[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-25207) Revisit the implementation and usage of RegionStates.include

2020-10-23 Thread Hudson (Jira)


[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-25207?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17219845#comment-17219845
 ] 

Hudson commented on HBASE-25207:


Results for branch branch-2
[build #82 on 
builds.a.o|https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/HBase/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2/82/]:
 (/) *{color:green}+1 overall{color}*

details (if available):

(/) {color:green}+1 general checks{color}
-- For more information [see general 
report|https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/HBase/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2/82/General_20Nightly_20Build_20Report/]




(/) {color:green}+1 jdk8 hadoop2 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk8 (hadoop2) 
report|https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/HBase/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2/82/JDK8_20Nightly_20Build_20Report_20_28Hadoop2_29/]


(/) {color:green}+1 jdk8 hadoop3 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk8 (hadoop3) 
report|https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/HBase/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2/82/JDK8_20Nightly_20Build_20Report_20_28Hadoop3_29/]


(/) {color:green}+1 jdk11 hadoop3 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk11 
report|https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/HBase/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2/82/JDK11_20Nightly_20Build_20Report_20_28Hadoop3_29/]


(/) {color:green}+1 source release artifact{color}
-- See build output for details.


(/) {color:green}+1 client integration test{color}


> Revisit the implementation and usage of RegionStates.include
> 
>
> Key: HBASE-25207
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-25207
> Project: HBase
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: Region Assignment
>Reporter: Duo Zhang
>Assignee: Duo Zhang
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.0.0-alpha-1, 2.3.3, 2.4.0, 2.2.7
>
>
> After several round of refactoring and fixing, the method has been used in 
> lots of places and the implementation looks really confusing.
> As in the first if condition for testing RegionStateNode and RegionInfo 
> state, we will always return false when split is true, which means we will 
> always filter out split parent, as a split parent, is split = true and also 
> offline = true.
> I think the reason why there is no problem is that, only in 
> EnableTableProcedure we call this method with offline = true, and 
> EnableTableProcedure does not need to deal with split parent...
> And now since we found a problem in HBASE-25206, where we need to get split 
> parent when deleting a table, I think it is time to revisit this method and 
> make logic less confusing.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)


[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-25207) Revisit the implementation and usage of RegionStates.include

2020-10-23 Thread Hudson (Jira)


[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-25207?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17219684#comment-17219684
 ] 

Hudson commented on HBASE-25207:


Results for branch master
[build #103 on 
builds.a.o|https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/HBase/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/master/103/]:
 (x) *{color:red}-1 overall{color}*

details (if available):

(/) {color:green}+1 general checks{color}
-- For more information [see general 
report|https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/HBase/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/master/103/General_20Nightly_20Build_20Report/]






(/) {color:green}+1 jdk8 hadoop3 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk8 (hadoop3) 
report|https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/HBase/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/master/103/JDK8_20Nightly_20Build_20Report_20_28Hadoop3_29/]


(x) {color:red}-1 jdk11 hadoop3 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk11 
report|https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/HBase/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/master/103/JDK11_20Nightly_20Build_20Report_20_28Hadoop3_29/]


(/) {color:green}+1 source release artifact{color}
-- See build output for details.


(/) {color:green}+1 client integration test{color}


> Revisit the implementation and usage of RegionStates.include
> 
>
> Key: HBASE-25207
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-25207
> Project: HBase
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: Region Assignment
>Reporter: Duo Zhang
>Assignee: Duo Zhang
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.0.0-alpha-1, 2.3.3, 2.4.0, 2.2.7
>
>
> After several round of refactoring and fixing, the method has been used in 
> lots of places and the implementation looks really confusing.
> As in the first if condition for testing RegionStateNode and RegionInfo 
> state, we will always return false when split is true, which means we will 
> always filter out split parent, as a split parent, is split = true and also 
> offline = true.
> I think the reason why there is no problem is that, only in 
> EnableTableProcedure we call this method with offline = true, and 
> EnableTableProcedure does not need to deal with split parent...
> And now since we found a problem in HBASE-25206, where we need to get split 
> parent when deleting a table, I think it is time to revisit this method and 
> make logic less confusing.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)


[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-25207) Revisit the implementation and usage of RegionStates.include

2020-10-23 Thread Hudson (Jira)


[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-25207?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17219562#comment-17219562
 ] 

Hudson commented on HBASE-25207:


Results for branch branch-2.3
[build #88 on 
builds.a.o|https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/HBase/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.3/88/]:
 (x) *{color:red}-1 overall{color}*

details (if available):

(x) {color:red}-1 general checks{color}
-- Something went wrong running this stage, please [check relevant console 
output|https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/HBase/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.3/88//console].




