Thanks for the reviews and the updates.
Ed Coleman
The report as filed (formatting is from the reporting tool):
## Description:
The mission of Apache Accumulo is the creation and maintenance of software
related to a robust, scalable, distributed key/value store with cell-based
access
reflected in the tool submission.
Ed Coleman
--- report text from reporter tool ---
## Description:
The mission of Apache Accumulo is the creation and maintenance of software
related to a robust, scalable, distributed key/value store with cell-based
access control and customizable server-side processing
reflected in the tool submission.
Ed Coleman
--- report text from reporter tool ---
## Description:
The mission of Apache Accumulo is the creation and maintenance of software
related to a robust, scalable, distributed key/value store with cell-based
access control and customizable server-side
The Accumulo report for January has been submitted without changes.
Ed Coleman
reflected in the tool submission.
Ed Coleman
--- report text from reporter tool ---
## Description:
The mission of Apache Accumulo is the creation and maintenance of software
related to a robust, scalable, distributed key/value store with cell-based
access control and customizable server-side
The text of the submitted report is below. Thanks everyone for the review.
(Note this is cut-n-paste from the ASF reported wizard so formatting may be
off)
Ed Coleman
--- report as filed ---
## Description:
The mission of Apache Accumulo is the creation and maintenance of software
related to a
the formatting will certainly change when this is
submitted.
Ed Coleman
begin report text
## Description:
The mission of Apache Accumulo is the creation and maintenance of software
related to a robust, scalable, distributed key/value store with cell-based
access control and customizable
The report has been submitted with Dan's edits - thanks everyone. For
reference, the report as filed is included below (note: formatting may be
off because of cut-n-paste differences from the Apache reporting tool.
Ed Coleman
--- begin submitted text ---
## Description:
The mission of A
final report when submitted.
Ed Coleman --- begin report text from report tool ---
## Description:
The mission of Apache Accumulo is the creation and maintenance of software
related to a robust, scalable, distributed key/value store with cell-based
access control and customizable server-side
te:
> >
> > > I'm fine with leaving it as-is, like I said, was just curious.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2024 at 3:33 PM Ed Coleman wrote:
> > >
> > > > I don't recall mentioning them at all. But the access library seems
> > &g
e I don't know / remember).
>
> On Fri, Apr 5, 2024 at 3:20 PM Ed Coleman wrote:
>
> > "Just curious why the Accumulo Access library mentions is in "Other".
> >
> > It was an arbitrary decision on my part. I wanted to make sure that it
> > was not
ed to "Other" because it's a
> sub-project (is that what would happen to testing, docker, etc.)?
>
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 10:34 AM Ed Coleman wrote:
>
> > The Accumulo community decided to draft the Apache community reports on the
> > Accumulo dev list – and this
Perhaps change the last sentence to one of the following:
>
> We continue to use the mailing list for official Apache business and it
> remains a channel
> for users to contact us.
>
> or
>
> We continue to use the mailing list for official Apache business and as a
&
m the reporting tool and may not reflect the
final formatting of the final report when submitted.
Ed Coleman
--- begin report text from report tool ---
## Description:
The mission of Apache Accumulo is the creation and maintenance of software
related to a robust, scalable, distributed key/value store with
an be achieved
with github.
We need a space to capture the redesign and whatever we select can be made to
work - I'm just wondering what provides the easiest forum to build a
collaborative space for the Accumulo community.
Ed Coleman
On 2023/02/28 16:35:31 dlmar...@comcast.net wrote:
>
Compactions work on splits / tablets so you will need to compact the tablet
that contains the row.
Tablets correspond to split points, and the rows between the split points are
allocated to a single tablet. During a compaction the tablet will process all
of the rows in that tablet and write a
I stared a general thread concerning topics for the next release. One major
topic raised was the state of replication and trying to determine if there is
consensus for a way forward. I stared this thread so that replication
discussions can occur in a single thread for continuity. From the gene
I stared a general thread concerning topics for the next release. One major
topic raised was what should the next version number be? I stared this thread
so that version discussions can occur in a single thread for continuity. From
the general email thread:
Version number: There have been su
issues that
you may have concerning the next release. I will start separate threads for the
version discussion and for replication. Please use this thread or create a new
thread if you want to raise other issues.
Ed Coleman
ht be good to try to get directly to the point in the
> description, since the board has to look at dozens of these each
> month.
