We still have this issue as blocker https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-2747
I don’t see a fix for this yet, however. > On 22 Oct 2015, at 11:53, Maximilian Michels <m...@apache.org> wrote: > > Ah. Good catch! :) The job counter should not be limited by the size > of the job history. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-2206 > fixed that for the old web frontend but since we have a new one now... > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Vasiliki Kalavri > <vasilikikala...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Thanks! >> But shouldn't the "completed jobs" counter be updated regardless of the >> configuration value of how much history we store? >> >> On 22 October 2015 at 11:32, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> @Vasia: We cannot keep infinite history currently, because the history is >>> kept in memory. Should improve that in the future... >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Maximilian Michels <m...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> @Stephan: That's right, the detached mode is very useful for streaming >>>> programs. Let's see if we can merge Sachin's pull request to give more >>>> meaningful exceptions in case of user programs which are not >>>> compatible with the detached execution mode. >>>> >>>> @Vasia: That's a feature :) You can adjust the number of old jobs to >>>> be kept by setting 'jobmanager.web.history' (default is 5). >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Vasiliki Kalavri >>>> <vasilikikala...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I found an issue with the web interface. It only shows the last 5 >>>> finished >>>>> jobs and the "Jobs Finished" counter also goes up to 5. >>>>> I found FLINK-2206, but it seems that this was fixed for the old >>>> interface >>>>> and broken again in the new one? >>>>> Shall I open another issue or is there something I need to configure in >>>> the >>>>> new web interface and I haven't? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> -V. >>>>> >>>>> On 22 October 2015 at 11:20, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I am onto FLINK-2800 and FLINK-2888 >>>>>> >>>>>> I would not disable YARN detached mode, it is used quite a bit by >>>> streaming >>>>>> users and makes perfect sense for streaming jobs, which are always >>>> one-shot >>>>>> currently. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Maximilian Michels <m...@apache.org> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I had a gut feeling this wouldn't be the last RC :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I second Stephan, Ufuk, and Fabian. It's a good idea to start >>> testing >>>> the >>>>>>> release candidate. We might discover more issues on the way. In the >>>>>>> meantime, let's fix FLINK-2763 and FLINK-2800 and push those to the >>>>>>> release-0.10 branch. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Eager execution calls are not supported by the detached YARN >>> execution >>>>>>> mode. The Flink standalone cluster mode doesn't have a detached >>> mode. >>>>>>> Sachin was working on throwing a proper exception for programs that >>>> try >>>>>> to >>>>>>> submit a job which contains eager execution calls. In the course of >>>>>>> throwing a proper exception, he also added detached execution mode >>>>>> support >>>>>>> for the standalone cluster mode. The reason why eager execution >>>> doesn't >>>>>>> work with detached programs is that the client submits the first >>> Flink >>>>>> job >>>>>>> (call to execute/count/collect/print) to the cluster and then >>> returns >>>> an >>>>>>> empty ExecutionResult. This leads to error if the user program tries >>>> to >>>>>>> access the ExecutionResult. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sachin's pull request hasn't been merged in time for the release. I >>>> would >>>>>>> like Flink to support detached execution mode but I suggest to >>> disable >>>>>>> detached execution mode for YARN in this release. We can include a >>>> proper >>>>>>> support for the next release. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Sachin Goel < >>>> sachingoel0...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Not sure if it's a blocker, but the yarn detached mode is faulty >>> for >>>>>>>> interactive programs with eager execution calls. The most basic >>>>>> starting >>>>>>>> point for yarn, i.e. *bin/flink run -m yarn-cluster -yd -n <> >>>>>>>> examples/Wordcount.jar* fails in a bad way. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- Sachin Goel >>>>>>>> Computer Science, IIT Delhi >>>>>>>> m. +91-9871457685 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 3:57 AM, fhueske <fhue...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> +1 to that, Stephan. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I can help with FLINK-2763 or FLINK-2800. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> From: Stephan Ewen >>>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 0:02 >>>>>>>>> To: dev@flink.apache.org >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Flink 0.10.0 >>>> (release-0.10.0-rc0) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> From my side 2888 is a valid blocker. Aljoscha also found >>> another >>>>>>> blocker >>>>>>>>> bug, so this RC will need a few patches. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think for 2824 there was no consensus to what would actually >>> be >>>> the >>>>>>>>> desired behavior, which makes it a bad candidate for a release >>>>>> blocker. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I would try and fix FLINK-2763 and FLINK-2800 if possible, but >>> not >>>>>>> block >>>>>>>>> the release on that. They seem to be very corner case. Good to >>> fix >>>>>>> them, >>>>>>>>> but not blockers. Too many people are on the 0.10 SNAPSHOT right >>>> now >>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>> too many urgent fixes are in that people wait to be available >>> in a >>>>>>>> release. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> How about we start testing anyways, because I would expect us to >>>> find >>>>>>>> more >>>>>>>>> issues, and we save time if we do not create a new release >>>> candidate >>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>> each patch. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:44 PM, Flavio Pompermaier < >>>>>>>> pomperma...@okkam.it >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I would also point out that Flink-2763 and Flink-2800 could be >>>>>> worth >>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>> further investigations before this release >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>>>>> Flavio >>>>>>>>>> On 21 Oct 2015 23:33, "Gyula Fóra" <gyf...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Max for the effort, this is going to be huge :) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Unfortunately I have to say -1 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> FLINK-2888 and FLINK-2824 are blockers from my point of >>> view. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>>> Gyula >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Vasiliki Kalavri <vasilikikala...@gmail.com> ezt írta >>>> (időpont: >>>>>>>> 2015. >>>>>>>>>> okt. >>>>>>>>>>> 21., Sze, 20:07): >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Awesome! Thanks Max :)) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I have a couple of questions: >>>>>>>>>>>> - what about the blocker issue (according to the wiki) >>>>>>> FLINK-2747? >>>>>>>>>>>> - weren't we going to get rid of staging altogether? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>>>> -V. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 21 October 2015 at 19:54, Stephan Ewen < >>> se...@apache.org >>>>> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Super, thanks Max! >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> We should also bump the master to the next version then, >>>> to >>>>>>>>> separate >>>>>>>>>>> what >>>>>>>>>>>>> goes into release fixes and what goes into the next >>>>>> version... >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that going to be 1.0-SNAPSHOT? ;-) That is a separate >>>>>>> thread, >>>>>>>> I >>>>>>>>>>>> guess... >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 7:12 PM, Maximilian Michels < >>>>>>>>> m...@apache.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Release candidates have to be tested thoroughly. >>>>>> Therefore, I >>>>>>>>> would >>>>>>>>>>>> like >>>>>>>>>>>>>> everybody to take a look at the release page in the >>>> wiki: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/0.10+Release >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've compiled the checks into a document. I would like >>>>>>> everyone >>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>> assign >>>>>>>>>>>>>> one of the checks in the documents to test the release >>>>>>>> candidate: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TWCFj55xTyJjGYe8x9YEqmICgSvcexDPlbgP4CnLpLY/edit?usp=sharing >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 7:10 PM, Maximilian Michels < >>>>>>>>>> m...@apache.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear community, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The past months we have been working very hard to >>> push >>>>>>>> towards >>>>>>>>>>> 0.10. >>>>>>>>>>>> I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would like to propose the first release candidate. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> =================================== >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please vote on releasing the following candidate as >>>>>> Apache >>>>>>>>> Flink >>>>>>>>>>>>> version >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0.10.0: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The commit to be voted on: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> b697064b71b97e51703caae13660038949d41631 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Branch: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release-0.10.0-rc0 (see >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf/flink/?p=flink.git >>>>>>>> ) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The release artifacts to be voted on can be found >>> at: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~mxm/flink-0.10.0-rc0/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Release artifacts are signed with the key with >>>>>> fingerprint >>>>>>>>>>> C2909CBF: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/flink/KEYS >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The staging repository for this release can be found >>>> at: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheflink-1047 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache >>> Flink >>>>>>> 0.10.0. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The vote is open for the next 72 hours and passes >>> if a >>>>>>>> majority >>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>> at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> least three +1 PMC votes are cast. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The vote ends on Monday October 26, 2015. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Flink 0.10.0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because ... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> =================================== >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>
