[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-20595) Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16489737#comment-16489737
]
Hudson commented on HBASE-20595:
Results for branch branch-1.4
[build #333 on
builds.a.o|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-1.4/333/]:
(x) *{color:red}-1 overall{color}*
details (if available):
(x) {color:red}-1 general checks{color}
-- For more information [see general
report|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-1.4/333//General_Nightly_Build_Report/]
(x) {color:red}-1 jdk7 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk7
report|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-1.4/333//JDK7_Nightly_Build_Report/]
(x) {color:red}-1 jdk8 hadoop2 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk8 (hadoop2)
report|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-1.4/333//JDK8_Nightly_Build_Report_(Hadoop2)/]
(/) {color:green}+1 source release artifact{color}
-- See build output for details.
> Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
>
>
> Key: HBASE-20595
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: Region Assignment, rsgroup
>Reporter: Andrew Purtell
>Assignee: Andrew Purtell
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.1.0, 1.5.0, 2.0.1, 1.4.5
>
> Attachments: HBASE-20595-branch-1.patch, HBASE-20595.patch,
> HBASE-20595.patch
>
>
> Regionserver groups needs to specially handle what it calls "special tables",
> tables upon which core or other modular functionality depends. They need to
> be excluded from normal rsgroup processing during bootstrap to avoid circular
> dependencies or errors due to insufficiently initialized state. I think we
> also want to ensure that such tables are always given a rsgroup assignment
> with nonzero servers. (IIRC another issue already raises that point, we can
> link it later.)
> Special tables include:
> * The system tables in the 'hbase:' namespace
> * The ACL table if the AccessController coprocessor is installed
> * The Labels table if the VisibilityController coprocessor is installed
> * The Quotas table if the FS quotas feature is active
> Either we need a facility where "special tables" can be registered, which
> should be in core. Or, we institute a blanket rule that core and all
> extensions that need a "special table" must put them into the 'hbase:'
> namespace, so the TableName#isSystemTable() test will return TRUE for all,
> and then rsgroups simply needs to test for that.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-20595) Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16488950#comment-16488950
]
Hudson commented on HBASE-20595:
Results for branch master
[build #343 on
builds.a.o|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/master/343/]: (x)
*{color:red}-1 overall{color}*
details (if available):
(/) {color:green}+1 general checks{color}
-- For more information [see general
report|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/master/343//General_Nightly_Build_Report/]
(x) {color:red}-1 jdk8 hadoop2 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk8 (hadoop2)
report|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/master/343//JDK8_Nightly_Build_Report_(Hadoop2)/]
(x) {color:red}-1 jdk8 hadoop3 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk8 (hadoop3)
report|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/master/343//JDK8_Nightly_Build_Report_(Hadoop3)/]
(x) {color:red}-1 source release artifact{color}
-- See build output for details.
> Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
>
>
> Key: HBASE-20595
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: Region Assignment, rsgroup
>Reporter: Andrew Purtell
>Assignee: Andrew Purtell
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.1.0, 1.5.0, 2.0.1, 1.4.5
>
> Attachments: HBASE-20595-branch-1.patch, HBASE-20595.patch,
> HBASE-20595.patch
>
>
> Regionserver groups needs to specially handle what it calls "special tables",
> tables upon which core or other modular functionality depends. They need to
> be excluded from normal rsgroup processing during bootstrap to avoid circular
> dependencies or errors due to insufficiently initialized state. I think we
> also want to ensure that such tables are always given a rsgroup assignment
> with nonzero servers. (IIRC another issue already raises that point, we can
> link it later.)
> Special tables include:
> * The system tables in the 'hbase:' namespace
> * The ACL table if the AccessController coprocessor is installed
> * The Labels table if the VisibilityController coprocessor is installed
> * The Quotas table if the FS quotas feature is active
> Either we need a facility where "special tables" can be registered, which
> should be in core. Or, we institute a blanket rule that core and all
> extensions that need a "special table" must put them into the 'hbase:'
> namespace, so the TableName#isSystemTable() test will return TRUE for all,
> and then rsgroups simply needs to test for that.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-20595) Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16488773#comment-16488773
]
Hudson commented on HBASE-20595:
Results for branch branch-1
[build #327 on
builds.a.o|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-1/327/]:
(x) *{color:red}-1 overall{color}*
details (if available):
(x) {color:red}-1 general checks{color}
-- For more information [see general
report|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-1/327//General_Nightly_Build_Report/]
(x) {color:red}-1 jdk7 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk7
report|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-1/327//JDK7_Nightly_Build_Report/]
(x) {color:red}-1 jdk8 hadoop2 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk8 (hadoop2)
report|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-1/327//JDK8_Nightly_Build_Report_(Hadoop2)/]
(x) {color:red}-1 source release artifact{color}
-- See build output for details.
> Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
>
>
> Key: HBASE-20595
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: Region Assignment, rsgroup
>Reporter: Andrew Purtell
>Assignee: Andrew Purtell
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.1.0, 1.5.0, 2.0.1, 1.4.5
>
> Attachments: HBASE-20595-branch-1.patch, HBASE-20595.patch,
> HBASE-20595.patch
>
>
> Regionserver groups needs to specially handle what it calls "special tables",
> tables upon which core or other modular functionality depends. They need to
> be excluded from normal rsgroup processing during bootstrap to avoid circular
> dependencies or errors due to insufficiently initialized state. I think we
> also want to ensure that such tables are always given a rsgroup assignment
> with nonzero servers. (IIRC another issue already raises that point, we can
> link it later.)
> Special tables include:
> * The system tables in the 'hbase:' namespace
> * The ACL table if the AccessController coprocessor is installed
> * The Labels table if the VisibilityController coprocessor is installed
> * The Quotas table if the FS quotas feature is active
> Either we need a facility where "special tables" can be registered, which
> should be in core. Or, we institute a blanket rule that core and all
> extensions that need a "special table" must put them into the 'hbase:'
> namespace, so the TableName#isSystemTable() test will return TRUE for all,
> and then rsgroups simply needs to test for that.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-20595) Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16488420#comment-16488420
]
Hudson commented on HBASE-20595:
Results for branch branch-2
[build #775 on
builds.a.o|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2/775/]:
(x) *{color:red}-1 overall{color}*
details (if available):
(/) {color:green}+1 general checks{color}
-- For more information [see general
report|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2/775//General_Nightly_Build_Report/]
(x) {color:red}-1 jdk8 hadoop2 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk8 (hadoop2)
report|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2/775//JDK8_Nightly_Build_Report_(Hadoop2)/]
(/) {color:green}+1 jdk8 hadoop3 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk8 (hadoop3)
report|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2/775//JDK8_Nightly_Build_Report_(Hadoop3)/]
(x) {color:red}-1 source release artifact{color}
-- See build output for details.
> Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
>
>
> Key: HBASE-20595
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: Region Assignment, rsgroup
>Reporter: Andrew Purtell
>Assignee: Andrew Purtell
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.1.0, 1.5.0, 2.0.1, 1.4.5
>
> Attachments: HBASE-20595-branch-1.patch, HBASE-20595.patch,
> HBASE-20595.patch
>
>
> Regionserver groups needs to specially handle what it calls "special tables",
> tables upon which core or other modular functionality depends. They need to
> be excluded from normal rsgroup processing during bootstrap to avoid circular
> dependencies or errors due to insufficiently initialized state. I think we
> also want to ensure that such tables are always given a rsgroup assignment
> with nonzero servers. (IIRC another issue already raises that point, we can
> link it later.)
> Special tables include:
> * The system tables in the 'hbase:' namespace
> * The ACL table if the AccessController coprocessor is installed
> * The Labels table if the VisibilityController coprocessor is installed
> * The Quotas table if the FS quotas feature is active
> Either we need a facility where "special tables" can be registered, which
> should be in core. Or, we institute a blanket rule that core and all
> extensions that need a "special table" must put them into the 'hbase:'
> namespace, so the TableName#isSystemTable() test will return TRUE for all,
> and then rsgroups simply needs to test for that.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-20595) Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16488391#comment-16488391
]
Hudson commented on HBASE-20595:
Results for branch branch-2.0
[build #340 on
builds.a.o|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.0/340/]:
(x) *{color:red}-1 overall{color}*
details (if available):
(/) {color:green}+1 general checks{color}
-- For more information [see general
report|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.0/340//General_Nightly_Build_Report/]
(x) {color:red}-1 jdk8 hadoop2 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk8 (hadoop2)
report|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.0/340//JDK8_Nightly_Build_Report_(Hadoop2)/]
(/) {color:green}+1 jdk8 hadoop3 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk8 (hadoop3)
report|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2.0/340//JDK8_Nightly_Build_Report_(Hadoop3)/]
(/) {color:green}+1 source release artifact{color}
-- See build output for details.
> Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
>
>
> Key: HBASE-20595
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: Region Assignment, rsgroup
>Reporter: Andrew Purtell
>Assignee: Andrew Purtell
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.1.0, 1.5.0, 2.0.1, 1.4.5
>
> Attachments: HBASE-20595-branch-1.patch, HBASE-20595.patch,
> HBASE-20595.patch
>
>
> Regionserver groups needs to specially handle what it calls "special tables",
> tables upon which core or other modular functionality depends. They need to
> be excluded from normal rsgroup processing during bootstrap to avoid circular
> dependencies or errors due to insufficiently initialized state. I think we
> also want to ensure that such tables are always given a rsgroup assignment
> with nonzero servers. (IIRC another issue already raises that point, we can
> link it later.)
> Special tables include:
> * The system tables in the 'hbase:' namespace
> * The ACL table if the AccessController coprocessor is installed
> * The Labels table if the VisibilityController coprocessor is installed
> * The Quotas table if the FS quotas feature is active
> Either we need a facility where "special tables" can be registered, which
> should be in core. Or, we institute a blanket rule that core and all
> extensions that need a "special table" must put them into the 'hbase:'
> namespace, so the TableName#isSystemTable() test will return TRUE for all,
> and then rsgroups simply needs to test for that.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-20595) Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16487686#comment-16487686 ] Lars Hofhansl commented on HBASE-20595: --- +1 > Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups > > > Key: HBASE-20595 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Task > Components: Region Assignment, rsgroup >Reporter: Andrew Purtell >Assignee: Andrew Purtell >Priority: Major > Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.1.0, 1.5.0 > > Attachments: HBASE-20595-branch-1.patch, HBASE-20595.patch, > HBASE-20595.patch > > > Regionserver groups needs to specially handle what it calls "special tables", > tables upon which core or other modular functionality depends. They need to > be excluded from normal rsgroup processing during bootstrap to avoid circular > dependencies or errors due to insufficiently initialized state. I think we > also want to ensure that such tables are always given a rsgroup assignment > with nonzero servers. (IIRC another issue already raises that point, we can > link it later.) > Special tables include: > * The system tables in the 'hbase:' namespace > * The ACL table if the AccessController coprocessor is installed > * The Labels table if the VisibilityController coprocessor is installed > * The Quotas table if the FS quotas feature is active > Either we need a facility where "special tables" can be registered, which > should be in core. Or, we institute a blanket rule that core and all > extensions that need a "special table" must put them into the 'hbase:' > namespace, so the TableName#isSystemTable() test will return TRUE for all, > and then rsgroups simply needs to test for that. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-20595) Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16485760#comment-16485760
]
Andrew Purtell commented on HBASE-20595:
I am running {{-Dtest=TestRSGroup\*,Test\*RSGroup\*}} 25 times locally just to
make sure this isn't an intermittently visible problem. After 10 runs it looks
good.
> Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
>
>
> Key: HBASE-20595
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: Region Assignment, rsgroup
>Reporter: Andrew Purtell
>Assignee: Andrew Purtell
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.1.0, 1.5.0
>
> Attachments: HBASE-20595-branch-1.patch, HBASE-20595.patch,
> HBASE-20595.patch
>
>
> Regionserver groups needs to specially handle what it calls "special tables",
> tables upon which core or other modular functionality depends. They need to
> be excluded from normal rsgroup processing during bootstrap to avoid circular
> dependencies or errors due to insufficiently initialized state. I think we
> also want to ensure that such tables are always given a rsgroup assignment
> with nonzero servers. (IIRC another issue already raises that point, we can
> link it later.)
> Special tables include:
> * The system tables in the 'hbase:' namespace
> * The ACL table if the AccessController coprocessor is installed
> * The Labels table if the VisibilityController coprocessor is installed
> * The Quotas table if the FS quotas feature is active
> Either we need a facility where "special tables" can be registered, which
> should be in core. Or, we institute a blanket rule that core and all
> extensions that need a "special table" must put them into the 'hbase:'
> namespace, so the TableName#isSystemTable() test will return TRUE for all,
> and then rsgroups simply needs to test for that.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-20595) Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16484699#comment-16484699
]
Andrew Purtell commented on HBASE-20595:
Test failure looks like the usual issue with running the RSgroup tests in
parallel. Precommit ran 4 of them at once, one of them timed out. I don't think
these should all be run in parallel like that on underpowered test resources.