(x) {color:red}-1 jdk8 hadoop2 checks{color}
-- Something went wrong running this stage, please [check relevant console 
output|https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/HBase/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.3/88//console].


(x) {color:red}-1 jdk8 hadoop3 checks{color}
-- Something went wrong running this stage, please [check relevant console 
output|https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/HBase/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.3/88//console].


(x) {color:red}-1 jdk11 hadoop3 checks{color}
-- Something went wrong running this stage, please [check relevant console 
output|https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/HBase/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.3/88//console].


(/) {color:green}+1 source release artifact{color}
-- See build output for details.


(/) {color:green}+1 client integration test{color}


> Revisit the implementation and usage of RegionStates.include
> 
>
> Key: HBASE-25207
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-25207
> Project: HBase
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: Region Assignment
>Reporter: Duo Zhang
>Assignee: Duo Zhang
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.0.0-alpha-1, 2.3.3, 2.4.0, 2.2.7
>
>
> After several round of refactoring and fixing, the method has been used in 
> lots of places and the implementation looks really confusing.
> As in the first if condition for testing RegionStateNode and RegionInfo 
> state, we will always return false when split is true, which means we will 
> always filter out split parent, as a split parent, is split = true and also 
> offline = true.
> I think the reason why there is no problem is that, only in 
> EnableTableProcedure we call this method with offline = true, and 
> EnableTableProcedure does not need to deal with split parent...
> And now since we found a problem in HBASE-25206, where we need to get split 
> parent when deleting a table, I think it is time to revisit this method and 
> make logic less confusing.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)


[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-25207) Revisit the implementation and usage of RegionStates.include

2020-10-22 Thread Hudson (Jira)


[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-25207?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=17219400#comment-17219400
 ] 

Hudson commented on HBASE-25207:


Results for branch branch-2.2
[build #105 on 
builds.a.o|https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/HBase/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.2/105/]:
 (x) *{color:red}-1 overall{color}*

details (if available):

(/) {color:green}+1 general checks{color}
-- For more information [see general 
report|https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/HBase/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.2/105//General_Nightly_Build_Report/]




(x) {color:red}-1 jdk8 hadoop2 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk8 (hadoop2) 
report|https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/HBase/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.2/105//JDK8_Nightly_Build_Report_(Hadoop2)/]


(x) {color:red}-1 jdk8 hadoop3 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk8 (hadoop3) 
report|https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/HBase/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.2/105//JDK8_Nightly_Build_Report_(Hadoop3)/]


(/) {color:green}+1 source release artifact{color}
-- See build output for details.


(/) {color:green}+1 client integration test{color}


> Revisit the implementation and usage of RegionStates.include
> 
>
> Key: HBASE-25207
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-25207
> Project: HBase
>  Issue Type: Bug
>  Components: Region Assignment
>Reporter: Duo Zhang
>Assignee: Duo Zhang
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.0.0-alpha-1, 2.3.3, 2.4.0, 2.2.7
>
>
> After several round of refactoring and fixing, the method has been used in 
> lots of places and the implementation looks really confusing.
> As in the first if condition for testing RegionStateNode and RegionInfo 
> state, we will always return false when split is true, which means we will 
> always filter out split parent, as a split parent, is split = true and also 
> offline = true.
> I think the reason why there is no problem is that, only in 
> EnableTableProcedure we call this method with offline = true, and 
> EnableTableProcedure does not need to deal with split parent...
> And now since we found a problem in HBASE-25206, where we need to get split 
> parent when deleting a table, I think it is time to revisit this method and 
> make logic less confusing.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)