Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
Go ahead lars :-) On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:37 PM, wrote: > Great. 14 fixes in a patch release. That's a healthy number. > Andy, didn't react to your earlier offer... Did you want to do the 4.8.2 > release? Fine either way. > > -- Lars > From: Samarth Jain > To: dev ; la...@apache.org > Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 3:31 PM > Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 > > Changes in PHOENIX-3432 were committed as part of PHOENIX-3436. > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:29 PM, wrote: > > Need to wait PHOENIX-3432 in both branches. > > From: "la...@apache.org" > To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org" > Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 3:27 PM > Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 > > I'll clean up Jira for 4.8.2 and spin the RCs. Today and/or early tomorrow. > > From: James Taylor > To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org" > Cc: lars hofhansl > Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 3:00 PM > Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 > > I'm in support of 4.8.2. I was just pointing out that we've already started > the release process for 4.9 as your prior email seemed to indicate that > perhaps you weren't aware of that. > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2016, Andrew Purtell > wrote: > > > There was an earlier discussion here regarding supporting multiple code > > lines. There seemed to be support for that. That implies maintenance of > at > > least one code line prior to the most recent, no? Or otherwise nothing > has > > changed, leaving all users who can't use or don't want the bleeding edge > to > > patch for themselves. > > > > And, especially because 4.8.x won't work with 1.2 at all, I think a > release > > that fixes that problem before moving on from 4.8 is a responsible thing > to > > do. > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:34 PM, James Taylor > > wrote: > > > > > Sounds good, except we've already moved on to 4.9 as we're voting on it > > > now. Second RC will be up today. > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2016, Andrew Purtell > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Yes please I think we need a 4.8.x that fixes PHOENIX-3407 on 1.2+ > > before > > > > moving on to 4.9 and up. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:00 PM, > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Was going to do it this week. Then again, since 4.9.0 does not > > include > > > > the > > > > > column encoding I was less enthused about it.If we think we want a > > > 4.8.2 > > > > > I'll spin an RC today. > > > > > -- Lars > > > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Purtell > > > > > > > > To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org " < > > dev@phoenix.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > Cc: lars hofhansl > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 11:41 AM > > > > > Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 > > > > > > > > > > Right, I think we should address PHOENIX-3407 in current 4.8.x > > releases > > > > > with a fixed version of it. I don't think we can ever fully > > understand > > > > the > > > > > version usage patterns of our users. I've seen folks write in to > > HBase > > > > > lists using 4 year old releases for unfathomable reasons. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:38 AM, James Taylor < > > jamestay...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, Andrew. One question: are there users on 4.8.0 or 4.8.1 > who > > > > would > > > > > > not want to upgrade to 4.9.0? We're in the voting stage for a > 4.9.0 > > > > which > > > > > > has all the fixes in 4.8 branch (and more) and is compatible (as > > > usual) > > > > > > with 4.8 releases through rolling restarts. At SFDC, we'll move > to > > > > 4.9.0. > > > > > > > > > > > > One thing is clear, though. Given PHOENIX-3407 (and HBASE-14465), > > > users > > > > > on > > > > > > HBase 1.2 should not use 4.8.0 or 4.8.1. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > James > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Andrew Purtell
Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
Great. 14 fixes in a patch release. That's a healthy number. Andy, didn't react to your earlier offer... Did you want to do the 4.8.2 release? Fine either way. -- Lars From: Samarth Jain To: dev ; la...@apache.org Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 3:31 PM Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 Changes in PHOENIX-3432 were committed as part of PHOENIX-3436. On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:29 PM, wrote: Need to wait PHOENIX-3432 in both branches. From: "la...@apache.org" To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org" Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 3:27 PM Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 I'll clean up Jira for 4.8.2 and spin the RCs. Today and/or early tomorrow. From: James Taylor To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org" Cc: lars hofhansl Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 3:00 PM Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 I'm in support of 4.8.2. I was just pointing out that we've already started the release process for 4.9 as your prior email seemed to indicate that perhaps you weren't aware of that. On Wednesday, November 2, 2016, Andrew Purtell wrote: > There was an earlier discussion here regarding supporting multiple code > lines. There seemed to be support for that. That implies maintenance of at > least one code line prior to the most recent, no? Or otherwise nothing has > changed, leaving all users who can't use or don't want the bleeding edge to > patch for themselves. > > And, especially because 4.8.x won't work with 1.2 at all, I think a release > that fixes that problem before moving on from 4.8 is a responsible thing to > do. > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:34 PM, James Taylor > wrote: > > > Sounds good, except we've already moved on to 4.9 as we're voting on it > > now. Second RC will be up today. > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2016, Andrew Purtell > > > wrote: > > > > > Yes please I think we need a 4.8.x that fixes PHOENIX-3407 on 1.2+ > before > > > moving on to 4.9 and up. > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:00 PM, > > wrote: > > > > > > > Was going to do it this week. Then again, since 4.9.0 does not > include > > > the > > > > column encoding I was less enthused about it.If we think we want a > > 4.8.2 > > > > I'll spin an RC today. > > > > -- Lars > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Purtell > > > > > > To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org " < > dev@phoenix.apache.org > > > > > > > > Cc: lars hofhansl > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 11:41 AM > > > > Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 > > > > > > > > Right, I think we should address PHOENIX-3407 in current 4.8.x > releases > > > > with a fixed version of it. I don't think we can ever fully > understand > > > the > > > > version usage patterns of our users. I've seen folks write in to > HBase > > > > lists using 4 year old releases for unfathomable reasons. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:38 AM, James Taylor < > jamestay...@apache.org > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Thanks, Andrew. One question: are there users on 4.8.0 or 4.8.1 who > > > would > > > > > not want to upgrade to 4.9.0? We're in the voting stage for a 4.9.0 > > > which > > > > > has all the fixes in 4.8 branch (and more) and is compatible (as > > usual) > > > > > with 4.8 releases through rolling restarts. At SFDC, we'll move to > > > 4.9.0. > > > > > > > > > > One thing is clear, though. Given PHOENIX-3407 (and HBASE-14465), > > users > > > > on > > > > > HBase 1.2 should not use 4.8.0 or 4.8.1. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > James > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Andrew Purtell < > apurt...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Need help with making a 4.8.2? I could try my hand at making a > > > Phoenix > > > > > > release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 7:06 PM, James Taylor < > > > jamestay...@apache.org > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Current plan is to have a 4.9.0 RC in that same timeframe (by > > > 10/31) > > > >
Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
Changes in PHOENIX-3432 were committed as part of PHOENIX-3436. On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:29 PM, wrote: > Need to wait PHOENIX-3432 in both branches. > > From: "la...@apache.org" > To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org" > Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 3:27 PM > Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 > > I'll clean up Jira for 4.8.2 and spin the RCs. Today and/or early tomorrow. > > From: James Taylor > To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org" > Cc: lars hofhansl > Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 3:00 PM > Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 > > I'm in support of 4.8.2. I was just pointing out that we've already started > the release process for 4.9 as your prior email seemed to indicate that > perhaps you weren't aware of that. > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2016, Andrew Purtell > wrote: > > > There was an earlier discussion here regarding supporting multiple code > > lines. There seemed to be support for that. That implies maintenance of > at > > least one code line prior to the most recent, no? Or otherwise nothing > has > > changed, leaving all users who can't use or don't want the bleeding edge > to > > patch for themselves. > > > > And, especially because 4.8.x won't work with 1.2 at all, I think a > release > > that fixes that problem before moving on from 4.8 is a responsible thing > to > > do. > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:34 PM, James Taylor > > wrote: > > > > > Sounds good, except we've already moved on to 4.9 as we're voting on it > > > now. Second RC will be up today. > > > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2016, Andrew Purtell > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Yes please I think we need a 4.8.x that fixes PHOENIX-3407 on 1.2+ > > before > > > > moving on to 4.9 and up. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:00 PM, > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Was going to do it this week. Then again, since 4.9.0 does not > > include > > > > the > > > > > column encoding I was less enthused about it.If we think we want a > > > 4.8.2 > > > > > I'll spin an RC today. > > > > > -- Lars > > > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Purtell > > > > > > > > To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org " < > > dev@phoenix.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > Cc: lars hofhansl > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 11:41 AM > > > > > Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 > > > > > > > > > > Right, I think we should address PHOENIX-3407 in current 4.8.x > > releases > > > > > with a fixed version of it. I don't think we can ever fully > > understand > > > > the > > > > > version usage patterns of our users. I've seen folks write in to > > HBase > > > > > lists using 4 year old releases for unfathomable reasons. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:38 AM, James Taylor < > > jamestay...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, Andrew. One question: are there users on 4.8.0 or 4.8.1 > who > > > > would > > > > > > not want to upgrade to 4.9.0? We're in the voting stage for a > 4.9.0 > > > > which > > > > > > has all the fixes in 4.8 branch (and more) and is compatible (as > > > usual) > > > > > > with 4.8 releases through rolling restarts. At SFDC, we'll move > to > > > > 4.9.0. > > > > > > > > > > > > One thing is clear, though. Given PHOENIX-3407 (and HBASE-14465), > > > users > > > > > on > > > > > > HBase 1.2 should not use 4.8.0 or 4.8.1. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > James > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Andrew Purtell < > > apurt...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Need help with making a 4.8.2? I could try my hand at making a > > > > Phoenix > > > > > > > release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat
Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