{noformat}
[INFO] Running org.apache.hadoop.hbase.rsgroup.TestRSGroupsOfflineMode
[INFO] Running org.apache.hadoop.hbase.rsgroup.TestEnableRSGroup
[INFO] Running org.apache.hadoop.hbase.rsgroup.TestRSGroups
[INFO] Running org.apache.hadoop.hbase.rsgroup.TestRSGroupsWithACL
[INFO] Tests run: 10, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 7.056 s
- in org.apache.hadoop.hbase.rsgroup.TestRSGroupsWithACL
[INFO] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 13.424 s
- in org.apache.hadoop.hbase.rsgroup.TestEnableRSGroup
[INFO] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 23.837 s
- in org.apache.hadoop.hbase.rsgroup.TestRSGroupsOfflineMode
[ERROR] Tests run: 4, Failures: 0, Errors: 3, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 753.348
s <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.hadoop.hbase.rsgroup.TestRSGroups
[ERROR]
testNamespaceCreateAndAssign(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.rsgroup.TestRSGroups)
Time elapsed: 743.922 s <<< ERROR!
java.io.InterruptedIOException
at
org.apache.hadoop.hbase.rsgroup.TestRSGroups.afterMethod(TestRSGroups.java:129)
Caused by: java.lang.InterruptedException
at
org.apache.hadoop.hbase.rsgroup.TestRSGroups.afterMethod(TestRSGroups.java:129)
{noformat}
> Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
>
>
> Key: HBASE-20595
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: Region Assignment, rsgroup
>Reporter: Andrew Purtell
>Assignee: Andrew Purtell
>Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.1.0, 1.5.0
>
> Attachments: HBASE-20595-branch-1.patch, HBASE-20595.patch,
> HBASE-20595.patch
>
>
> Regionserver groups needs to specially handle what it calls "special tables",
> tables upon which core or other modular functionality depends. They need to
> be excluded from normal rsgroup processing during bootstrap to avoid circular
> dependencies or errors due to insufficiently initialized state. I think we
> also want to ensure that such tables are always given a rsgroup assignment
> with nonzero servers. (IIRC another issue already raises that point, we can
> link it later.)
> Special tables include:
> * The system tables in the 'hbase:' namespace
> * The ACL table if the AccessController coprocessor is installed
> * The Labels table if the VisibilityController coprocessor is installed
> * The Quotas table if the FS quotas feature is active
> Either we need a facility where "special tables" can be registered, which
> should be in core. Or, we institute a blanket rule that core and all
> extensions that need a "special table" must put them into the 'hbase:'
> namespace, so the TableName#isSystemTable() test will return TRUE for all,
> and then rsgroups simply needs to test for that.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-20595) Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16484696#comment-16484696 ] Andrew Purtell commented on HBASE-20595: This should also fix HBASE-20606 > Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups > > > Key: HBASE-20595 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Task > Components: Region Assignment, rsgroup >Reporter: Andrew Purtell >Assignee: Andrew Purtell >Priority: Major > Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.1.0, 1.5.0 > > Attachments: HBASE-20595-branch-1.patch, HBASE-20595.patch, > HBASE-20595.patch > > > Regionserver groups needs to specially handle what it calls "special tables", > tables upon which core or other modular functionality depends. They need to > be excluded from normal rsgroup processing during bootstrap to avoid circular > dependencies or errors due to insufficiently initialized state. I think we > also want to ensure that such tables are always given a rsgroup assignment > with nonzero servers. (IIRC another issue already raises that point, we can > link it later.) > Special tables include: > * The system tables in the 'hbase:' namespace > * The ACL table if the AccessController coprocessor is installed > * The Labels table if the VisibilityController coprocessor is installed > * The Quotas table if the FS quotas feature is active > Either we need a facility where "special tables" can be registered, which > should be in core. Or, we institute a blanket rule that core and all > extensions that need a "special table" must put them into the 'hbase:' > namespace, so the TableName#isSystemTable() test will return TRUE for all, > and then rsgroups simply needs to test for that. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-20595) Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16484593#comment-16484593
]
Hadoop QA commented on HBASE-20595:
---
| (x) *{color:red}-1 overall{color}* |
\\
\\
|| Vote || Subsystem || Runtime || Comment ||
| {color:blue}0{color} | {color:blue} reexec {color} | {color:blue} 2m
54s{color} | {color:blue} Docker mode activated. {color} |
|| || || || {color:brown} Prechecks {color} ||
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} hbaseanti {color} | {color:green} 0m
0s{color} | {color:green} Patch does not have any anti-patterns. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} @author {color} | {color:green} 0m
0s{color} | {color:green} The patch does not contain any @author tags. {color} |
| {color:red}-1{color} | {color:red} test4tests {color} | {color:red} 0m
0s{color} | {color:red} The patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified
tests. Please justify why no new tests are needed for this patch. Also please
list what manual steps were performed to verify this patch. {color} |
|| || || || {color:brown} master Compile Tests {color} ||
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvninstall {color} | {color:green} 5m
7s{color} | {color:green} master passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} compile {color} | {color:green} 0m
37s{color} | {color:green} master passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} checkstyle {color} | {color:green} 0m
11s{color} | {color:green} master passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} shadedjars {color} | {color:green} 4m
28s{color} | {color:green} branch has no errors when building our shaded
downstream artifacts. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} findbugs {color} | {color:green} 0m
32s{color} | {color:green} master passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javadoc {color} | {color:green} 0m
23s{color} | {color:green} master passed {color} |
|| || || || {color:brown} Patch Compile Tests {color} ||
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvninstall {color} | {color:green} 4m
19s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} compile {color} | {color:green} 0m
34s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javac {color} | {color:green} 0m
34s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} checkstyle {color} | {color:green} 0m
11s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} whitespace {color} | {color:green} 0m
0s{color} | {color:green} The patch has no whitespace issues. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} shadedjars {color} | {color:green} 4m
23s{color} | {color:green} patch has no errors when building our shaded
downstream artifacts. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} hadoopcheck {color} | {color:green}
13m 27s{color} | {color:green} Patch does not cause any errors with Hadoop
2.6.5 2.7.4 or 3.0.0. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} findbugs {color} | {color:green} 0m
40s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javadoc {color} | {color:green} 0m
16s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
|| || || || {color:brown} Other Tests {color} ||
| {color:red}-1{color} | {color:red} unit {color} | {color:red} 15m 58s{color}
| {color:red} hbase-rsgroup in the patch failed. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} asflicense {color} | {color:green} 0m
9s{color} | {color:green} The patch does not generate ASF License warnings.
{color} |
| {color:black}{color} | {color:black} {color} | {color:black} 54m 48s{color} |
{color:black} {color} |
\\
\\
|| Reason || Tests ||
| Failed junit tests | hadoop.hbase.rsgroup.TestRSGroups |
\\
\\
|| Subsystem || Report/Notes ||
| Docker | Client=17.05.0-ce Server=17.05.0-ce Image:yetus/hbase:d8b550f |
| JIRA Issue | HBASE-20595 |
| JIRA Patch URL |
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12924604/HBASE-20595.patch |
| Optional Tests | asflicense javac javadoc unit findbugs shadedjars
hadoopcheck hbaseanti checkstyle compile |
| uname | Linux 3efea925dcc9 4.4.0-109-generic #132-Ubuntu SMP Tue Jan 9
19:52:39 UTC 2018 x86_64 GNU/Linux |
| Build tool | maven |
| Personality |
/home/jenkins/jenkins-slave/workspace/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/component/dev-support/hbase-personality.sh
|
| git revision | master / 6c1097e92f |
| maven | version: Apache Maven 3.5.3
(3383c37e1f9e9b3bc3df5050c29c8aff9f295297; 2018-02-24T19:49:05Z) |
| Default Java | 1.8.0_171 |
| findbugs | v3.1.0-RC3 |
| unit |
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/12902/artifact/patchprocess/patch-unit-hbase-rsgroup.txt
|
| Test Results |
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/12902/testReport/
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-20595) Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16484432#comment-16484432 ] Andrew Purtell commented on HBASE-20595: Updated master patch removes the unused imports that checkstyle complained about. > Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups > > > Key: HBASE-20595 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Task > Components: Region Assignment, rsgroup >Reporter: Andrew Purtell >Assignee: Andrew Purtell >Priority: Major > Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.1.0, 1.5.0 > > Attachments: HBASE-20595-branch-1.patch, HBASE-20595.patch, > HBASE-20595.patch > > > Regionserver groups needs to specially handle what it calls "special tables", > tables upon which core or other modular functionality depends. They need to > be excluded from normal rsgroup processing during bootstrap to avoid circular > dependencies or errors due to insufficiently initialized state. I think we > also want to ensure that such tables are always given a rsgroup assignment > with nonzero servers. (IIRC another issue already raises that point, we can > link it later.) > Special tables include: > * The system tables in the 'hbase:' namespace > * The ACL table if the AccessController coprocessor is installed > * The Labels table if the VisibilityController coprocessor is installed > * The Quotas table if the FS quotas feature is active > Either we need a facility where "special tables" can be registered, which > should be in core. Or, we institute a blanket rule that core and all > extensions that need a "special table" must put them into the 'hbase:' > namespace, so the TableName#isSystemTable() test will return TRUE for all, > and then rsgroups simply needs to test for that. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-20595) Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16483102#comment-16483102
]
Hadoop QA commented on HBASE-20595:
---
| (x) *{color:red}-1 overall{color}* |
\\
\\
|| Vote || Subsystem || Runtime || Comment ||
