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

Switch to Threaded View
HDFS >> mail # dev >> Re: [VOTE] Merge HDFS-3077 (QuorumJournalManager) branch to trunk


Copy link to this message
-
Re: [VOTE] Merge HDFS-3077 (QuorumJournalManager) branch to trunk
Suresh and I are still reviewing this design and patch.
The 3077 code along with  the code pulled from 3092 is fairly substrantial. The design is also fairly complex and involved.
I  would request that we postpone the merge for another week to give folks time to review this fully.
sanjay

On Sep 25, 2012, at 4:02 PM, Todd Lipcon wrote:

> Dear fellow HDFS developers,
>
> Per my email thread last week ("Heads up: merge for QJM branch soon"
> at http://markmail.org/message/vkyh5culdsuxdb6t) I would like to
> propose merging the HDFS-3077 branch into trunk. The branch has been
> active since mid July and has stabilized significantly over the last
> two months. It has passed the full test suite, findbugs, and release
> audit, and I think it's ready to merge at this point.
>
> The branch has been fully developed using the standard
> 'review-then-commit' (RTC) policy, and the design is described in
> detail in a document attached to HDFS-3077 itself. The code itself has
> been contributed by me, Aaron, and Eli, but I'd be remiss not to also
> acknowledge the contributions to the design from discussions with
> Suresh, Sanjay, Henry Robinson, Patrick Hunt, Ivan Kelly, Andrew
> Purtell, Flavio Junqueira, Ben Reed, Nicholas, Bikas, Brandon, and
> others. Additionally, special thanks to Andrew Purtell and Stephen Chu
> for their help with cluster testing.
>
> This initial VOTE is to merge only into trunk, but, following the
> pattern of automatic failover, I expect to merge it into branch-2
> within a few weeks as well. The merge to branch-2 should be clean, as
> both I and Andrew Purtell have been testing on branch-2-derived
> codebases in addition to trunk.
>
> Please cast your vote by EOD Friday 9/29. Given that the branch has
> only had small changes in the last few weeks, and there was a "heads
> up" last week, I trust this should be enough time for committers to
> cast their votes. Per our by-laws, we need a minimum of three binding
> +1 votes from committers.
>
> I will start the voting with my own +1.
>
> Thanks
> -Todd
> --
> Todd Lipcon
> Software Engineer, Cloudera