I've opened BEAM-6228 for the website build issue-- thanks for noting it Kenn.
On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 8:39 AM Kenneth Knowles <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 (binding) > > A new feature request (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-6212) > had been filed against 2.9.0 release ( > https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/BEAM/versions/12344258). I moved > it to 2.10.0. > > I additionally built [some targets in] the source release. The website > build does not work since it apparently depends on having a git repo > defined. We should fix that but no reason to block the release. > > Kenn > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 4:54 PM Andrew Pilloud <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> +1 >> >> Turns out we broke DOUBLE on purpose. Updated the demo to use DECIMAL and >> it doesn't hard fail. This is a docs bug. >> >> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 3:55 PM Scott Wegner <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> I verified the Java examples succeed on DirectRunner. >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 3:30 PM Chamikara Jayalath <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks Andrew. Please make this a blocker and -1 the thread if you >>>> think we need a new RC. >>>> >>>> - Cham >>>> >>>> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 3:27 PM Andrew Pilloud <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I was just running the Beam SQL demo. I found one query fails with >>>>> "the keyCoder of a GroupByKey must be deterministic" and another just >>>>> hangs. I opened an issue: >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-6224 Not sure if this >>>>> calls for canceling the release or just a release note (SQL is still >>>>> experimental). I'm continuing to track down the root cause, but am tied up >>>>> with the Beam Meetup in SFO today. >>>>> >>>>> Andrew >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 3:32 PM Ruoyun Huang <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> +1, Looking forward to the release! >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 11:09 AM Chamikara Jayalath < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi All, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I ran Beam RC verification script [1] and updated the validation >>>>>>> spreadsheet [2]. I think the current release candidate looks good. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So +1 for the release. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Cham >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/master/release/src/main/scripts/run_rc_validation.sh >>>>>>> [2] >>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qk-N5vjXvbcEk68GjbkSZTR8AGqyNUM-oLFo_ZXBpJw/edit#gid=2053422529 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 7:19 AM Ismaël Mejía <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Looking at the dates on the Spark runner git log there was a PR >>>>>>>> merged to change Spark translation from classes to URNs. I cannot see >>>>>>>> how >>>>>>>> this can impact performance. Looking at the other queries in the >>>>>>>> dashboards, there seems to be a great variability in the executions of >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> Spark runner to the point of feeling we don't have guarantees anymore. >>>>>>>> I >>>>>>>> wonder if this was because of other loads shared in the server(s), or >>>>>>>> because our sample is too small for the standard deviation. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I would proceed with the release, the real question is if we can >>>>>>>> somehow constraint the execution of this tests to have a more >>>>>>>> consistent >>>>>>>> output. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 4:10 PM Etienne Chauchot < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>> Regarding query7 in spark: >>>>>>>>> - there doesn't seem to be a functional regression: query passes >>>>>>>>> and output size is still the same >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - Also the performance degradation seems to be only on spark, the >>>>>>>>> other runners do not seem to suffer from it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - performance degradation seems to be constant from 11/12 so we >>>>>>>>> can eliminate temporary load on the jenkins server that would generate >>>>>>>>> delays in Max transform. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> => query7 uses Max transform, fanout and side inputs, has one of >>>>>>>>> these parts recently (11/12/18) changed in spark? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Etienne >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Le jeudi 06 décembre 2018 à 21:32 -0800, Chamikara Jayalath a >>>>>>>>> écrit : >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Udi or anybody else who is familiar about Nexmark, please -1 the >>>>>>>>> vote thread if you think this particular performance regression for >>>>>>>>> Spark/Direct runners is a blocker. Otherwise I think we can continue >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> vote. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>> Cham >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 6:19 PM Chamikara Jayalath < >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Are either of these regressions due to known issues ? If not >>>>>>>>> should they be considered release blockers ? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>> Cham >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 6:11 PM Udi Meiri <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> For DirectRunner there are regressions in query 7 sql direct >>>>>>>>> runner batch mode >>>>>>>>> <https://apache-beam-testing.appspot.com/explore?dashboard=5084698770407424&widget=732741424&container=411089194> >>>>>>>>> (2x) >>>>>>>>> and streaming mode (5x). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 5:59 PM Udi Meiri <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I see a regression for query 7 spark runner batch mode >>>>>>>>> <https://apache-beam-testing.appspot.com/explore?dashboard=5138380291571712&widget=1782465104&container=462502368> >>>>>>>>> on >>>>>>>>> about 2018-11-13. >>>>>>>>> [image: image.png] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 2:46 AM Chamikara Jayalath < >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi everyone, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the version >>>>>>>>> 2.9.0, as follows: >>>>>>>>> [ ] +1, Approve the release >>>>>>>>> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific >>>>>>>>> comments) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The complete staging area is available for your review, which >>>>>>>>> includes: >>>>>>>>> * JIRA release notes [1], >>>>>>>>> * the official Apache source release to be deployed to >>>>>>>>> dist.apache.org [2], which is signed with the key with >>>>>>>>> fingerprint EEAC70DF3D0BC23B [3], >>>>>>>>> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4], >>>>>>>>> * source code tag "v2.9.0-RC1" [5], >>>>>>>>> * website pull request listing the release [6] and publishing the >>>>>>>>> API reference manual [7]. >>>>>>>>> * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to >>>>>>>>> the dist.apache.org [2]. >>>>>>>>> * Validation sheet with a tab for 2.9.0 release to help with >>>>>>>>> validation [7]. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by >>>>>>>>> majority approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>> Cham >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12344258 >>>>>>>>> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.9.0/ >>>>>>>>> [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS >>>>>>>>> [4] >>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1054/ >>>>>>>>> [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.9.0-RC1 >>>>>>>>> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7215 >>>>>>>>> [7] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/584 >>>>>>>>> [8] >>>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qk-N5vjXvbcEk68GjbkSZTR8AGqyNUM-oLFo_ZXBpJw/edit#gid=2053422529 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> ================ >>>>>> Ruoyun Huang >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Got feedback? tinyurl.com/swegner-feedback >>> >> -- Got feedback? tinyurl.com/swegner-feedback