Need to wait PHOENIX-3432 in both branches. From: "la...@apache.org" To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org" Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 3:27 PM Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 I'll clean up Jira for 4.8.2 and spin the RCs. Today and/or early tomorrow. From: James Taylor To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org" Cc: lars hofhansl Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 3:00 PM Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 I'm in support of 4.8.2. I was just pointing out that we've already started the release process for 4.9 as your prior email seemed to indicate that perhaps you weren't aware of that. On Wednesday, November 2, 2016, Andrew Purtell wrote: > There was an earlier discussion here regarding supporting multiple code > lines. There seemed to be support for that. That implies maintenance of at > least one code line prior to the most recent, no? Or otherwise nothing has > changed, leaving all users who can't use or don't want the bleeding edge to > patch for themselves. > > And, especially because 4.8.x won't work with 1.2 at all, I think a release > that fixes that problem before moving on from 4.8 is a responsible thing to > do. > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:34 PM, James Taylor > wrote: > > > Sounds good, except we've already moved on to 4.9 as we're voting on it > > now. Second RC will be up today. > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2016, Andrew Purtell > > > wrote: > > > > > Yes please I think we need a 4.8.x that fixes PHOENIX-3407 on 1.2+ > before > > > moving on to 4.9 and up. > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:00 PM, > > wrote: > > > > > > > Was going to do it this week. Then again, since 4.9.0 does not > include > > > the > > > > column encoding I was less enthused about it.If we think we want a > > 4.8.2 > > > > I'll spin an RC today. > > > > -- Lars > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Purtell > > > > > > To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org " < > dev@phoenix.apache.org > > > > > > > > Cc: lars hofhansl > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 11:41 AM > > > > Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 > > > > > > > > Right, I think we should address PHOENIX-3407 in current 4.8.x > releases > > > > with a fixed version of it. I don't think we can ever fully > understand > > > the > > > > version usage patterns of our users. I've seen folks write in to > HBase > > > > lists using 4 year old releases for unfathomable reasons. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:38 AM, James Taylor < > jamestay...@apache.org > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Thanks, Andrew. One question: are there users on 4.8.0 or 4.8.1 who > > > would > > > > > not want to upgrade to 4.9.0? We're in the voting stage for a 4.9.0 > > > which > > > > > has all the fixes in 4.8 branch (and more) and is compatible (as > > usual) > > > > > with 4.8 releases through rolling restarts. At SFDC, we'll move to > > > 4.9.0. > > > > > > > > > > One thing is clear, though. Given PHOENIX-3407 (and HBASE-14465), > > users > > > > on > > > > > HBase 1.2 should not use 4.8.0 or 4.8.1. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > James > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Andrew Purtell < > apurt...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Need help with making a 4.8.2? I could try my hand at making a > > > Phoenix > > > > > > release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 7:06 PM, James Taylor < > > > jamestay...@apache.org > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Current plan is to have a 4.9.0 RC in that same timeframe (by > > > 10/31) > > > > > with > > > > > > > the column encoding work (PHOENIX-1598 and PHOENIX-2565) and > > > > PHOENIX-6 > > > > > > > (atomic insert/update). If it's too much much for you to do > both > > > > 4.8.2 > > > > > > and > > > > > > > 4.9 simultaneously,
Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
I'll clean up Jira for 4.8.2 and spin the RCs. Today and/or early tomorrow. From: James Taylor To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org" Cc: lars hofhansl Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 3:00 PM Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 I'm in support of 4.8.2. I was just pointing out that we've already started the release process for 4.9 as your prior email seemed to indicate that perhaps you weren't aware of that. On Wednesday, November 2, 2016, Andrew Purtell wrote: > There was an earlier discussion here regarding supporting multiple code > lines. There seemed to be support for that. That implies maintenance of at > least one code line prior to the most recent, no? Or otherwise nothing has > changed, leaving all users who can't use or don't want the bleeding edge to > patch for themselves. > > And, especially because 4.8.x won't work with 1.2 at all, I think a release > that fixes that problem before moving on from 4.8 is a responsible thing to > do. > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:34 PM, James Taylor > wrote: > > > Sounds good, except we've already moved on to 4.9 as we're voting on it > > now. Second RC will be up today. > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2016, Andrew Purtell > > > wrote: > > > > > Yes please I think we need a 4.8.x that fixes PHOENIX-3407 on 1.2+ > before > > > moving on to 4.9 and up. > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:00 PM, > > wrote: > > > > > > > Was going to do it this week. Then again, since 4.9.0 does not > include > > > the > > > > column encoding I was less enthused about it.If we think we want a > > 4.8.2 > > > > I'll spin an RC today. > > > > -- Lars > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Purtell > > > > > > To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org " < > dev@phoenix.apache.org > > > > > > > > Cc: lars hofhansl > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 11:41 AM > > > > Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 > > > > > > > > Right, I think we should address PHOENIX-3407 in current 4.8.x > releases > > > > with a fixed version of it. I don't think we can ever fully > understand > > > the > > > > version usage patterns of our users. I've seen folks write in to > HBase > > > > lists using 4 year old releases for unfathomable reasons. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:38 AM, James Taylor < > jamestay...