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 5:10 PM Ed Coleman wrote:
> >
> > The Accumulo community has agreed to draft the quaterly reports using th
arily, since it applies to every
> ASF project, and delays the point. Have we had such a prefacing phrase
> before? It might be good to try to get directly to the point in the
> description, since the board has to look at dozens of these each
> month.
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 202
Report as submitted on 2021-01-13
Thanks everyone for the suggestions / comments.
Ed Coleman
--
## Description:
The mission of Apache Accumulo is the creation and maintenance of software
related to a robust, scalable, distributed key/value store with cell-based
access control and
This is the final draft that incorporates the comments received to date. I will
submit this version Tuesday evening unless there are objections or other
changes,
Ed Coleman
-
[DRAFT][REPORT] Apache Accumulo - January 2021
## Description:
The Apache Accumulo sorted, distributed key/value
/accumulo-website/pull/256.
Please let me know if you have any feedback and your thoughts on using PRs as
an approach for drafting these reports.
Some more detailed metrics are at
https://reporter.apache.org/wizard/statistics?accumulo, which appears to
require a committer login.
Ed Coleman
-1
https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/1692
-Original Message-
From: Mike Miller
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 11:53 AM
To: dev@accumulo.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.10.0-rc1 (attempt 2)
Accumulo Developers,
Please consider the following candidate for Apache Acc
+1
-Original Message-
From: Christopher
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2020 11:08 AM
To: accumulo-dev
Subject: [LAZY][VOTE] Rename the 1.9 branch to 1.10
Hi Accumulo devs,
I've heard from a few people that they are confused why we are developing in a
1.9 branch when we are working toward
I would like to raise the issue of releasing 1.10 in the near future. It
has been 16+ months since the last release. At this point I'd like to shoot
for a late August release unless additional blockers are identified, or
concerns raised.
There was some work done back in Jan/Feb timeframe and
+1
-Original Message-
From: Christopher
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2020 9:54 AM
To: accumulo-dev
Subject: [VOTE] "Manager" as new name for "master" service
Based on the feedback on
https://github.com/apache/accumulo/issues/1638 , the following two names have
taken a clear lead in popul
+1
Thanks for working this.
-Original Message-
From: Christopher
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2020 7:59 AM
To: accumulo-dev
Subject: [LAZY][VOTE] change default branch to 'main'
As a follow-up from our previous conversation on this issue, I have already
started a new branch named 'main'
Posting this to the dev list for those that may not follow github issues
closely and so that this has a wider circulation.
If anyone wants to chime in, there has been a list of candidate names for
renaming the Master process created as issue
https://github.com/apache/accumulo/issues/1638.
C
For processes, would Root be too confusing? We would then have rservers and
tservers which may be more descriptive of functionality.
This discussion is also going on the NiFi lists (and I assume elsewhere) One
thing that popped out is that we may want to avoid leader / follower. (Leader
is pr
Does the NiFi community have an established process or procedure that they
follow that we could copy as a guide? (https://hub.docker.com/r/apache/nifi/)
-Original Message-
From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org]
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2020 12:23 AM
To: accumulo-dev
Subject: Re:
This vote passes with 5 binding +1s (alerman, ctubbsii, etcoleman, mjwall,
mmiller), 1 +0 (kturner) and 1 -1 (busbey)
The original proposal:
:
The proposal - I would like to start the formal release process for a 1.10
version that would change the java language level to java 8. The release
would b
Sean - Thanks for your responses and sorry for the confusion - my fault
entirely that I didn't more thoroughly vet this with a discuss thread
before calling for the vote and not realizing that there was ambiguity in
the votes re majority / veto.
I'll work on closing the vote.
+1
Dave Marion raises a good point. With is proposal, the change would be in
the pom to allow java 8 language constructs with the 1.9 branch as it stand
today,
Currently the 1.9.x branch does not contain any code that is not
incompatible with java 7. The 1.10 release could be compiled with a java 7
make it easier to upgrade to Accumulo 2.y
On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 7:37 PM Ed Coleman wrote:
>
> As suggested in the LTS discussion ([LAZY][VOTE] A basic, but
> concrete, LTS proposal), I'm breaking this out to as a separate thread
> to keep the topic distinct.
>
>
> T
As suggested in the LTS discussion ([LAZY][VOTE] A basic, but concrete, LTS
proposal), I'm breaking this out to as a separate thread to keep the topic
distinct.
