Vinod, Thank you for taking care of this. I've checked the list of changes. As a result, I agree that we don't have enough time to backport these changes into 2.7.2 by this weekend. For a fast move, it's better suggestion to me to backport these tickets into 2.7.3.
Best, - Tsuyoshi On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 2:19 AM, Vinod Vavilapalli <vino...@hortonworks.com> wrote: > Tsuyoshi / Wangda / Naga, > > This looks too big of a list to me if we have to cut an RC by this weekend > per my plan. > > I’d suggest a fast move on things you think are low risk enough and punt > everything else for next release. > > Thanks > +Vinod > >> On Oct 28, 2015, at 3:08 AM, Naganarasimha G R (Naga) >> <garlanaganarasi...@huawei.com> wrote: >> >> Thanks Tsuyoshi, >> If required even i can pitch in :) >> Additional to this we added the support in Mapreduce for labels in >> MAPREDUCE-6304, >> >> Regards, >> + Naga >> ________________________________________ >> From: Tsuyoshi Ozawa [oz...@apache.org] >> Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2015 14:28 >> To: yarn-...@hadoop.apache.org >> Cc: hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org; common-...@hadoop.apache.org; Vinod Kumar >> Vavilapalli; Wangda tan >> Subject: Re: 2.7.2 release plan >> >> Thank you for reporting, Naganarasimha. >> Vinod and Wangda, I will help you to backport these changes. >> >> Best, >> - Tsuyoshi >> >> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Naganarasimha G R (Naga) >> <garlanaganarasi...@huawei.com> wrote: >>> Hi Vinod, & Wangda >>> >>> I think it would be good to backport, following jira's related to >>> NodeLabels as it will improve debug ability and usability of NodeLabels >>> -------------------------------- >>> Key Summary >>> -------------------------------- >>> YARN-4215 YARN-2492 RMNodeLabels Manager Need to verify and replace >>> node labels for the only modified Node Label Mappings in the request >>> YARN-4162 YARN-2492 CapacityScheduler: Add resource usage by >>> partition and queue capacity by partition to REST API >>> YARN-4140 YARN-2492 RM container allocation delayed incase of app >>> submitted to Nodelabel partition >>> YARN-3717 YARN-2492 Expose app/am/queue's node-label-expression to RM >>> web UI / CLI / REST-API >>> YARN-3647 YARN-2492 RMWebServices api's should use updated api from >>> CommonNodeLabelsManager to get NodeLabel object >>> YARN-3593 YARN-2492 Add label-type and Improve "DEFAULT_PARTITION" in >>> Node Labels Page >>> YARN-3583 YARN-2492 Support of NodeLabel object instead of plain >>> String in YarnClient side. >>> YARN-3581 YARN-2492 Deprecate -directlyAccessNodeLabelStore in >>> RMAdminCLI >>> YARN-3579 YARN-2492 CommonNodeLabelsManager should support NodeLabel >>> instead of string label name when getting node-to-label/label-to-label >>> mappings >>> YARN-3565 YARN-2492 NodeHeartbeatRequest/RegisterNodeManagerRequest >>> should use NodeLabel object instead of String >>> YARN-3521 YARN-2492 Support return structured NodeLabel objects in >>> REST API >>> YARN-3362 YARN-2492 Add node label usage in RM CapacityScheduler web >>> UI >>> YARN-3326 YARN-2492 Support RESTful API for getLabelsToNodes >>> YARN-3216 YARN-2492 Max-AM-Resource-Percentage should respect node >>> labels >>> YARN-3136 YARN-3091 getTransferredContainers can be a bottleneck >>> during AM registration >>> >>> Please inform if any support is required to backport them to 2.7.2 >>> >>> Regards, >>> + Naga >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: Kihwal Lee [kih...@yahoo-inc.com.INVALID] >>> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 20:42 >>> To: hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org; common-...@hadoop.apache.org >>> Cc: Chris Nauroth; yarn-...@hadoop.apache.org; >>> mapreduce-...@hadoop.apache.org; Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli; Ming Ma >>> Subject: Re: 2.7.2 release plan >>> >>> I think we need HDFS-8950 and HDFS-7725 in 2.7.2.It should be easy to >>> backport/cherry-pick HDFS-7725. For HDFS-8950, it will be nice if Ming can >>> chime in. >>> Kihwal >>> >>> From: Tsuyoshi Ozawa <oz...@apache.org> >>> To: "common-...@hadoop.apache.org" <common-...@hadoop.apache.org> >>> Cc: Chris Nauroth <cnaur...@hortonworks.com>; "yarn-...@hadoop.apache.org" >>> <yarn-...@hadoop.apache.org>; "hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org" >>> <hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org>; "mapreduce-...@hadoop.apache.org" >>> <mapreduce-...