@apache.org > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Thanks, Andrew. One question: are there users on 4.8.0 or 4.8.1 who > > > would > > > > > not want to upgrade to 4.9.0? We're in the voting stage for a 4.9.0 > > > which > > > > > has all the fixes in 4.8 branch (and more) and is compatible (as > > usual) > > > > > with 4.8 releases through rolling restarts. At SFDC, we'll move to > > > 4.9.0. > > > > > > > > > > One thing is clear, though. Given PHOENIX-3407 (and HBASE-14465), > > users > > > > on > > > > > HBase 1.2 should not use 4.8.0 or 4.8.1. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > James > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Andrew Purtell < > apurt...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Need help with making a 4.8.2? I could try my hand at making a > > > Phoenix > > > > > > release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 7:06 PM, James Taylor < > > > jamestay...@apache.org > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Current plan is to have a 4.9.0 RC in that same timeframe (by > > > 10/31) > > > > > with > > > > > > > the column encoding work (PHOENIX-1598 and PHOENIX-2565) and > > > > PHOENIX-6 > > > > > > > (atomic insert/update). If it's too much much for you to do > both > > > > 4.8.2 > > > > > > and > > > > > > > 4.9 simultaneously, I can volunteer to be the RM for 4.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 6:42 PM, > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, >
Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
I'm in support of 4.8.2. I was just pointing out that we've already started the release process for 4.9 as your prior email seemed to indicate that perhaps you weren't aware of that. On Wednesday, November 2, 2016, Andrew Purtell wrote: > There was an earlier discussion here regarding supporting multiple code > lines. There seemed to be support for that. That implies maintenance of at > least one code line prior to the most recent, no? Or otherwise nothing has > changed, leaving all users who can't use or don't want the bleeding edge to > patch for themselves. > > And, especially because 4.8.x won't work with 1.2 at all, I think a release > that fixes that problem before moving on from 4.8 is a responsible thing to > do. > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:34 PM, James Taylor > wrote: > > > Sounds good, except we've already moved on to 4.9 as we're voting on it > > now. Second RC will be up today. > > > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2016, Andrew Purtell > > > wrote: > > > > > Yes please I think we need a 4.8.x that fixes PHOENIX-3407 on 1.2+ > before > > > moving on to 4.9 and up. > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:00 PM, > > wrote: > > > > > > > Was going to do it this week. Then again, since 4.9.0 does not > include > > > the > > > > column encoding I was less enthused about it.If we think we want a > > 4.8.2 > > > > I'll spin an RC today. > > > > -- Lars > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Purtell > > > > > > To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org " < > dev@phoenix.apache.org > > > > > > > > Cc: lars hofhansl > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 11:41 AM > > > > Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 > > > > > > > > Right, I think we should address PHOENIX-3407 in current 4.8.x > releases > > > > with a fixed version of it. I don't think we can ever fully > understand > > > the > > > > version usage patterns of our users. I've seen folks write in to > HBase > > > > lists using 4 year old releases for unfathomable reasons. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:38 AM, James Taylor < > jamestay...@apache.org > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Thanks, Andrew. One question: are there users on 4.8.0 or 4.8.1 who > > > would > > > > > not want to upgrade to 4.9.0? We're in the voting stage for a 4.9.0 > > > which > > > > > has all the fixes in 4.8 branch (and more) and is compatible (as > > usual) > > > > > with 4.8 releases through rolling restarts. At SFDC, we'll move to > > > 4.9.0. > > > > > > > > > > One thing is clear, though. Given PHOENIX-3407 (and HBASE-14465), > > users > > > > on > > > > > HBase 1.2 should not use 4.8.0 or 4.8.1. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > James > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Andrew Purtell < > apurt...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Need help with making a 4.8.2? I could try my hand at making a > > > Phoenix > > > > > > release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 7:06 PM, James Taylor < > > > jamestay...@apache.org > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Current plan is to have a 4.9.0 RC in that same timeframe (by > > > 10/31) > > > > > with > > > > > > > the column encoding work (PHOENIX-1598 and PHOENIX-2565) and > > > > PHOENIX-6 > > > > > > > (atomic insert/update). If it's too much much for you to do > both > > > > 4.8.2 > > > > > > and > > > > > > > 4.9 simultaneously, I can volunteer to be the RM for 4.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 6:42 PM, > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > we have 20 jiras against 4.8.2 some of which seem important > > > enough > > > > > ... > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > over 200 against 4.9.0. > > > > > > > > I think we should start keeping stable branches for longer.As > > > > before > > > > > > I'll > > > > > > > > volunteer doing 4.8.2 as well as a 4.9.0. > > > > > > > > Let's think about a 4.8.2 in two weeks or so, unless there're > > > > vastly > > > > > > > > different opinions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Lars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > >- Andy > > > > > > > > > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - > Piet > > > > Hein > > > > > > (via Tom White) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > - Andy > > > > > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet > > Hein > > > > (via Tom White) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Best regards, > > > > > >- Andy > > > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet > Hein > > > (via Tom White) > > > > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > >- Andy > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > (via Tom White) >
Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
There was an earlier discussion here regarding supporting multiple code lines. There seemed to be support for that. That implies maintenance of at least one code line prior to the most recent, no? Or otherwise nothing has changed, leaving all users who can't use or don't want the bleeding edge to patch for themselves. And, especially because 4.8.x won't work with 1.2 at all, I think a release that fixes that problem before moving on from 4.8 is a responsible thing to do. On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:34 PM, James Taylor wrote: > Sounds good, except we've already moved on to 4.9 as we're voting on it > now. Second RC will be up today. > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2016, Andrew Purtell > wrote: > > > Yes please I think we need a 4.8.x that fixes PHOENIX-3407 on 1.2+ before > > moving on to 4.9 and up. > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:00 PM, > wrote: > > > > > Was going to do it this week. Then again, since 4.9.0 does not include > > the > > > column encoding I was less enthused about it.If we think we want a > 4.8.2 > > > I'll spin an RC today. > > > -- Lars > > > > > > From: Andrew Purtell > > > > To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org " > > > > > Cc: lars hofhansl > > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 11:41 AM > > > Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 > > > > > > Right, I think we should address PHOENIX-3407 in current 4.8.x releases > > > with a fixed version of it. I don't think we can ever fully understand > > the > > > version usage patterns of our users. I've seen folks write in to HBase > > > lists using 4 year old releases for unfathomable reasons. > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:38 AM, James Taylor > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks, Andrew. One question: are there users on 4.8.0 or 4.8.1 who > > would > > > > not want to upgrade to 4.9.0? We're in the voting stage for a 4.9.0 > > which > > > > has all the fixes in 4.8 branch (and more) and is compatible (as > usual) > > > > with 4.8 releases through rolling restarts. At SFDC, we'll move to > > 4.9.0. > > > > > > > > One thing is clear, though. Given PHOENIX-3407 (and HBASE-14465), > users > > > on > > > > HBase 1.2 should not use 4.8.0 or 4.8.1. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > James > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Andrew Purtell > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Need help with making a 4.8.2? I could try my hand at making a > > Phoenix > > > > > release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 7:06 PM, James Taylor < > > jamestay...@apache.org > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Current plan is to have a 4.9.0 RC in that same timeframe (by > > 10/31) > > > > with > > > > > > the column encoding work (PHOENIX-1598 and PHOENIX-2565) and > > > PHOENIX-6 > > > > > > (atomic insert/update). If it's too much much for you to do both > > > 4.8.2 > > > > > and > > > > > > 4.9 simultaneously, I can volunteer to be the RM for 4.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 6:42 PM, > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > we have 20 jiras against 4.8.2 some of which seem important > > enough > > > > ... > > > > > > and > > > > > > > over 200 against 4.9.0. > > > > > > > I think we should start keeping stable branches for longer.As > > > before > > > > > I'll > > > > > > > volunteer doing 4.8.2 as well as a 4.9.0. > > > > > > > Let's think about a 4.8.2 in two weeks or so, unless there're > > > vastly > > > > > > > different opinions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Lars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > >- Andy > > > > > > > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet > > > Hein > > > > > (via Tom White) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Best regards, > > > > > > - Andy > > > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet > Hein > > > (via Tom White) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > > >- Andy > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > > (via Tom White) > > > -- Best regards, - Andy Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)
Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
I am done porting changes as part of https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-3436. On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:34 PM, James Taylor wrote: > Sounds good, except we've already moved on to 4.9 as we're voting on it > now. Second RC will be up today. > > On Wednesday, November 2, 2016, Andrew Purtell > wrote: > > > Yes please I think we need a 4.8.x that fixes PHOENIX-3407 on 1.2+ before > > moving on to 4.9 and up. > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:00 PM, > wrote: > > > > > Was going to do it this week. Then again, since 4.9.0 does not include > > the > > > column encoding I was less enthused about it.If we think we want a > 4.8.2 > > > I'll spin an RC today. > > > -- Lars > > > > > > From: Andrew Purtell > > > > To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org " > > > > > Cc: lars hofhansl > > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 11:41 AM > > > Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 > > > > > > Right, I think we should address PHOENIX-3407 in current 4.8.x releases > > > with a fixed version of it. I don't think we can ever fully understand > > the > > > version usage patterns of our users. I've seen folks write in to HBase > > > lists using 4 year old releases for unfathomable reasons. > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:38 AM, James Taylor > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks, Andrew. One question: are there users on 4.8.0 or 4.8.1 who > > would > > > > not want to upgrade to 4.9.0? We're in the voting stage for a 4.9.0 > > which > > > > has all the fixes in 4.8 branch (and more) and is compatible (as > usual) > > > > with 4.8 releases through rolling restarts. At SFDC, we'll move to > > 4.9.0. > > > > > > > > One thing is clear, though. Given PHOENIX-3407 (and HBASE-14465), > users > > > on > > > > HBase 1.2 should not use 4.8.0 or 4.8.1. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > James > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Andrew Purtell > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Need help with making a 4.8.2? I could try my hand at making a > > Phoenix > > > > > release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 7:06 PM, James Taylor < > > jamestay...