There's still ongoing discussion on HDFS-4858 and I don't think we should hold up 2.3.0 for that. IMO we should target that for 2.3.1 or 2.4.0.
-- Aaron T. Myers Software Engineer, Cloudera On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com>wrote: > Sorry for the last minute request. > Can we add HDFS-4858 to the release, please? > It solves pretty important bug related to failover. > I can commit momentarily if there are no objections. > > Thanks, > --Konstantin > > > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Aaron T. Myers <a...@cloudera.com> wrote: > > > Just committed a fix for HDFS-5921 to branch-2.3. > > > > Fire away. > > > > -- > > Aaron T. Myers > > Software Engineer, Cloudera > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Aaron T. Myers <a...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > > > > > OK. I think I should be able to get it in by 6pm PT, thanks to a quick > +1 > > > from Andrew, but certainly don't let it hold up the train if for some > > > reason it takes longer than that. > > > > > > -- > > > Aaron T. Myers > > > Software Engineer, Cloudera > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 12:04 PM, Arun C Murthy <a...@hortonworks.com > > >wrote: > > > > > >> Looks like we are down to 0 blockers; I'll create rc0 tonight. > > >> > > >> ATM - Your call, you have until 6pm tonight to get this in. > > >> > > >> thanks, > > >> Arun > > >> > > >> On Feb 10, 2014, at 11:44 AM, "Aaron T. Myers" <a...@cloudera.com> > > wrote: > > >> > > >> > I just filed an issue for the fact that browsing the FS from the NN > is > > >> > broken if you have a directory with the sticky bit set: > > >> > > > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-5921 > > >> > > > >> > I didn't set this to be targeted for 2.3 because it doesn't seem > like > > a > > >> > _blocker_ to me, but if we're not going to get 2.3 out today anyway, > > I'd > > >> > like to put this in. It's a small fix, and since many people have > the > > >> > sticky bit set on /tmp, they won't be able to browse any of the FS > > >> > hierarchy from the NN without this fix. > > >> > > > >> > -- > > >> > Aaron T. Myers > > >> > Software Engineer, Cloudera > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli < > > >> vino...@apache.org > > >> >> wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> Heres what I've done: > > >> >> - Reverted YARN-1493,YARN-1490,YARN-1041, > > >> >> YARN-1166,YARN-1566,YARN-1689,YARN-1661 from branch-2.3. > > >> >> - Updated YARN's CHANGES.txt in trunk, branch-2 and branch-2.3. > > >> >> - Updated these JIRAs to have 2.4 as the fix-version. > > >> >> - Compiled branch-2.3. > > >> >> > > >> >> Let me know if you run into any issues caused by this revert. > > >> >> > > >> >> Thanks, > > >> >> +Vinod > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 11:41 AM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli < > > >> >> vino...@apache.org > > >> >>> wrote: > > >> >> > > >> >>> Haven't heard back from Jian. Reverting the set from branch-2.3 > > >> (only). > > >> >> Tx > > >> >>> for the offline list. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> +Vinod > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Alejandro Abdelnur < > > t...@cloudera.com > > >> >>> wrote: > > >> >>> > > >> >>>> Vinod, I have the patches to revert most of the JIRAs, the first > > >> batch, > > >> >>>> I'll send them off line to you. > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> Thanks. > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 8:56 PM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli > > >> >>>> <vino...@apache.org>wrote: > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> Thanks. please post your findings, Jian wrote this part of the > > code > > >> >> and > > >> >>>>> between him/me, we can take care of those issues. > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> +1 for going ahead with the revert on branch-2.3. I'll go do > that > > >> >>>> tomorrow > > >> >>>>> morning unless I hear otherwise from Jian. > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> Thanks, > > >> >>>>> +Vinod > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> On Feb 6, 2014, at 8:28 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur < > t...@cloudera.com > > > > > >> >>>> wrote: > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>>> Hi Vinod, > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> Nothing confidential, > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> * With umanaged AMs I'm seeing the trace I've posted a couple > of > > >> >> days > > >> >>>> ago > > >> >>>>>> in YARN-1577 ( > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >> > > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-1577?focusedCommentId=13891853&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13891853 > > >> >>>>>> ). > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> * Also, Robert has been digging in Oozie testcases > > failing/getting > > >> >>>> suck > > >> >>>>>> with several token renewer threads, this failures happened > > >> >>>> consistently > > >> >>>>> at > > >> >>>>>> different places around the same testcases (like some file > > >> >> descriptors > > >> >>>>>> leaking out), reverting YARN-1490 fixes the problem. The > > potential > > >> >>>> issue > > >> >>>>>> with this is that a long running client (oozie) my run into > this > > >> >>>>> situation > > >> >>>>>> thus becoming unstable. > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> *Robert,* mind posting to YARN-1490 the jvm thread dump at the > > time > > >> >> of > > >> >>>>> test > > >> >>>>>> hanging? > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> After YARN-1493 & YARN-1490 we have a couple of JIRAs trying to > > fix > > >> >>>>> issues > > >> >>>>>> introduced by them, and we still didn't get them right. > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> Because this, the improvements driven by YARN-1493 & YARN-1490 > > seem > > >> >>>> that > > >> >>>>>> require more work before being stable. > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> IMO, being conservative, we should do 2.3 without them and roll > > >> them > > >> >>>> with > > >> >>>>>> 2.4. If we want to do regular releases we will have to make > this > > >> >> kind > > >> >>>> of > > >> >>>>>> calls, else we will start dragging the releases. > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> Sounds like a plan? > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> Thanks. > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli > > >> >>>>>> <vino...@apache.org>wrote: > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>> Hey > > >> >>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>> I am not against removing them from 2.3 if that is helpful for > > >> >>>> progress. > > >> >>>>>>> But I want to understand what the issues are before we make > that > > >> >>>>> decision. > > >> >>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>> There is the issue with unmanaged AM that is clearly known > and I > > >> >> was > > >> >>>>>>> thinking of coming to the past two days, but couldn't. What is > > >> this > > >> >>>> new > > >> >>>>>>> issue that we (confidently?) pinned down to YARN-1490? > > >> >>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>> Thanks > > >> >>>>>>> +Vinod > > >> >>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>> On Feb 6, 2014, at 5:07 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur < > > t...@cloudera.com > > >> > > > >> >>>>> wrote: > > >> >>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> Thanks Robert, > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> All, > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> So it seems that YARN-1493 and YARN-1490 are introducing > > serious > > >> >>>>>>>> regressions. > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> I would propose to revert them and the follow up JIRAs from > the > > >> >> 2.3 > > >> >>>>>>> branch > > >> >>>>>>>> and keep working on them on trunk/branch-2 until the are > stable > > >> (I > > >> >>>>> would > > >> >>>>>>>> even prefer reverting them from branch-2 not to block a 2.4 > if > > >> >> they > > >> >>>> are > > >> >>>>>>> not > > >> >>>>>>>> ready in time). > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> As I've mentioned before, the list of JIRAs to revert were: > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> YARN-1493 > > >> >>>>>>>> YARN-1490 > > >> >>>>>>>> YARN-1166 > > >> >>>>>>>> YARN-1041 > > >> >>>>>>>> YARN-1566 > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> Plus 2 additional JIRAs committed since my email on this > issue > > 2 > > >> >>>> days > > >> >>>>>>> ago: > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> *YARN-1661 > > >> >>>>>>>> *YARN-1689 (not sure if this JIRA is related in functionality > > to > > >> >> the > > >> >>>>>>>> previous ones but it is creating conflicts). > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> I think we should hold on continuing work on top of something > > >> that > > >> >>>> is > > >> >>>>>>>> broken until the broken stuff is fixed. > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> Quoting Arun, "Committers - Henceforth, please use extreme > > >> caution > > >> >>>>> while > > >> >>>>>>>> committing to branch-2.3. Please commit *only* blockers to > > 2.3." > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> YARN-1661 & YARN-1689 are not blockers. > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> Unless there are objections, I'll revert all these JIRAs from > > >> >>>>> branch-2.3 > > >> >>>>>>>> tomorrow around noon and I'll update fixedVersion in the > JIRAs. > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> I'm inclined to revert them from branch-2 as well. > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> Thoughts? > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> Thanks. > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Robert Kanter < > > >> >> rkan...