Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
HBase, mail # dev - 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)


Copy link to this message
-
Re: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)
lars hofhansl 2013-04-04, 17:37
If we do a 0.94.6.1 we should call it that (IMHO), replacing releases with the same name is confusing, also we only have to validate that one patch and not go through the whole process.

+1 on 0.94.6.1 and we agree to do that with just running the test suite and double checking that one patch (which we can all do today) -1 otherwise.
+1 on 0.94.7RC today if can't agree on the quick path mentioned above :)

-- Lars
________________________________
 From: Jean-Daniel Cryans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2013 10:21 AM
Subject: 0.94.6.1 discussion (WAS [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-8259) Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts)
 
We might wanna bring this discussion here on dev@.

So right now the questions are:

- Should we call a release with just HBASE-8259 as 0.94.6.1 or
0.94.7? How much testing are we expecting from folks?
- Should we just cut a release with what's in the branch and call it 0.94.7?

My opinion is to release 0.94.6.1 with just HBASE-8259 to replace the
current 0.94.6. Have the normal unit test run and release based on the
+1s we gather.

J-D

On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Ted Yu (JIRA) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8259?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13622514#comment-13622514 ]
>
> Ted Yu commented on HBASE-8259:
> -------------------------------
>
> What level of verification effort are you expecting ?
> If normal procedure of validating a release is involved, 0.94.7 release seems to be a better fit.
>
>> Snapshot backport in 0.94.6 breaks rolling restarts
>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>
>>                 Key: HBASE-8259
>>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8259
>>             Project: HBase
>>          Issue Type: Bug
>>    Affects Versions: 0.94.6
>>            Reporter: Jean-Daniel Cryans
>>            Assignee: Matteo Bertozzi
>>            Priority: Blocker
>>             Fix For: 0.94.7
>>
>>         Attachments: HBASE-8259-v0.patch
>>
>>
>> [~aleksshulman] found with his nifty QA tools that 0.94.6 has an incompatible change due to HBASE-7360 (Snapshot 0.94 Backport) that breaks rolling restarts.
>> RegionTransitionData.write() uses eventType.ordinal() that is the index in the enum and not the value specified in the enum definition. It means we can't add new states in the middle of the list. This can be fixed by moving C_M_SNAPSHOT_TABLE and C_M_RESTORE_SNAPSHOT at the end of the list. Trunk does the right thing already.
>> Right now, RIT znodes created with 0.94.6 (or top of the branch) will use the wrong value for the event type. You will see things like:
>> {noformat}
>> 2013-04-03 14:57:25,197 DEBUG org.apache.hadoop.hbase.zookeeper.ZKAssign: regionserver:60020-0x13dd1e10dbd0004 Attempting to transition node 70236052/-ROOT- from M_ZK_REGION_OFFLINE to RS_ZK_REGION_OPENING
>> 2013-04-03 14:57:25,201 WARN org.apache.hadoop.hbase.zookeeper.ZKAssign: regionserver:60020-0x13dd1e10dbd0004 Attempt to transition the unassigned node for 70236052 from M_ZK_REGION_OFFLINE to RS_ZK_REGION_OPENING failed, the node existed but was in the state M_SERVER_SHUTDOWN set by the server 192.168.1.112,60020,1365026237977
>> 2013-04-03 14:57:25,201 WARN org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.handler.OpenRegionHandler: Failed transition from OFFLINE to OPENING for region=70236052
>> 2013-04-03 14:57:25,201 WARN org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.handler.OpenRegionHandler: Region was hijacked? It no longer exists, encodedName=70236052
>> {noformat}
>> We should roll a 0.94.6.1 or 0.94.7 as soon this is fixed IMO.
>
> --
> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
> For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira