commit sha1, the build passed mvn clean verify -Psunny, and I accept this as a release of Accumulo 1.9.0, pending the successful outcome of cluster testing. Ed Coleman -Original Message- From: Christopher

RE: Re[2]: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.4-rc1

This is historical information from when I was running tests against 1.7.3, but in case it helps with the current discussion. (File timestamps are last Feb / March of 2107) I was using local / openbox VM and spun up a small AWS instance. I never got

RE: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 2.0.0-alpha-1-rc1

notes did not work for me - assuming that because that they are in progress, they will be published when the release is formalized, after voting completes, and is not a reason to not accept this candidate for release. Ed Coleman -Original Message- From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.

RE: [DISCUSS] 2.0.0-alpha?

and implications of semver are clear, sometimes it seems that there is additional weight and additional perceived risk when changing major versions, an alpha version preserves our flexibility while still moving forward. Ed Coleman -Original Message- From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb

RE: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 2.0.0-alpha-2-rc1

+0 Just getting to this, and only have been able to do some cursory checks. Because this is an alpha release I do not object moving forward. I did want to document some issues that I seem to be having with some of the IT tests running mvn verify. These issues could be with my current set-up,

RE: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.3-rc3

+1 Verified published commit git sha matches Verified binary and src tar signatures. Build and verify passed without failures (-Psunny) on local machine Ran on small cluster, 2 tservers and a master node, and performed some basic checks with no issues seen. - performed bulk ingest. - scan of

RE: 2.0.0 home stretch

without any issues. There is some additional testing I'd like to perform concerning blocking for available tservers - but I know of no issues at this time. Ed Coleman -Original Message- From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org] Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2019 6:07 PM To: accumulo

RE: checking on another ticket to work

I think Christopher closed that - the monitor is not expected to be a replacement for Prometheus / Graphina - but other's opinions may differ. -Original Message- From: d resnik [mailto:dresnik...@yahoo.com.INVALID] Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2019 8:32 PM To: dev@accumulo.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Proposal to release version 1.10

Dave Marion raises a good point. With is proposal, the change would be in the pom to allow java 8 language constructs with the 1.9 branch as it stand today, Currently the 1.9.x branch does not contain any code that is not incompatible with java 7. The 1.10 release could be compiled with a java

Re: [VOTE] Proposal to release version 1.10

Sean - Thanks for your responses and sorry for the confusion - my fault entirely that I didn't more thoroughly vet this with a discuss thread before calling for the vote and not realizing that there was ambiguity in the votes re majority / veto. I'll work on closing the vote.

[RESULT][VOTE] Proposal to release version 1.10

This vote passes with 5 binding +1s (alerman, ctubbsii, etcoleman, mjwall, mmiller), 1 +0 (kturner) and 1 -1 (busbey) The original proposal: : The proposal - I would like to start the formal release process for a 1.10 version that would change the java language level to java 8. The release would

[VOTE] Proposal to release version 1.10

As suggested in the LTS discussion ([LAZY][VOTE] A basic, but concrete, LTS proposal), I'm breaking this out to as a separate thread to keep the topic distinct. The proposal - I would like to start the formal release process for a 1.10 version that would change the java language level to java 8.

RE: [VOTE] Proposal to release version 1.10

make it easier to upgrade to Accumulo 2.y On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 7:37 PM Ed Coleman wrote: > > As suggested in the LTS discussion ([LAZY][VOTE] A basic, but > concrete, LTS proposal), I'm breaking this out to as a separate thread > to keep the topic distinct. > > > The pr

RE: accumulo-docker

Does the NiFi community have an established process or procedure that they follow that we could copy as a guide? (https://hub.docker.com/r/apache/nifi/) -Original Message- From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org] Sent: Friday, April 10, 2020 12:23 AM To: accumulo-dev Subject:

RE: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.10.0-rc1 (attempt 2)

-1 https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/1692 -Original Message- From: Mike Miller Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 11:53 AM To: dev@accumulo.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.10.0-rc1 (attempt 2) Accumulo Developers, Please consider the following candidate for Apache

Collecting possible names for renaming master.

Posting this to the dev list for those that may not follow github issues closely and so that this has a wider circulation. If anyone wants to chime in, there has been a list of candidate names for renaming the Master process created as issue https://github.com/apache/accumulo/issues/1638.

Planning for a 1.10 release.