The proposal - I would like to start the formal release process for a 1.10
version that would change the java language level to java 8.
Another dimension to this discussion that I'd like to address is the
provision for a 1.10 version. In fact, I lean towards having 1.10
nominated as the pre-2.x LTS version instead of a 1.9.x. I am in favor of
the basic LTS proposal, but I think that additional accommodations to ease
the pre-2.x t
without any issues. There is some
additional testing I'd like to perform concerning blocking for available
tservers - but I know of no issues at this time.
Ed Coleman
-Original Message-
From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org]
Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2019 6:07 PM
To: acc
I think Christopher closed that - the monitor is not expected to be a
replacement for Prometheus / Graphina - but other's opinions may differ.
-Original Message-
From: d resnik [mailto:dresnik...@yahoo.com.INVALID]
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2019 8:32 PM
To: dev@accumulo.apache.org
Subject
+1
Verified published commit git sha matches
Verified binary and src tar signatures.
Build and verify passed without failures (-Psunny) on local machine
Ran on small cluster, 2 tservers and a master node, and performed some basic
checks with no issues seen.
- performed bulk ingest.
- scan of
+0
Just getting to this, and only have been able to do some cursory checks.
Because this is an alpha release I do not object moving forward. I did want to
document some issues that I seem to be having with some of the IT tests running
mvn verify.
These issues could be with my current set-up, o
es did not work for me -
assuming that because that they are in progress, they will be published when
the release is formalized, after voting completes, and is not a reason to not
accept this candidate for release.
Ed Coleman
-Original Message-
From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.
implications of semver
are clear, sometimes it seems that there is additional weight and additional
perceived risk when changing major versions, an alpha version preserves our
flexibility while still moving forward.
Ed Coleman
-Original Message-
From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb
prevent the release
of this candidate.
Aditionally, rc1 was installed on bare hardware and validated with bulk ingest
and some simple scans - did not have time to repeat with rc2.
Ed Coleman
-Original Message-
From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org]
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2018
correctly (issue #551).
I will try to do more once rc2 is available.
Ed Coleman
-Original Message-
From: Keith Turner [mailto:ke...@deenlo.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2018 5:24 PM
To: Accumulo Dev List
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.2-rc1
-1 because of the following bug I found
open source
communities. Our findings uncover new types of licensing bugs not addressed
in prior literature, and a detailed assessment of their implications.
The paper is available at:
http://www.christophervendome.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/ICSE18-Licensin
gBugsCRC.pdf
Ed Coleman
+1
-Original Message-
From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org]
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 3:50 AM
To: accumulo-dev
Subject: Re: [DRAFT][ANNOUNCE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.1 (Critical Bug Fixes)
If there is consensus, I could publish late Monday. I just want to make sure
folks are happ
(org.apache.accumulo.test.replication.UnorderedWorkAssignerReplicationIT)
- FastBulkImportIT.test:110
The timing issues are mentioned only for completeness are not a concern for me
in accepting this release.
Ed Coleman
-Original Message-
From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org]
Sent
+1
Thanks for the quick turnaround on this.
Ed Coleman
-Original Message-
From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org]
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2018 1:39 PM
To: accumulo-dev
Subject: Let's do a 1.9.1 release
Hi Devs,
I'd like to do a 1.9.1 release to fix the recently
+1 I verified the md5, sha1 and asc signatures of the artifacts and the git
commit sha1, the build passed mvn clean verify -Psunny, and I accept this as a
release of Accumulo 1.9.0, pending the successful outcome of cluster testing.
Ed Coleman
-Original Message-
From: Christopher
This is historical information from when I was running tests against 1.7.3, but
in case it helps with the current discussion. (File timestamps are last Feb /
March of 2107)
I was using local / openbox VM and spun up a small AWS instance. I never got
KerberosRenewalIT.testReadAndWriteThroug
+0 I defer to others.
-Original Message-
From: Keith Turner [mailto:ke...@deenlo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2018 12:53 PM
To: Accumulo Dev List
Subject: [VOTE] Switch to GitHub issues
Accumulo PMC,
Please vote on initiating the transition from JIRA to GitHub. The purpose of
this vo
For general discussion - Facebook recently (Oct 28, 2017) published a paper on
tracing: Canopy: An End-to-End Performance Tracing and Analysis System
(https://research.fb.com/publications/canopy-end-to-end-performance-tracing-at-scale/)
As a bonus, they referenced Accumulo and HTrace in section
.
The dates are just a starting point for discussion - if Keith has additional
fixes that we'd like to get in, but needs additional time that's fine with
me, I'm really just pushing for sooner rather than later.
Ed Coleman
different?
I'm not opposed to a change if there are clear, demonstrable benefits beyond
personal preferences - but I also have an affinity to continuity and
consistency.
Ed Coleman
-Original Message-
From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org]
Sent: Wednesday, February
t the immediate
issue and offer time to consider other alternatives.
Ed Coleman
-Original Message-
From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org]
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2017 11:36 PM
To: accumulo-dev
Subject: [DISCUSS] Moving away from Thrift
Accumulo Devs,
I think it's tim
Thanks - The delay was mainly due to my time constraints and I've also been
fighting getting sick.
There are some comments that need incorporated into the release notes which
I'll try to get wrapped up tonight or tomorrow.
Ed Coleman
-Original Message-
From: Christopher [ma
t the door :)
Keith Turner wrote:
> The release notes look good.
>
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Ed Coleman wrote:
>> I have completed a first pass of the release notes - they are
>> available at
>> https://github.com/EdColeman/accumulo/blob/1.7.3-release-not
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4496
Ed Coleman
-Original Message-
From: Ed Coleman [mailto:d...@etcoleman.com]
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 9:01 PM
To: dev@accumulo.apache.org
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.3-rc2 - vote closed (passed)
The vote to release 1.7.3.rc2 has
The vote to release 1.7.3.rc2 has met the voting criteria (+72 hours, at
least 3 +1 votes) and has passed. Vote results:
+1 - 3
0 - 0
-1 - 0
I will begin working on the release notes and other release artifacts
forthwith.
Ed Coleman
-Original Message-
From: Ed Coleman [mailto:d
this version
released, but I also would like it to be as correct as possible - so whatever
can facilitate meeting these two somewhat conflicting goals, +1 from me, and of
course, whatever is the will of the group.
Ed Coleman
-Original Message-
From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org]
Sorry, the formatting seemed to get lost. It was a pretty chart - had colors
and everything.
-Original Message-
From: Ed Coleman [mailto:d...@etcoleman.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2017 7:06 AM
To: dev@accumulo.apache.org
Subject: Intermittent IT failures - was RE: [VOTE] Accumulo
017 at 5:38 PM, Keith Turner < <mailto:ke...@deenlo.com>
> ke...@deenlo.com> wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > Did the following :
> >
> > * Was able to build Fluo against jars in staging repo.
> > * Sigs checkout for tarballs
> > * No diffs
Accumulo Developers,
Please consider the following candidate for Accumulo 1.7.3. This candidate
contains two changes from 1.7.3-rc1:
- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4600 - shell does
not fall back to accumulo-site.xml when on classpath.
- https://issues.
The vote for 1.7.3-rc1 fails. Waiting for
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4600 to be fixed / merged and
then will start rc2.
The results:
+1 - 0
0 - 0
-1 - 4
-Original Message-
From: Ed Coleman [mailto:d...@etcoleman.com]
Sent: Monday, March 06, 2017 7:11 AM
To
My keys show up at pgp.mit.edu
(https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0xFC4368E0864BCC36) Is there
something else I need to do?
I closed the staging repository this morning - and it is showing closed now -
has this resolved for you?
Ed Coleman
-Original Message-
Accumulo Developers,
Please consider the following candidate for Accumulo 1.7.3. (This branch is
based on the same commit as the pre-release rc0 test candidate, commit
c3a0d1d5e2f810ebcda346977009ab0fd1bd34f7) Release notes, java docs and other
non-code artifacts are still in-progress and not
I've run through the release process using:
./assemble/build.sh --create-release-candidate
The artifacts have been published and the branch pushed to the Accumulo
repository. This test release only contains the code for 1.7.3, other
artifacts (release notes, web pages,...) have not be added /
I've chatted with Mike Wall and
he gave me some pointers.
More of a warning and apologies up front. This is my first attempt at
creating a release, so expect the worst and hope for the best.
Ed Coleman
In case this helps:
Confirmed checksum.