@hadoop.apache.org>; Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli >>> <vino...@apache.org> >>> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 2:39 AM >>> Subject: Re: 2.7.2 release plan >>> >>> Vinod and Chris, >>> >>> Thanks for your reply. I'll do also backport not only bug fixes but >>> also documentations(I think 2.7.2 includes them). It helps users a lot. >>> >>> Best, >>> - Tsuyoshi >>> >>> On Tuesday, 27 October 2015, Vinod Vavilapalli <vino...@hortonworks.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> +1. >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> +Vinod >>>> >>>>> On Jul 16, 2015, at 8:18 AM, Chris Nauroth <cnaur...@hortonworks.com >>>> <javascript:;>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I'd be comfortable with inclusion of any doc-only patch in minor >>>> releases. >>>>> There is a lot of value to end users in pushing documentation fixes as >>>>> quickly as possible, and they don't bear the same risk of regressions or >>>>> incompatibilities as code changes. >>>>> >>>>> --Chris Nauroth >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 7/16/15, 12:38 AM, "Tsuyoshi Ozawa" <oz...@apache.org <javascript:;>> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> thank you for starting the discussion about 2.7.2 release. >>>>>> >>>>>>> The focus obviously is to have blocker issues [2], bug-fixes and *no* >>>>>> features / improvements. >>>>>> >>>>>> I've committed YARN-3170, which is an improvement of documentation. I >>>>>> thought documentation pages which can be fit into branch-2.7 can be >>>>>> included easily. Should I revert it? >>>>>> >>>>>>>> I need help from all committers in automatically >>>>>> merging in any patch that fits the above criterion into 2.7.2 instead of >>>>>> only on trunk or 2.8. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sure, I'll try my best. >>>>>> >>>>>>> That way we can include not only blocker but also critical bug fixes to >>>>>>> 2.7.2 release. >>>>>> >>>>>> As Vinod mentioned, we should also apply major bug fixes into >>>> branch-2.7. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> - Tsuyoshi >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Akira AJISAKA >>>>>> <ajisa...@oss.nttdata.co.jp <javascript:;>> wrote: >>> >>> >>>>>>> Thanks Vinod for starting 2.7.2 release plan. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The focus obviously is to have blocker issues [2], bug-fixes and *no* >>>>>>>> features / improvements. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Can we adopt the plan as Karthik mentioned in "Additional maintenance >>>>>>> releases for Hadoop 2.y versions" thread? That way we can include not >>>>>>> only >>>>>>> blocker but also critical bug fixes to 2.7.2 release. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In addition, branch-2.7 is a special case. (2.7.1 is the first stable >>>>>>> release) Therefore I'm thinking we can include major bug fixes as well. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> Akira >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 7/16/15 04:13, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks everyone for the push on 2.7.1! Branch-2.7 is now open for >>>>>>>> commits >>>>>>>> to a 2.7.2 release. JIRA also now has a 2.7.2 version for all the >>>>>>>> sub-projects. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Continuing the previous 2.7.1 thread on steady maintenance releases >>>>>>>> [1], >>>>>>>> we >>>>>>>> should follow up 2.7.1 with a 2.7.2 within 4 weeks. Earlier I tried a >>>>>>>> 2-3 >>>>>>>> week cycle for 2.7.1, but it seems to be impractical given the >>>>>>>> community >>>>>>>> size. So, I propose we target a release by the end for 4 weeks from >>>>>>>> now, >>>>>>>> starting the release close-down within 2-3 weeks. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The focus obviously is to have blocker issues [2], bug-fixes and *no* >>>>>>>> features / improvements. I need help from all committers in >>>>>>>> automatically >>>>>>>> merging in any patch that fits the above criterion into 2.7.2 instead >>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>> only on trunk or 2.8. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +Vinod >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [1] A 2.7.1 release to follow up 2.7.0 >>>>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/zwzze6cqqgwq4rmw >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [2] 2.7.2 release blockers: >>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12332867 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >
