Build failed in Jenkins: Hadoop-Common-trunk #1033

See Changes: [zjshen] YARN-1628. Fixed the test failure in TestContainerManagerSecurity. Contributed by Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli. [zjshen] MAPREDUCE-5743. Fixed the test failure in TestRMContainerAllocator. Contributed by Vinod Ku

[jira] [Created] (HADOOP-10328) loadGenerator exit code is not reliable

Arpit Gupta created HADOOP-10328: Summary: loadGenerator exit code is not reliable Key: HADOOP-10328 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10328 Project: Hadoop Common Issue Type:

[jira] [Created] (HADOOP-10329) Fully qualified URIs are inconsistant and sometimes break in hadoop conf files

Travis Thompson created HADOOP-10329: Summary: Fully qualified URIs are inconsistant and sometimes break in hadoop conf files Key: HADOOP-10329 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10329

Re: Re-swizzle 2.3

Merged HADOOP-10273 to branch-2.3 as r1565456. On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Arpit Agarwal 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 wrote: >

[jira] [Reopened] (HADOOP-10112) har file listing doesn't work with wild card

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10112?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Jason Lowe reopened HADOOP-10112: - Reopening this as it's also problem in 0.23 that our customers would like fixed. Posting a backpo

Re: Re-swizzle 2.3

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 wrote: > Merged HADOOP-10273 to branch-2.3 as r1565456. > > > On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Arpit Agarwal >wrote: > > > IMO HA

Re: Re-swizzle 2.3

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

[jira] [Created] (HADOOP-10330) TestFrameDecoder fails if it cannot bind port 12345

Arpit Agarwal created HADOOP-10330: -- Summary: TestFrameDecoder fails if it cannot bind port 12345 Key: HADOOP-10330 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10330 Project: Hadoop Common

Re: Re-swizzle 2.3

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 bl

Re: Re-swizzle 2.3

Recently I brought 4 JIRAs to branch-2.3, which are MAPREDUCE-5743, YARN-1628, YARN-1661 and YARN-1689. Recall that we mark test failure fixes as blockers for pior releases as closing to release, thus I brought to branch-2.3 MAPREDUCE-5743 and YARN-1628 that are the fixes for the test failure on 2.

Re: Re-swizzle 2.3

yep, the idea is to pull all of them out from branch2.3. things go back to normal then. thanks Alejandro (phone typing) > On Feb 6, 2014, at 17:39, Zhijie Shen wrote: > > Recently I brought 4 JIRAs to branch-2.3, which are MAPREDUCE-5743, YARN-1628, > YARN-1661 and YARN-1689. Recall that we

Re: Re-swizzle 2.3

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, Rob

Re: Re-swizzle 2.3

Do you guys think that committing https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-4858 to branch-2.3 is still Ok? It is a small change that bring fixes broken timeout behavior of DN to NN RPC. We have been testing this fix on top of 2.0.6 for a long time now and it seems to be a real help. Apprec

Re: Re-swizzle 2.3

+1 to reverting those JIRAs from branch-2.3. As YARN-1689 is fixing a problem caused by YARN-1493 I think we can revert it in branch-2.3 as well. I think we should leave them in branch-2 for now. We can revert if 2.4 is imminent and they're holding it up, but hopefully the issues they caused wil

Re: Re-swizzle 2.3

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 is

Re: Re-swizzle 2.3

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