| {color:blue}0{color} | {color:blue} reexec {color} | {color:blue} 0m
12s{color} | {color:blue} Docker mode activated. {color} |
|| || || || {color:brown} Prechecks {color} ||
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} hbaseanti {color} | {color:green} 0m
1s{color} | {color:green} Patch does not have any anti-patterns. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} @author {color} | {color:green} 0m
0s{color} | {color:green} The patch does not contain any @author tags. {color} |
| {color:red}-1{color} | {color:red} test4tests {color} | {color:red} 0m
0s{color} | {color:red} The patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified
tests. Please justify why no new tests are needed for this patch. Also please
list what manual steps were performed to verify this patch. {color} |
|| || || || {color:brown} master Compile Tests {color} ||
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvninstall {color} | {color:green} 4m
20s{color} | {color:green} master passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} compile {color} | {color:green} 0m
29s{color} | {color:green} master passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} checkstyle {color} | {color:green} 0m
10s{color} | {color:green} master passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} shadedjars {color} | {color:green} 4m
11s{color} | {color:green} branch has no errors when building our shaded
downstream artifacts. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} findbugs {color} | {color:green} 0m
30s{color} | {color:green} master passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javadoc {color} | {color:green} 0m
14s{color} | {color:green} master passed {color} |
|| || || || {color:brown} Patch Compile Tests {color} ||
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvninstall {color} | {color:green} 4m
20s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} compile {color} | {color:green} 0m
31s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javac {color} | {color:green} 0m
31s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:red}-1{color} | {color:red} checkstyle {color} | {color:red} 0m
10s{color} | {color:red} hbase-rsgroup: The patch generated 4 new + 0 unchanged
- 0 fixed = 4 total (was 0) {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} whitespace {color} | {color:green} 0m
0s{color} | {color:green} The patch has no whitespace issues. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} shadedjars {color} | {color:green} 4m
28s{color} | {color:green} patch has no errors when building our shaded
downstream artifacts. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} hadoopcheck {color} | {color:green}
13m 40s{color} | {color:green} Patch does not cause any errors with Hadoop
2.6.5 2.7.4 or 3.0.0. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} findbugs {color} | {color:green} 1m
0s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javadoc {color} | {color:green} 0m
19s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
|| || || || {color:brown} Other Tests {color} ||
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} unit {color} | {color:green} 3m
21s{color} | {color:green} hbase-rsgroup in the patch passed. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} asflicense {color} | {color:green} 0m
7s{color} | {color:green} The patch does not generate ASF License warnings.
{color} |
| {color:black}{color} | {color:black} {color} | {color:black} 38m 30s{color} |
{color:black} {color} |
\\
\\
|| Subsystem || Report/Notes ||
| Docker | Client=17.05.0-ce Server=17.05.0-ce Image:yetus/hbase:d8b550f |
| JIRA Issue | HBASE-20595 |
| JIRA Patch URL |
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12924416/HBASE-20595.patch |
| Optional Tests | asflicense javac javadoc unit findbugs shadedjars
hadoopcheck hbaseanti checkstyle compile |
| uname | Linux f03269567095 4.4.0-43-generic #63-Ubuntu SMP Wed Oct 12
13:48:03 UTC 2016 x86_64 GNU/Linux |
| Build tool | maven |
| Personality |
/home/jenkins/jenkins-slave/workspace/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/component/dev-support/hbase-personality.sh
|
| git revision | master / c9f8c3436f |
| maven | version: Apache Maven 3.5.3
(3383c37e1f9e9b3bc3df5050c29c8aff9f295297; 2018-02-24T19:49:05Z) |
| Default Java | 1.8.0_171 |
| findbugs | v3.1.0-RC3 |
| checkstyle |
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/12893/artifact/patchprocess/diff-checkstyle-hbase-rsgroup.txt
|
| Test Results |
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/12893/testReport/ |
| Max. p
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-20595) Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16481407#comment-16481407 ] Andrew Purtell commented on HBASE-20595: Dropping a WIP patch for branch-1 that is even simpler than above discussion. We avoid a deadlock at initialization time by using the default group to deploy system tables. Later, when balancing, if the deploy to default at bootstrap has misplaced the table the assignment will be adjusted. Also, if a table has not yet been assigned a group during balancing we place it into the default group. This is equivalent to how "special tables" were formerly added to the default group in the in-memory representation only. HBASE-20500 maintains at least one server always in the default group. RSGroup tests pass for me locally with this change. > Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups > > > Key: HBASE-20595 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Task > Components: Region Assignment, rsgroup >Reporter: Andrew Purtell >Priority: Major > Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.1.0, 