@cloudera.com > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>>>> wrote: > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>> I think we should revert YARN-1490 from Hadoop 2.3 branch. > I > > >> >>>> think it > > >> >>>>>>> was > > >> >>>>>>>>> causing some strange behavior in the Oozie unit tests: > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>> Basically, we use a single MiniMRCluster and MiniDFSCluster > > >> >> across > > >> >>>> all > > >> >>>>>>> unit > > >> >>>>>>>>> tests in a module. With YARN-1490 we saw that, regardless > of > > >> >> test > > >> >>>>>>> order, > > >> >>>>>>>>> the last few tests would timeout waiting for an MR job to > > >> finish; > > >> >>>> on > > >> >>>>>>> slower > > >> >>>>>>>>> machines, the entire test suite would timeout. Through some > > >> >>>> digging, > > >> >>>>> I > > >> >>>>>>>>> found that we were getting a ton of "Connection refused" > > >> >>>> Exceptions on > > >> >>>>>>>>> LeaseRenewer talking to the NN and a few on the AM talking > to > > >> the > > >> >>>> RM. > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>> After a bunch of investigation, I found that the problem > went > > >> >> away > > >> >>>>> once > > >> >>>>>>>>> YARN-1490 was removed. Though I couldn't figure out the > exact > > >> >>>>> problem. > > >> >>>>>>>>> Even though this occurred in unit tests, it does make me > > >> >> concerned > > >> >>>>> that > > >> >>>>>>> it > > >> >>>>>>>>> could indicate some bigger issue in a long-running real > > cluster > > >> >>>> (where > > >> >>>>>>>>> everything isn't running on the same machine) that we > haven't > > >> >> seen > > >> >>>>> yet. > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Karthik Kambatla < > > >> >>>> ka...@cloudera.com> > > >> >>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> I have marked MAPREDUCE-5744 a blocker for 2.3. Committing > it > > >> >>>>> shortly. > > >> >>>>>>>>> Will > > >> >>>>>>>>>> pull it out of branch-2.3 if anyone objects. > > >> >>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Arpit Agarwal < > > >> >>>>>>> aagar...@hortonworks.com > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >> >>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Merged HADOOP-10273 to branch-2.3 as r1565456. > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Arpit Agarwal < > > >> >>>>>>>>> aagar...@hortonworks.com > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> IMO HADOOP-10273 (Fix 'mvn site') should be included in > > 2.3. > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> I will merge it to branch-2.3 tomorrow PST if no one > > >> >> disagrees. > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur < > > >> >>>>>>>>> t...@cloudera.com > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> IMO YARN-1577 is a blocker, it is breaking unmanaged AMs > > in > > >> a > > >> >>>> very > > >> >>>>>>>>> odd > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ways > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> (to the point it seems un-deterministic). > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd say eiher YARN-1577 is fixed or we revert > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> YARN-1493/YARN-1490/YARN-1166/YARN-1041/YARN-1566 > (almost > > >> >> clean > > >> >>>>>>>>>> reverts) > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> from Hadoop 2.3 branch before doing the release. > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I've verified that after reverting those JIRAs things > work > > >> >> fine > > >> >>>>> with > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> unmanaged AMs. > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks. > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Arun C Murthy < > > >> >>>>> a...@hortonworks.com > > >> >>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I punted YARN-1444 to 2.4 since it's a long-standing > > issue. > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jian is away and I don't see YARN-1577 & YARN-1206 > making > > >> >> much > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> progress > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> till he is back; so I'm inclined to push both to 2.4 > too. > > >> >> Any > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> objections? > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Looks like Daryn has both HADOOP-10301 & HDFS-4564 > > covered. > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Overall, I'll try get this out in next couple of days > if > > we > > >> >>>> can > > >> >>>>>>>>>> clear > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> list. > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks, > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Arun > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 3, 2014, at 12:14 PM, Arun C Murthy < > > >> >>>> a...@hortonworks.com> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An update. Per > > >> https://s.apache.org/hadoop-2.3.0-blockerswe > > >> >>>>>>>>> are > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> now > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> down to 5 blockers: 1 Common, 1 HDFS, 3 YARN. > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Daryn (thanks!) has both the non-YARN covered. Vinod > is > > >> >>>> helping > > >> >>>>>>>>>> out > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> with > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the YARN ones. > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks, > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Arun > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Arun C. Murthy > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hortonworks Inc. > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hortonworks.com/ > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the > > >> >>>> individual or > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> entity to > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that > is > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> confidential, > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable > > law. > > >> >> If > > >> >>>>> the > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> reader > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are > > >> >> hereby > > >> >>>>>>>>>> notified > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> that > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, > > >> >>>> disclosure or > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly > prohibited. > > If > > >> >>>> you > > >> >>>>>>>>> have > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> received this communication in error, please contact > the > > >> >>>> sender > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> immediately > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You. > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alejandro > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the > > individual > > >> >> or > > >> >>>>>>>>> entity > > >> >>>>>>>>>> to > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is > > >> >>>>>>> confidential, > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable > law. > > If > > >> >>>> the > > >> >>>>>>>>> reader > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are > > hereby > > >> >>>>> notified > > >> >>>>>>>>>> that > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, > > disclosure > > >> >> or > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. > If > > >> you > > >> >>>> have > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> received this communication in error, please contact the > > >> sender > > >> >>>>>>>>>> immediately > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You. > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>>> -- > > >> >>>>>>>> Alejandro > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>>> -- > > >> >>>>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > > >> >>>>>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual > > or > > >> >>>>> entity to > > >> >>>>>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is > > >> >>>> confidential, > > >> >>>>>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If > > the > > >> >>>>> reader > > >> >>>>>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby > > >> >>>> notified > > >> >>>>> that > > >> >>>>>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure > > or > > >> >>>>>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If > you > > >> >> have > > >> >>>>>>> received this communication in error, please contact the > sender > > >> >>>>> immediately > > >> >>>>>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You. > > >> >>>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> -- > > >> >>>>>> Alejandro > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> -- > > >> >>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > > >> >>>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual > or > > >> >>>> entity to > > >> >>>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is > > >> >> confidential, > > >> >>>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If > the > > >> >>>> reader > > >> >>>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby > > >> notified > > >> >>>> that > > >> >>>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure > or > > >> >>>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you > > have > > >> >>>>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender > > >> >>>> immediately > > >> >>>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You. > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> -- > > >> >>>> Alejandro > > >> >>>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >> > > >> >> -- > > >> >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > > >> >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or > > >> entity to > > >> >> which it is addressed and may contain information that is > > confidential, > > >> >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the > > >> reader > > >> >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby > > notified > > >> that > > >> >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or > > >> >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you > have > > >> >> received this communication in error, please contact the sender > > >> immediately > > >> >> and delete it from your system. Thank You. > > >> >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Arun C. Murthy > > >> Hortonworks Inc. > > >> http://hortonworks.com/ > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > > >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or > entity > > >> to > > >> which it is addressed and may contain information that is > confidential, > > >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the > > reader > > >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified > > >> that > > >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or > > >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have > > >> received this communication in error, please contact the sender > > >> immediately > > >> and delete it from your system. Thank You. > > >> > > > > > > > > >
