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

Switch to Plain View
HBase, mail # dev - ANN: The second hbase 0.92.2 release candidate is available for download


+
Ted Yu 2012-08-31, 15:58
+
Ted Yu 2012-09-07, 18:00
+
Shrijeet Paliwal 2012-09-11, 18:43
+
Aditya 2012-09-11, 18:48
+
Ted Yu 2012-09-11, 19:11
+
Ted Yu 2012-09-12, 04:18
+
Stack 2012-09-12, 04:32
+
Stack 2012-09-12, 05:24
+
Ted Yu 2012-09-12, 13:49
+
Jean-Daniel Cryans 2012-09-12, 16:33
+
Ted Yu 2012-09-12, 16:47
+
Elliott Clark 2012-09-12, 18:55
+
Elliott Clark 2012-09-12, 19:07
+
yuzhihong@... 2012-09-12, 19:16
+
Ted Yu 2012-09-12, 20:27
Copy link to this message
-
Re: ANN: The second hbase 0.92.2 release candidate is available for download
Ted Yu 2012-09-12, 21:10
I went through the following thread:
Re: ANN: The 2nd hbase 0.94.1 release candidate is available for download

I didn't see 3 binding +1's on that RC.

FYI

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Ted Yu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> J-D:
> So far we have 2 +1 (binding) and 2 +1 (non-binding), no -1 on RC1.
>
> Do you think I can roll this RC as 0.92.2 ?
>
> Thanks
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Elliott Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>> So it looks like I must have just caught a region as it was moving or
>> something.  I can't seem to re-produce that error. So I'm fully +1.
>> Sorry for the false alarm.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Elliott Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> > I'm +1'ish
>> >
>> > Spun up a 0.92.1 cluster wrote some data.  Then spun up a 0.92.2RC and
>> > everything worked.
>> > Ran LoadTestTool while killing region servers.  Everything recovered
>> well.
>> > Ran PerformanceEvaluation everything went well
>> >
>> >
>> > However when trying to manually split a table while tests were running
>> > I was unable to.  On investigating more I found that manual splits
>> > appear to be broken in 0.92.  So I filed HBASE-6767.  I don't think
>> > it's enough to sink the rc but it was something that I noticed.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Ted Yu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> We're having more and more releases across 0.92, 0.94 and soon 0.96
>> >> branches.
>> >> It would be wise to revisit the historical convention.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for bringing this up, J-D.
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> > Usually it takes 3 +1s by committers.  Maybe hang a little while to
>> >>> > get another one or so?
>> >>>
>> >>> Little nit, it's actually 3 PMC members. Historically committers were
>> >>> also PMC members but this changed recently.
>> >>>
>> >>> I'm referring to http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>> >>>
>> >>> We may want to eventually do like Hadoop and have our own bylaws:
>> >>> http://hadoop.apache.org/bylaws.html
>> >>>
>> >>> J-D
>> >>>
>>
>
>
+
Stack 2012-09-13, 04:12
+
Ted Yu 2012-09-13, 04:15
+
Ramkrishna.S.Vasudevan 2012-09-13, 05:58
+
Jean-Daniel Cryans 2012-09-12, 21:17
+
Ted Yu 2012-09-12, 21:27
+
Jean-Daniel Cryans 2012-09-12, 22:07
+
Ted Yu 2012-09-12, 22:13
+
lars hofhansl 2012-09-12, 22:31
+
Ted Yu 2012-09-12, 22:35
+
yuzhihong@... 2012-09-13, 07:41