1.5.0 > > Attachments: HBASE-20595-branch-1-WIP.patch > > > Regionserver groups needs to specially handle what it calls "special tables", > tables upon which core or other modular functionality depends. They need to > be excluded from normal rsgroup processing during bootstrap to avoid circular > dependencies or errors due to insufficiently initialized state. I think we > also want to ensure that such tables are always given a rsgroup assignment > with nonzero servers. (IIRC another issue already raises that point, we can > link it later.) > Special tables include: > * The system tables in the 'hbase:' namespace > * The ACL table if the AccessController coprocessor is installed > * The Labels table if the VisibilityController coprocessor is installed > * The Quotas table if the FS quotas feature is active > Either we need a facility where "special tables" can be registered, which > should be in core. Or, we institute a blanket rule that core and all > extensions that need a "special table" must put them into the 'hbase:' > namespace, so the TableName#isSystemTable() test will return TRUE for all, > and then rsgroups simply needs to test for that. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-20595) Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16479467#comment-16479467 ] Andrew Purtell commented on HBASE-20595: Never mind what I said above about another special rsgroup for system tables. I think we just need to set a flag if a rsgroup has a system table in it and guarantee that group always has at least one server. That works for a wider range of cases including the single node case. > Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups > > > Key: HBASE-20595 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Task > Components: Region Assignment, rsgroup >Reporter: Andrew Purtell >Priority: Major > Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.1.0, 1.5.0 > > > Regionserver groups needs to specially handle what it calls "special tables", > tables upon which core or other modular functionality depends. They need to > be excluded from normal rsgroup processing during bootstrap to avoid circular > dependencies or errors due to insufficiently initialized state. I think we > also want to ensure that such tables are always given a rsgroup assignment > with nonzero servers. (IIRC another issue already raises that point, we can > link it later.) > Special tables include: > * The system tables in the 'hbase:' namespace > * The ACL table if the AccessController coprocessor is installed > * The Labels table if the VisibilityController coprocessor is installed > * The Quotas table if the FS quotas feature is active > Either we need a facility where "special tables" can be registered, which > should be in core. Or, we institute a blanket rule that core and all > extensions that need a "special table" must put them into the 'hbase:' > namespace, so the TableName#isSystemTable() test will return TRUE for all, > and then rsgroups simply needs to test for that. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-20595) Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16479457#comment-16479457 ] Andrew Purtell commented on HBASE-20595: bq. Or, we institute a blanket rule that core and all extensions that need a "special table" must put them into the 'hbase:' namespace, so the TableName#isSystemTable() test will return TRUE for all, and then rsgroups simply needs to test for that. This is what I am thinking as far as how we achieve removal of the 'special tables' concept. Special == system. I haven't looked at all of the places where we create such tables though to determine if it is a compat problem. Pretty sure the security coprocessors are fine. Quotas is only in trunk so that would be ok too. Anyway, any objections to this? > Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups > > > Key: HBASE-20595 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Task > Components: Region Assignment, rsgroup >Reporter: Andrew Purtell >Priority: Major > Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.1.0, 1.5.0 > > > Regionserver groups needs to specially handle what it calls "special tables", > tables upon which core or other modular functionality depends. They need to > be excluded from normal rsgroup processing during bootstrap to avoid circular > dependencies or errors due to insufficiently initialized state. I think we > also want to ensure that such tables are always given a rsgroup assignment > with nonzero servers. (IIRC another issue already raises that point, we can > link it later.) > Special tables include: > * The system tables in the 'hbase:' namespace > * The ACL table if the AccessController coprocessor is installed > * The Labels table if the VisibilityController coprocessor is installed > * The Quotas table if the FS quotas feature is active > Either we need a facility where "special tables" can be registered, which > should be in core. Or, we institute a blanket rule that core and all > extensions that need a "special table" must put them into the 'hbase:' > namespace, so the TableName#isSystemTable() test will return TRUE for all, > and then rsgroups simply needs to test for that. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-20595) Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16479450#comment-16479450 ] Andrew Purtell commented on HBASE-20595: bq. we'll probably need to document "can't turn on rsgroup feature" as a limitation of single-node deployments. Ah, no, better that the constraint that system tables cannot be placed into the same rsgroup as user tables be what is optional. > Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups > > > Key: HBASE-20595 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Task > Components: Region Assignment, rsgroup >Reporter: Andrew Purtell >Priority: Major > Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.1.0, 1.5.0 > > > Regionserver groups needs to specially handle what it calls "special tables", > tables upon which core or other modular functionality depends. They need to > be excluded from normal rsgroup processing during bootstrap to avoid circular > dependencies or errors due to insufficiently initialized state. I think we > also want to ensure that such tables are always given a rsgroup assignment > with nonzero servers. (IIRC another issue already raises that point, we can > link it later.) > Special tables include: > * The system tables in the 'hbase:' namespace > * The ACL table if the AccessController coprocessor is installed > * The Labels table if the VisibilityController coprocessor is installed > * The Quotas table if the FS quotas feature is active > Either we need a facility where "special tables" can be registered, which > should be in core. Or, we institute a blanket rule that core and all > extensions that need a "special table" must put them into the 'hbase:' > namespace, so the TableName#isSystemTable() test will return TRUE for all, > and then rsgroups simply needs to test for that. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-20595) Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16479202#comment-16479202 ] Sean Busbey commented on HBASE-20595: - that makes sense. is the "system group" treated like a normal rsgroup in terms of exclusivity? If so, how do we handle it and the user group needing to be distinct? if we just delegate it to manual operator config that means we can't have the rsgroup on by default ever right? we'll probably need to document "can't turn on rsgroup feature" as a limitation of single-node deployments. > Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups > > > Key: HBASE-20595 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Task > Components: Region Assignment, rsgroup >Reporter: Andrew Purtell >Priority: Major > Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.1.0, 1.5.0 > > > Regionserver groups needs to specially handle what it calls "special tables", > tables upon which core or other modular functionality depends. They need to > be excluded from normal rsgroup processing during bootstrap to avoid circular > dependencies or errors due to insufficiently initialized state. I think we > also want to ensure that such tables are always given a rsgroup assignment > with nonzero servers. (IIRC another issue already raises that point, we can > link it later.) > Special tables include: > * The system tables in the 'hbase:' namespace > * The ACL table if the AccessController coprocessor is installed > * The Labels table if the VisibilityController coprocessor is installed > * The Quotas table if the FS quotas feature is active > Either we need a facility where "special tables" can be registered, which > should be in core. Or, we institute a blanket rule that core and all > extensions that need a "special table" must put them into the 'hbase:' > namespace, so the TableName#isSystemTable() test will return TRUE for all, > and then rsgroups simply needs to test for that. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-20595) Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16478153#comment-16478153 ] Andrew Purtell commented on HBASE-20595: The issue I was thinking of was HBASE-20500 which maintains one server in the 'default' group, but that is not the full scope of what we should have. We should guarantee the placement, specifically, of "special tables" into a rsgroup that must always have a nonzero number of servers, and not assume that will be the 'default' group. In fact I think we should have two default rsgroups, very similar to how we do namespacing: a "default" group into which goes all user level stuff not otherwise specified; and a system group into which goes system/special tables (in namespace terms, akin to the 'hbase' namespace) > Remove the concept of 'special tables' from rsgroups > > > Key: HBASE-20595 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20595 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Task > Components: Region Assignment, rsgroup >Reporter: Andrew Purtell >Priority: Major > Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.1.0, 1.5.0 > > > Regionserver groups needs to specially handle what it calls "special tables", > tables upon which core or other modular functionality depends. They need to > be excluded from normal rsgroup processing during bootstrap to avoid circular > dependencies or errors due to insufficiently initialized state. I think we > also want to ensure that such tables are always given a rsgroup assignment > with nonzero servers. (IIRC another issue already raises that point, we can > link it later.) > Special tables include: > * The system tables in the 'hbase:' namespace > * The ACL table if the AccessController coprocessor is installed > * The Labels table if the VisibilityController coprocessor is installed > * The Quotas table if the FS quotas feature is active > Either we need a facility where "special tables" can be registered, which > should be in core. Or, we institute a blanket rule that core and all > extensions that need a "special table" must put them into the 'hbase:' > namespace, so the TableName#isSystemTable() test will return TRUE for all, > and then rsgroups simply needs to test for that. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