I would like to raise the issue of releasing 1.10 in the near future. It has been 16+ months since the last release. At this point I'd like to shoot for a late August release unless additional blockers are identified, or concerns raised. There was some work done back in Jan/Feb timeframe and

RE: [LAZY][VOTE] Rename the 1.9 branch to 1.10

+1 -Original Message- From: Christopher Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2020 11:08 AM To: accumulo-dev Subject: [LAZY][VOTE] Rename the 1.9 branch to 1.10 Hi Accumulo devs, I've heard from a few people that they are confused why we are developing in a 1.9 branch when we are working

RE: [VOTE] "Manager" as new name for "master" service

+1 -Original Message- From: Christopher Sent: Monday, August 03, 2020 9:54 AM To: accumulo-dev Subject: [VOTE] "Manager" as new name for "master" service Based on the feedback on https://github.com/apache/accumulo/issues/1638 , the following two names have taken a clear lead in

RE: [LAZY][VOTE] change default branch to 'main'

+1 Thanks for working this. -Original Message- From: Christopher Sent: Monday, August 03, 2020 7:59 AM To: accumulo-dev Subject: [LAZY][VOTE] change default branch to 'main' As a follow-up from our previous conversation on this issue, I have already started a new branch named 'main'

RE: [DISCUSS] Rename Accumulo master

For processes, would Root be too confusing? We would then have rservers and tservers which may be more descriptive of functionality. This discussion is also going on the NiFi lists (and I assume elsewhere) One thing that popped out is that we may want to avoid leader / follower. (Leader is

Re: [DRAFT][REPORT] Apache Accumulo - Jan 2021

This is the final draft that incorporates the comments received to date. I will submit this version Tuesday evening unless there are objections or other changes, Ed Coleman - [DRAFT][REPORT] Apache Accumulo - January 2021 ## Description: The Apache Accumulo sorted, distributed key/value

[DRAFT][REPORT] Apache Accumulo - Jan 2021

/accumulo-website/pull/256. Please let me know if you have any feedback and your thoughts on using PRs as an approach for drafting these reports. Some more detailed metrics are at https://reporter.apache.org/wizard/statistics?accumulo, which appears to require a committer login. Ed Coleman

Re: [DRAFT][REPORT] Apache Accumulo - Jan 2021

Report as submitted on 2021-01-13 Thanks everyone for the suggestions / comments. Ed Coleman -- ## Description: The mission of Apache Accumulo is the creation and maintenance of software related to a robust, scalable, distributed key/value store with cell-based access control

Re: Quarterly Community Report due 4/16.

to try to get directly to the point in the > description, since the board has to look at dozens of these each > month. > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 5:10 PM Ed Coleman wrote: > > > > The Accumulo community has agreed to draft the quaterly reports usin

Re: Quarterly Community Report due 4/16.

ce it applies to every > ASF project, and delays the point. Have we had such a prefacing phrase > before? It might be good to try to get directly to the point in the > description, since the board has to look at dozens of these each > month. > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 5

[DISCUSS] Version number of next release?

I stared a general thread concerning topics for the next release. One major topic raised was what should the next version number be? I stared this thread so that version discussions can occur in a single thread for continuity. From the general email thread: Version number: There have been

[DISCUSS] The current state of replication and the way forward?

I stared a general thread concerning topics for the next release. One major topic raised was the state of replication and trying to determine if there is consensus for a way forward. I stared this thread so that replication discussions can occur in a single thread for continuity. From the

[DISCUSS] Community discussion on topics concerning the next release.

issues that you may have concerning the next release. I will start separate threads for the version discussion and for replication. Please use this thread or create a new thread if you want to raise other issues. Ed Coleman

Re: Manually initiating compaction on correct tablet(s)

Compactions work on splits / tablets so you will need to compact the tablet that contains the row. Tablets correspond to split points, and the rows between the split points are allocated to a single tablet. During a compaction the tablet will process all of the rows in that tablet and write a

RE: [DISCUSS] Enable Github wiki in asf.yaml?

be achieved with github. We need a space to capture the redesign and whatever we select can be made to work - I'm just wondering what provides the easiest forum to build a collaborative space for the Accumulo community. Ed Coleman On 2023/02/28 16:35:31 dlmar...@comcast.net wrote: > Circling b

Accumulo Quarterly Report - Due Wednesday, April 10th.

the reporting tool and may not reflect the final formatting of the final report when submitted. Ed Coleman --- begin report text from report tool --- ## Description: The mission of Apache Accumulo is the creation and maintenance of software related to a robust, scalable, distributed key/value store with cell

Re: Accumulo Quarterly Report - Due Wednesday, April 10th.

ps change the last sentence to one of the following: > > We continue to use the mailing list for official Apache business and it > remains a channel > for users to contact us. > > or > > We continue to use the mailing list for official Apache business and as a > c

Re: Accumulo Quarterly Report - Due Wednesday, April 10th.

to "Other" because it's a > sub-project (is that what would happen to testing, docker, etc.)? > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 10:34 AM Ed Coleman wrote: > > > The Accumulo community decided to draft the Apache community reports on the > > Accumulo dev list – and this is a draf

Re: Accumulo Quarterly Report - Due Wednesday, April 10th.

ember). > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2024 at 3:20 PM Ed Coleman wrote: > > > "Just curious why the Accumulo Access library mentions is in "Other". > > > > It was an arbitrary decision on my part. I wanted to make sure that it > > was noted as an achievement / pr

Re: Accumulo Quarterly Report - Due Wednesday, April 10th.

wrote: > > > > > I'm fine with leaving it as-is, like I said, was just curious. > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2024 at 3:33 PM Ed Coleman wrote: > > > > > > > I don't recall mentioning them at all. But the access library seems > > > > signifi