| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| stack | Aug 17, 2009 10:52 pm | |
| Billy Pearson | Aug 18, 2009 8:43 am | |
| Jean-Daniel Cryans | Aug 18, 2009 8:55 am | |
| stack | Aug 18, 2009 9:03 am | |
| Billy Pearson | Aug 18, 2009 10:58 am | |
| stack | Aug 18, 2009 11:46 am | |
| Billy Pearson | Aug 18, 2009 11:57 am | |
| Billy Pearson | Aug 18, 2009 12:11 pm | |
| stack | Aug 18, 2009 12:20 pm | |
| Andrew Purtell | Aug 19, 2009 6:59 am | |
| Andrew Purtell | Aug 19, 2009 8:38 am | |
| Tim Sell | Aug 24, 2009 1:10 am | |
| Jean-Daniel Cryans | Aug 24, 2009 7:51 am | |
| Jonathan Gray | Aug 25, 2009 4:19 pm | |
| Andrew Purtell | Aug 26, 2009 12:17 am | |
| Mathias Herberts | Aug 26, 2009 1:03 am | |
| stack | Aug 26, 2009 7:21 am | |
| Andrew Purtell | Aug 26, 2009 8:18 am | |
| Jonathan Gray | Aug 26, 2009 9:03 am | |
| stack | Aug 26, 2009 10:44 am | |
| stack | Aug 26, 2009 11:00 am | |
| Ryan Rawson | Aug 26, 2009 11:57 am | |
| Jonathan Gray | Aug 26, 2009 12:07 pm | |
| Andrew Purtell | Aug 27, 2009 12:23 am | |
| Andrew Purtell | Aug 27, 2009 12:27 am | |
| stack | Aug 27, 2009 9:42 am | |
| stack | Aug 31, 2009 12:21 pm |
| Subject: | Re: ANN: hbase 0.20.0 Release Candidate 2 available for download | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | Andrew Purtell (apur...@apache.org) | |
| Date: | Aug 26, 2009 8:18:44 am | |
| List: | org.apache.hadoop.hbase-dev | |
There is a lot riding on getting this release right. There have been some
serious bugs unearthed since 0.20.0 RC1. This makes me nervous. I'm not sure I
understand the rationale for releasing 0.20.0 now and then 0.20.1 in one week,
as opposed to taking the same amount of time to run another RC cycle to produce
a 0.20.0 without bad known defects. What is the benefit?
HBASE-1794: Recovered data still seems missing until compaction, which might
not happen for 24 hours. Seems like a fix is already known?
HBASE-1780: Data loss, known fix.
HBASE-1784: Data loss.
I'll try to put up a patch/band-aid against at least one of these tonight.
HBASE-1784 is really troubling. We should roll back a failed compaction, not
vaporize data. -1 on those grounds alone.
- Andy
________________________________ From: stack <sta...@duboce.net> To: hbas...@hadoop.apache.org Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 4:21:33 PM Subject: Re: ANN: hbase 0.20.0 Release Candidate 2 available for download
It will take a week or so to roll a new RC and to test and vote on it.
Why not let out RC2 as 0.20.0 and do 0.20.1 within the next week or so?
The balancing issue happens when you new node online only. Usually balancing ain't bad.
The Mathias issue is bad but still being investigated.
Andrew?
St.Ack
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:04 AM, Mathias Herberts < math...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 16:51, Jean-Daniel Cryans<jdcr...@apache.org> wrote:
+1 I ran it without any problem for a while. I asked Mathias if 1784 should kill it and he thinks no since it is not deterministic.
Given the latest run I did and the associated logs/investigation which clearly show that the missing rows is related to failed compactions I change my mind and now think 1784 should kill this RC.
so -1 for rc2.
Mathias.