Passed: mvn clean verify -Psunny
Running: mvn clean verify
Environment:
Maven 3.3.9
jdk -openjdk-1.8.0.212-0.b13.el7_3.x86_64
Centos 7 (3.10.0-514.6.1.el7.x86_64)
Ed Coleman
-Original Message-
From: Michael Wall [mailto:mjw...@gmail.com]
Sent
.1 is
released.
Ed Coleman
ot in progress and have been moved to from 1.8.1 to 1.8.2
also be moved to 1.7.4. This would leave just a few issues that are in
progress or have been already been merged (thanks to Keith Turner)
Ed Coleman
downloaded built artifact. Checksums
of scripts and packaged jars match. (Checksums of built artifact differ -
assuming this is I'm because building with openjdk-1.8.0_101)
[Pending update from Keith Turner - adding sampling info to release notes.]
Ed Coleman
-Original Message-
+1 to not release 1.8, instead release a 2.0
version of that code base with the additional change of requiring Java 8.
v/r
Ed Coleman
Josh wrote
-Original Message-
From: Dylan Hutchison [mailto:dhutc...@cs.washington.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 8:49 PM
To: Accumulo Dev List
S
+1
Verified git hash. (e5694cfa5ec3861e6f8f764e2b8477716e3072b9)
mvn clean verify -Psunny
passes all tests.
-Original Message-
From: Michael Wall [mailto:mjw...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2016 12:22 PM
To: dev@accumulo.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.8.0-rc2
Accumul
other considerations / requirements and
services that should be considered before any change is recommended.
Ed Coleman
org/repos/asf/accumulo into
1.6
Commit: b83f88caf758ee9561d5041cc8d6fac3e6a68f62
Then, the second push (forced) was to unwind these changes by rolling back to
967100dda. 967100dda was committed by Christopher on Friday 17 July. Hope this
helps reconstruct if anything was overwritten. Sorry
/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/server/client/HdfsZooInstance.java
0d7aaf1
test/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/test/NativeMapStressTest.java 72831d8
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/36186/diff/
Testing
---
passes
mvn verify -DskipITs
mvn package -P assemble
Thanks,
Ed Coleman
/accumulo/test/NativeMapStressTest.java 72831d8
Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/36186/diff/
Testing
---
passes
mvn verify -DskipITs
mvn package -P assemble
Thanks,
Ed Coleman
+1 for EOL of 1.5 with the release of 1.5.3
-Original Message-
From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org]
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 1:18 PM
To: Accumulo Dev List
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] EOL 1.5
So, at this point, I'm willing to do a 1.5.3 release and can start that today.
It seems
7;m really looking forward to working with all of you and thank you for
extending me committer status.
Ed Coleman
My current interests
-Original Message-
From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org]
Sent: Saturday, May 16, 2015 9:51 AM
To: Accumulo Dev List
Subject: Re: New committers
The basic issue was pointed out that the original - using just
e.getMessage() could cause problems because the log message is expecting a
format string, so if e.getMessage() had {} in the message it would be
interrupted for parameter replacement / expansion but there would be no
parameter.
The "{}
suggesting that it be removed - I just want to make
sure that I understand the other side effects and know our options.
Ed Coleman
d I'd like to see how it could be
leveraged.
And with a request for internationalized logging in ACCUMULO-2797, well slf4j
(http://www.slf4j.org/localization.html) seems like it would position us to
support that too.
Ed Coleman
On Tuesday, May 13, 2014 12:18 AM, William Slacum wrote:
&g
d I'd like to see how it could be
leveraged.
And with a request for internationalized logging in ACCUMULO-2797, well slf4j
(http://www.slf4j.org/localization.html) seems like it would position us to
support that too.
Ed Coleman
(sorry if this gets duplicated, but my first reply seems
plays out.
Ed Coleman
Arshak Navruzyan wrote:
Along these lines curious where and how monitor stores its stats currently. I
imagine some of it comes from !METADATA but guessing not all of it does (for
example the time series).
If there was a clean way to access the stats there is no shorta
I am willing to take another run at the Consistent Logging ticket,
ACCUMULO-1242, but I'd like to achieve a consensus on an approach before
starting.
The tl;dr version - I would like to split ACCUMULO-1242 into subtasks.
Target version would be 1.7.0 (or whatever it gets called, would not mind
d
something? (Thought I should ask before opening a ticket)
Ed Coleman
90 matches
Mail list logo
