lars hofhansl 2013-07-06, 08:22
Ted Yu 2013-07-06, 08:32
lars hofhansl 2013-07-06, 08:35
lars hofhansl 2013-07-06, 16:09
For option #1, some users would obtain 0.94.9 from download site yet others
would obtain from maven repo.
This means that there would be inconsistency among 0.94.9 users down the
Is this desirable ?
On Sat, Jul 6, 2013 at 9:09 AM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am still leaning towards #1. There is no bug, just one jira missing from
> the maven release for two weeks or so (until 0.94.10 is released).
> HBASE-8656 has no functional implications but fixes a condition where
> sometimes handler threads are leaked with secure HBase only.
> Furthermore this issue has existing since 0.94.0.
> So unless I hear very strong support/arguments for option #2 or #3 below,
> I'll simply leave this as is.
> -- Lars
> From: Ted Yu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; hbase-user <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, July 6, 2013 1:32 AM
> Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] HBase 0.94.9 is available for download
> Looks like option #2 is better.
> On Jul 6, 2013, at 1:22 AM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So I cannot fix the maven release after the fact. So we have the
> following options:
> > 1. Leave it as is. Tags/tar have HBASE-8656, but the maven release
> misses that that one fix; and release 0.94.10 soon.
> > 2. Release 0.94.9.1, which would be identical to 0.94.9 (except for the
> release name change in pom.xml).
> > 3. Re-release 0.94.9 with HBASE-8656 removed. That way tags and tar ball
> would be the same as the maven release.
> > Not sure which one I'd prefer. Probably #1 followed by #2.
> > -- Lars
> > ________________________________
> > From: Aditya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; lars hofhansl <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: hbase-user <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Friday, July 5, 2013 9:12 PM
> > Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] HBase 0.94.9 is available for download
> > Thanks Lars.
> > It looks like HBASE-8656, though part of the tarball, is not included in
> 0.94.9 tag.
> > Regards,
> > Aditya...
> > On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 10:58 AM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The HBase Team is pleased to announce the immediate release of HBase
> >> Download it from your favorite Apache mirror .
> >> As usual, all previous 0.92.x and 0.94.x releases can upgraded to
> 0.94.9 via a rolling upgrade without downtime, intermediary versions can be
> >> 0.94.9 is the current stable release of HBase. It fixes the following
> 26 issues:
> >> [HBASE-8453] - TestImportExport failing again due to configuration
> >> [HBASE-8494] - TestRemoteAdmin#testClusterStatus should not assume
> 'requests' does not change
> >> [HBASE-8522] - Archived hfiles and old hlogs may be deleted
> immediately by HFileCleaner, LogCleaner in HMaster
> >> [HBASE-8555] - FilterList correctness may be affected by random
> ordering of sub-filter(list)
> >> [HBASE-8590] - [0.94] BlockingMetaScannerVisitor should check for
> parent meta entry while waiting for split daughter
> >> [HBASE-8639] - Poor performance of htable#getscanner in
> multithreaded environment due to DNS.getDefaultHost() being called in
> >> [HBASE-8640] - ServerName in master may not initialize with the
> configured ipc address of hbase.master.ipc.address
> >> [HBASE-8655] - Backport to 94 - HBASE-8346(Prefetching .META. rows
> in case only when useCache is set to true)
> >> [HBASE-8656] - Rpc call may not be notified in SecureClient
> >> [HBASE-8671] - Per-region WAL breaks CP backwards compatibility in
> 0.94 for non-enabled case
> >> [HBASE-8684] - Table Coprocessor can't access external HTable by
> >> [HBASE-8700] - IntegrationTestBigLinkedList can fail due to random
> number collision
Azuryy Yu 2013-07-06, 08:02
lars hofhansl 2013-07-06, 08:04
lars hofhansl 2013-07-06, 08:07
Azuryy Yu 2013-07-06, 08:37