I have one more commit for FLINK-6652. Chesnay gave it a look and I'm addressing the feedback right now.
2017-06-20 14:49 GMT+02:00 Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai <tzuli...@apache.org>: > FLINK-6921 and FLINK-6948 has been merged for 1.3.1. > RC2 is good to go on my side! > > Best, > Gordon > > > On 20 June 2017 at 8:44:33 PM, Timo Walther (twal...@apache.org) wrote: > > FLINK-6881 and FLINK-6896 are merged. The Table API is ready for a new RC. > > Timo > > Am 19.06.17 um 17:00 schrieb jincheng sun: > > Thanks @Timo! > > > > 2017-06-19 22:02 GMT+08:00 Timo Walther <twal...@apache.org>: > > > >> I'm working on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6896 and > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6881. I try to open a PR > for > >> both today. > >> > >> Timo > >> > >> > >> Am 19.06.17 um 14:54 schrieb Robert Metzger: > >> > >> Fabian and SunJincheng, it looks like we are cancelling the 1.3.1 RC1. > >>> So there is the opportunity to get the two mentioned JIRAs in. > >>> > >>> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 4:16 PM, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> I've closed my emails, so I didn't see your messages anymore Fabian. > >>>> The RC1 for 1.3.1 is out now. I personally think we should not cancel > it > >>>> because of these two issues. > >>>> If we find more stuff we can do it, but I would like to push out 1.3.1 > >>>> soon to make the ES5 connector and the fixes to the state descriptors > >>>> available. > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 11:22 AM, jincheng sun < > sunjincheng...@gmail.com > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hi @Robert, > >>>>> I agree with @Fabian. > >>>>> And thanks for review those PRs. @Fabian. > >>>>> > >>>>> Cheers, > >>>>> SunJincheng > >>>>> > >>>>> 2017-06-14 16:53 GMT+08:00 Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com>: > >>>>> > >>>>> I don't think that > >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6886 > >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6896 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> are blockers but it would be good to include them. > >>>>>> I'll try to review the PRs today and merge them. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Cheers, Fabian > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 2017-06-13 11:48 GMT+02:00 Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org>: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I've just merged the fix for this blocker (FLINK-6685). > >>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Aljoscha Krettek < > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> aljos...@apache.org> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> A quick Jira search reveals one blocker: > https://issues.apache.org/ > >>>>>>>> jira/browse/FLINK-6685?filter=12334772&jql=project%20%3D% > >>>>>>>> 20FLINK%20AND%20priority%20%3D%20Blocker%20AND% > 20resolution%20%3D% > >>>>>>>> 20Unresolved%20AND%20affectedVersion%20%3D%201.3.0 < > >>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6685?filter= > >>>>>>>> 12334772&jql=project%20=%20FLINK%20AND%20priority%20=% > >>>>>>>> 20Blocker%20AND%20resolution%20=%20Unresolved%20AND% > >>>>>>>> 20affectedVersion%20=%201.3.0> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 13. Jun 2017, at 10:12, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> I would like to include FLINK-6898 and FLINK-6900 in 1.3.1. > >>>>>>>>> They are related to the metric system, and limit the size of > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> individual > >>>>>>> metric name components > >>>>>>>>> as the default window operator names are so long they were > causing > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> issues with file-system based > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> storages because the components exceeded 255 characters. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> They both have open PRs and change 1 and 3 lines respectively, so > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> it's > >>>>>>> very fast to review. > >>>>>>>>> On 13.06.2017 09:33, jincheng sun wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Hi Robert, > >>>>>>>>>> From user mail-list I find 2 bugs as follows: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6886 > >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6896 > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure if they are as the release blocker. But I think is > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> better > >>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>> merged those two PR. into 1.3.1 release. > >>>>>>>>>> What do you think? @Fabian, @Timo, @Robert > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>> SunJincheng > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 2017-06-13 14:03 GMT+08:00 Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai < > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> tzuli...@apache.org > >>>>>> : > >>>>>>>> I’ve just merged the last blockers for 1.3.1. IMO, the release > >>>>>>>>>> process > >>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> 1.3.1 is ready for kick off. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On 8 June 2017 at 10:32:47 AM, Aljoscha Krettek ( > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> aljos...