@apache.org > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Current plan is to have a 4.9.0 RC in that same timeframe (by > > 10/31) > > > > with > > > > > > the column encoding work (PHOENIX-1598 and PHOENIX-2565) and > > > PHOENIX-6 > > > > > > (atomic insert/update). If it's too much much for you to do both > > > 4.8.2 > > > > > and > > > > > > 4.9 simultaneously, I can volunteer to be the RM for 4.9. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 6:42 PM, > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > we have 20 jiras against 4.8.2 some of which seem important > > enough > > > > ... > > > > > > and > > > > > > > over 200 against 4.9.0. > > > > > > > I think we should start keeping stable branches for longer.As > > > before > > > > > I'll > > > > > > > volunteer doing 4.8.2 as well as a 4.9.0. > > > > > > > Let's think about a 4.8.2 in two weeks or so, unless there're > > > vastly > > > > > > > different opinions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Lars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > >- Andy > > > > > > > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet > > > Hein > > > > > (via Tom White) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Best regards, > > > > > > - Andy > > > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet > Hein > > > (via Tom White) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > > >- Andy > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > > (via Tom White) > > >
Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
Sounds good, except we've already moved on to 4.9 as we're voting on it now. Second RC will be up today. On Wednesday, November 2, 2016, Andrew Purtell wrote: > Yes please I think we need a 4.8.x that fixes PHOENIX-3407 on 1.2+ before > moving on to 4.9 and up. > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:00 PM, > wrote: > > > Was going to do it this week. Then again, since 4.9.0 does not include > the > > column encoding I was less enthused about it.If we think we want a 4.8.2 > > I'll spin an RC today. > > -- Lars > > > > From: Andrew Purtell > > > To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org " > > > Cc: lars hofhansl > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 11:41 AM > > Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 > > > > Right, I think we should address PHOENIX-3407 in current 4.8.x releases > > with a fixed version of it. I don't think we can ever fully understand > the > > version usage patterns of our users. I've seen folks write in to HBase > > lists using 4 year old releases for unfathomable reasons. > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:38 AM, James Taylor > > > wrote: > > > > > Thanks, Andrew. One question: are there users on 4.8.0 or 4.8.1 who > would > > > not want to upgrade to 4.9.0? We're in the voting stage for a 4.9.0 > which > > > has all the fixes in 4.8 branch (and more) and is compatible (as usual) > > > with 4.8 releases through rolling restarts. At SFDC, we'll move to > 4.9.0. > > > > > > One thing is clear, though. Given PHOENIX-3407 (and HBASE-14465), users > > on > > > HBase 1.2 should not use 4.8.0 or 4.8.1. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > James > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Andrew Purtell > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Need help with making a 4.8.2? I could try my hand at making a > Phoenix > > > > release. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 7:06 PM, James Taylor < > jamestay...@apache.org > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Current plan is to have a 4.9.0 RC in that same timeframe (by > 10/31) > > > with > > > > > the column encoding work (PHOENIX-1598 and PHOENIX-2565) and > > PHOENIX-6 > > > > > (atomic insert/update). If it's too much much for you to do both > > 4.8.2 > > > > and > > > > > 4.9 simultaneously, I can volunteer to be the RM for 4.9. > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 6:42 PM, > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > we have 20 jiras against 4.8.2 some of which seem important > enough > > > ... > > > > > and > > > > > > over 200 against 4.9.0. > > > > > > I think we should start keeping stable branches for longer.As > > before > > > > I'll > > > > > > volunteer doing 4.8.2 as well as a 4.9.0. > > > > > > Let's think about a 4.8.2 in two weeks or so, unless there're > > vastly > > > > > > different opinions. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Lars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > >- Andy > > > > > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet > > Hein > > > > (via Tom White) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > > > - Andy > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > > (via Tom White) > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > >- Andy > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > (via Tom White) >
Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
Yes please I think we need a 4.8.x that fixes PHOENIX-3407 on 1.2+ before moving on to 4.9 and up. On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:00 PM, wrote: > Was going to do it this week. Then again, since 4.9.0 does not include the > column encoding I was less enthused about it.If we think we want a 4.8.2 > I'll spin an RC today. > -- Lars > > From: Andrew Purtell > To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org" > Cc: lars hofhansl > Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 11:41 AM > Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 > > Right, I think we should address PHOENIX-3407 in current 4.8.x releases > with a fixed version of it. I don't think we can ever fully understand the > version usage patterns of our users. I've seen folks write in to HBase > lists using 4 year old releases for unfathomable reasons. > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:38 AM, James Taylor > wrote: > > > Thanks, Andrew. One question: are there users on 4.8.0 or 4.8.1 who would > > not want to upgrade to 4.9.0? We're in the voting stage for a 4.9.0 which > > has all the fixes in 4.8 branch (and more) and is compatible (as usual) > > with 4.8 releases through rolling restarts. At SFDC, we'll move to 4.9.0. > > > > One thing is clear, though. Given PHOENIX-3407 (and HBASE-14465), users > on > > HBase 1.2 should not use 4.8.0 or 4.8.1. > > > > Thanks, > > James > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Andrew Purtell > > wrote: > > > > > Need help with making a 4.8.2? I could try my hand at making a Phoenix > > > release. > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 7:06 PM, James Taylor > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Current plan is to have a 4.9.0 RC in that same timeframe (by 10/31) > > with > > > > the column encoding work (PHOENIX-1598 and PHOENIX-2565) and > PHOENIX-6 > > > > (atomic insert/update). If it's too much much for you to do both > 4.8.2 > > > and > > > > 4.9 simultaneously, I can volunteer to be the RM for 4.9. > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 6:42 PM, wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > we have 20 jiras against 4.8.2 some of which seem important enough > > ... > > > > and > > > > > over 200 against 4.9.0. > > > > > I think we should start keeping stable branches for longer.As > before > > > I'll > > > > > volunteer doing 4.8.2 as well as a 4.9.0. > > > > > Let's think about a 4.8.2 in two weeks or so, unless there're > vastly > > > > > different opinions. > > > > > > > > > > -- Lars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Best regards, > > > > > >- Andy > > > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet > Hein > > > (via Tom White) > > > > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > > - Andy > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > (via Tom White) > > > > -- Best regards, - Andy Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)
Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
Before cutting the RC, I would like to get https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-3436 in. I didn't anticipate that we will be doing more releases on the 4.8 branch. So didn't checkin the fixes there. Will work on cherry picking the changes and commit them. On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:00 PM, wrote: > Was going to do it this week. Then again, since 4.9.0 does not include the > column encoding I was less enthused about it.If we think we want a 4.8.2 > I'll spin an RC today. > -- Lars > > From: Andrew Purtell > To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org" > Cc: lars hofhansl > Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 11:41 AM > Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 > > Right, I think we should address PHOENIX-3407 in current 4.8.x releases > with a fixed version of it. I don't think we can ever fully understand the > version usage patterns of our users. I've seen folks write in to HBase > lists using 4 year old releases for unfathomable reasons. > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:38 AM, James Taylor > wrote: > > > Thanks, Andrew. One question: are there users on 4.8.0 or 4.8.1 who would > > not want to upgrade to 4.9.0? We're in the voting stage for a 4.9.0 which > > has all the fixes in 4.8 branch (and more) and is compatible (as usual) > > with 4.8 releases through rolling restarts. At SFDC, we'll move to 4.9.0. > > > > One thing is clear, though. Given PHOENIX-3407 (and HBASE-14465), users > on > > HBase 1.2 should not use 4.8.0 or 4.8.1. > > > > Thanks, > > James > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Andrew Purtell > > wrote: > > > > > Need help with making a 4.8.2? I could try my hand at making a Phoenix > > > release. > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 7:06 PM, James Taylor > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Current plan is to have a 4.9.0 RC in that same timeframe (by 10/31) > > with > > > > the column encoding work (PHOENIX-1598 and PHOENIX-2565) and > PHOENIX-6 > > > > (atomic insert/update). If it's too much much for you to do both > 4.8.2 > > > and > > > > 4.9 simultaneously, I can volunteer to be the RM for 4.9. > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 6:42 PM, wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > we have 20 jiras against 4.8.2 some of which seem important enough > > ... > > > > and > > > > > over 200 against 4.9.0. > > > > > I think we should start keeping stable branches for longer.As > before > > > I'll > > > > > volunteer doing 4.8.2 as well as a 4.9.0. > > > > > Let's think about a 4.8.2 in two weeks or so, unless there're > vastly > > > > > different opinions. > > > > > > > > > > -- Lars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Best regards, > > > > > >- Andy > > > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet > Hein > > > (via Tom White) > > > > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > > - Andy > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > (via Tom White) > > > >
Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
Was going to do it this week. Then again, since 4.9.0 does not include the column encoding I was less enthused about it.If we think we want a 4.8.2 I'll spin an RC today. -- Lars From: Andrew Purtell To: "dev@phoenix.apache.org" Cc: lars hofhansl Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 11:41 AM Subject: Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0 Right, I think we should address PHOENIX-3407 in current 4.8.x releases with a fixed version of it. I don't think we can ever fully understand the version usage patterns of our users. I've seen folks write in to HBase lists using 4 year old releases for unfathomable reasons. On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:38 AM, James Taylor wrote: > Thanks, Andrew. One question: are there users on 4.8.0 or 4.8.1 who would > not want to upgrade to 4.9.0? We're in the voting stage for a 4.9.0 which > has all the fixes in 4.8 branch (and more) and is compatible (as usual) > with 4.8 releases through rolling restarts. At SFDC, we'll move to 4.9.0. > > One thing is clear, though. Given PHOENIX-3407 (and HBASE-14465), users on > HBase 1.2 should not use 4.8.0 or 4.8.1. > > Thanks, > James > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Andrew Purtell > wrote: > > > Need help with making a 4.8.2? I could try my hand at making a Phoenix > > release. > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 7:06 PM, James Taylor > > wrote: > > > > > Current plan is to have a 4.9.0 RC in that same timeframe (by 10/31) > with > > > the column encoding work (PHOENIX-1598 and PHOENIX-2565) and PHOENIX-6 > > > (atomic insert/update). If it's too much much for you to do both 4.8.2 > > and > > > 4.9 simultaneously, I can volunteer to be the RM for 4.9. > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 6:42 PM, wrote: > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > we have 20 jiras against 4.8.2 some of which seem important enough > ... > > > and > > > > over 200 against 4.9.0. > > > > I think we should start keeping stable branches for longer.As before > > I'll > > > > volunteer doing 4.8.2 as well as a 4.9.0. > > > > Let's think about a 4.8.2 in two weeks or so, unless there're vastly > > > > different opinions. > > > > > > > > -- Lars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > > > - Andy > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > > (via Tom White) > > > -- Best regards, - Andy Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)
Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
Right, I think we should address PHOENIX-3407 in current 4.8.x releases with a fixed version of it. I don't think we can ever fully understand the version usage patterns of our users. I've seen folks write in to HBase lists using 4 year old releases for unfathomable reasons. On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:38 AM, James Taylor wrote: > Thanks, Andrew. One question: are there users on 4.8.0 or 4.8.1 who would > not want to upgrade to 4.9.0? We're in the voting stage for a 4.9.0 which > has all the fixes in 4.8 branch (and more) and is compatible (as usual) > with 4.8 releases through rolling restarts. At SFDC, we'll move to 4.9.0. > > One thing is clear, though. Given PHOENIX-3407 (and HBASE-14465), users on > HBase 1.2 should not use 4.8.0 or 4.8.1. > > Thanks, > James > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Andrew Purtell > wrote: > > > Need help with making a 4.8.2? I could try my hand at making a Phoenix > > release. > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 7:06 PM, James Taylor > > wrote: > > > > > Current plan is to have a 4.9.0 RC in that same timeframe (by 10/31) > with > > > the column encoding work (PHOENIX-1598 and PHOENIX-2565) and PHOENIX-6 > > > (atomic insert/update). If it's too much much for you to do both 4.8.2 > > and > > > 4.9 simultaneously, I can volunteer to be the RM for 4.9. > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 6:42 PM, wrote: > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > we have 20 jiras against 4.8.2 some of which seem important enough > ... > > > and > > > > over 200 against 4.9.0. > > > > I think we should start keeping stable branches for longer.As before > > I'll > > > > volunteer doing 4.8.2 as well as a 4.9.0. > > > > Let's think about a 4.8.2 in two weeks or so, unless there're vastly > > > > different opinions. > > > > > > > > -- Lars > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > > >- Andy > > > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > > (via Tom White) > > > -- Best regards, - Andy Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)
Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
Thanks, Andrew. One question: are there users on 4.8.0 or 4.8.1 who would not want to upgrade to 4.9.0? We're in the voting stage for a 4.9.0 which has all the fixes in 4.8 branch (and more) and is compatible (as usual) with 4.8 releases through rolling restarts. At SFDC, we'll move to 4.9.0. One thing is clear, though. Given PHOENIX-3407 (and HBASE-14465), users on HBase 1.2 should not use 4.8.0 or 4.8.1. Thanks, James On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > Need help with making a 4.8.2? I could try my hand at making a Phoenix > release. > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 7:06 PM, James Taylor > wrote: > > > Current plan is to have a 4.9.0 RC in that same timeframe (by 10/31) with > > the column encoding work (PHOENIX-1598 and PHOENIX-2565) and PHOENIX-6 > > (atomic insert/update). If it's too much much for you to do both 4.8.2 > and > > 4.9 simultaneously, I can volunteer to be the RM for 4.9. > > > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 6:42 PM, wrote: > > > > > Hi All, > > > we have 20 jiras against 4.8.2 some of which seem important enough ... > > and > > > over 200 against 4.9.0. > > > I think we should start keeping stable branches for longer.As before > I'll > > > volunteer doing 4.8.2 as well as a 4.9.0. > > > Let's think about a 4.8.2 in two weeks or so, unless there're vastly > > > different opinions. > > > > > > -- Lars > > > > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > >- Andy > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein > (via Tom White) >
Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
Need help with making a 4.8.2? I could try my hand at making a Phoenix release. On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 7:06 PM, James Taylor wrote: > Current plan is to have a 4.9.0 RC in that same timeframe (by 10/31) with > the column encoding work (PHOENIX-1598 and PHOENIX-2565) and PHOENIX-6 > (atomic insert/update). If it's too much much for you to do both 4.8.2 and > 4.9 simultaneously, I can volunteer to be the RM for 4.9. > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 6:42 PM, wrote: > > > Hi All, > > we have 20 jiras against 4.8.2 some of which seem important enough ... > and > > over 200 against 4.9.0. > > I think we should start keeping stable branches for longer.As before I'll > > volunteer doing 4.8.2 as well as a 4.9.0. > > Let's think about a 4.8.2 in two weeks or so, unless there're vastly > > different opinions. > > > > -- Lars > > > -- Best regards, - Andy Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)
Re: 4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
Current plan is to have a 4.9.0 RC in that same timeframe (by 10/31) with the column encoding work (PHOENIX-1598 and PHOENIX-2565) and PHOENIX-6 (atomic insert/update). If it's too much much for you to do both 4.8.2 and 4.9 simultaneously, I can volunteer to be the RM for 4.9. On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 6:42 PM, wrote: > Hi All, > we have 20 jiras against 4.8.2 some of which seem important enough ... and > over 200 against 4.9.0. > I think we should start keeping stable branches for longer.As before I'll > volunteer doing 4.8.2 as well as a 4.9.0. > Let's think about a 4.8.2 in two weeks or so, unless there're vastly > different opinions. > > -- Lars >
4.8.2 and/or 4.9.0
Hi All, we have 20 jiras against 4.8.2 some of which seem important enough ... and over 200 against 4.9.0. I think we should start keeping stable branches for longer.As before I'll volunteer doing 4.8.2 as well as a 4.9.0. Let's think about a 4.8.2 in two weeks or so, unless there're vastly different opinions. -- Lars