@apache.org > >>>>>>> ) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> Yes, there is a workaround, as mentioned in the other thread: > >>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> eb7e256146fbe069a4210e1690fac5 > >>>>>>> d3453208fab61515ab1a2f6bf7@%3Cuser.flink.apache.org%3E < > >>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> eb7e256146fbe069a4210e1690fac5 > >>>>>>> d3453208fab61515ab1a2f6bf7@%3Cuser.flink.apache.org%3E>. It’s > >>>>>>>>>> just a > >>>>>>> bit > >>>>>>>>> cumbersome but I agree that it’s not a blocker now. > >>>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>>> Aljoscha > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On 8. Jun 2017, at 09:47, Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> There should be an easy work-around for this problem. Start a > >>>>>>>>>>> standalone > >>>>>>>>> cluster and run the queries against this cluster. But I also > >>>>>>>>>>> see > >>>>>> that > >>>>>>>> it > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> might be annoying for users who used to do it differently. The > >>>>>>>>>>> basic > >>>>>>> question here should be whether we want the users to use the > >>>>>>>>>>>> LocalFlinkMiniCluster in a remote setting (running queries > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> against > >>>>>> it > >>>>>>>> from > >>>>>>>>>>>> a different process). > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>>>>>>> Till > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Aljoscha Krettek < > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> aljos...@apache.org > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> I would also like to raise another potential blocker: it’s > >>>>>>>>>>>> currently > >>>>>>>> not > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> easily possible for users to start a job in local mode in the > >>>>>>>>>>>> IDE > >>>>>> and to > >>>>>>>>> then interact with that cluster, say for experimenting with > >>>>>>>>>>>> queryable > >>>>>>>> state. At least one user walked into this problem already with > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>> 1.3.0 > >>>>>>>>> RC: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ > >>>>>>>>>>>> eb7e256146fbe069a4210e1690fac5 > >>>>>>>>> d3453208fab61515ab1a2f6bf7@%3Cuser.flink.apache.org%3E < > >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> eb7e256146fbe069a4210e1690fac5 > >>>>>>>> d3453208fab61515ab1a2f6bf7@%3Cuser.flink.apache.org%3E> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> The reasons I have so far analysed are: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> * the local flink cluster starts with HAServices that don’t > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> allow > >>>>>> external querying, by default. (Broadly spoken) > >>>>>>>>>>>>> * the queryable state server is not started in the local > flink > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> mini > >>>>>>> cluster anymore and it cannot be configured to do so easily > >>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think? > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Aljoscha > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7. Jun 2017, at 11:54, Robert Metzger < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> rmetz...@apache.org> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> From the list [1], not many of the JIRAs have been fixed. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think it would be nice to put the RC for 1.3.1 out this > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> week, > >>>>>> given > >>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> multiple users have complained about some issues in the > 1.3.0 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> release. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=labels%20%3D% > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 20flink-rel-1.3.1-blockers > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> tzuli...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> After an offline discussion with Till, we decided to not > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> include > >>>>>>> FLINK-6763 and FLINK-6764 as blockers for 1.3.1, and only > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> merge > >>>>>> them > >>>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>> 1.4.0 since they change serialization formats for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> checkpoints. > >>>>>> In turn, I’ve included https://issues.apache.org/ > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira/browse/FLINK-6804 > >>>>>>>>>>>> as > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a 1.3.1 blocker. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2 June 2017 at 5:27:18 PM, Nico Kruber ( > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> n...@data-artisans.com) > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> while fixing build issues - what about FLINK-6654? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, 2 June 2017 11:05:34 CEST Robert Metzger wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi devs, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would like to release Apache Flink 1.3.1 with the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> following > >>>>>> fixes: > >>>>>>>>> - FLINK-6812 Elasticsearch 5 release artifacts not > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> published > >>>>>> to > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Maven > >>>>>>>>> central > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - FLINK-6783 Wrongly extracted TypeInformations for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WindowedStream::aggregate > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - FLINK-6780 ExternalTableSource should add time > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attributes in > >>>>>> the > >>>>>>>> row > >>>>>>>>>>>> type > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - FLINK-6775 StateDescriptor cannot be shared by multiple > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> subtasks > >>>>>>>> - FLINK-6763 Inefficient PojoSerializerConfigSnapshot > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> serialization > >>>>>>>>> format > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - FLINK-6764 Deduplicate stateless TypeSerializers when > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> serializing > >>>>>>>>> composite TypeSerializers > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there anything else that we need to wait for before we > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vote > >>>>>> on > >>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> first > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RC? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Robert > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >
