Re: [VOTE] Apache Ozone 1.3.0 RC0

Thanks Sammi, Uma and Ethan, Here I had discussed the FSO with Ethan. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-7496 Our conclusion is also that FSO bucket will not be the default in 1.3.0. Instead, let the user choose for themselves using the configuration. So far we don't have any new blocking

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ozone 1.3.0 RC0

Hi, I agree, probably after fixing mkdir issue, we can move forward with 1.3 and update remaining issues in known issues/release notes. Regards, Uma On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 6:20 AM Sammi Chen wrote: > Hi Ethan, > > Thanks for working on making the FSO the default type of bucket. > Besides test

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ozone 1.3.0 RC0

Hi Ethan, Thanks for working on making the FSO the default type of bucket. Besides test failures, I think so far there are still several known issues for FSO, for example the quota on FSO is breaking. We'd better fix all these know issues before we set FSO as the default bucket type. For the issu

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ozone 1.3.0 RC0

+1. Thanks MingChao for HDDS-7084, cherry-picking patches and tracking the jiras associated with this 1.3.0 RC0. Regards, Neil On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 5:35 AM mingchao zhao wrote: > Thanks to Ethon, > I have paid attention to HDDS-7496. I'm not sure if FSO still needs to be > optimized or not.

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ozone 1.3.0 RC0

Thanks to Ethon, I have paid attention to HDDS-7496. I'm not sure if FSO still needs to be optimized or not. If the current FSO can be directly used in production, I think it is OK. We can discuss this in HDDS-7496. On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 9:42 AM Ethan Rose wrote: > Hi all, sorry to crash this

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ozone 1.3.0 RC0

Hi all, sorry to crash this thread again, but I found another issue we may want to look into for 1.3.0. It turns out the default bucket layout type is set to LEGACY, which means that most new ozone clusters will continue to create legacy buckets if they are not aware bucket layouts have been added

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ozone 1.3.0 RC0

Thanks Ethan and Sammi for the tip. I will cherry pick this patch to ozone-1.3 and start a new rc. On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 10:29 AM Sammi Chen wrote: > Agree. > > https://github.com/apache/ozone/pull/3961 fixed a severe problem. > > We'd better have it in 1.3.0 release. > > Bests, > Sammi > > On

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ozone 1.3.0 RC0

Agree. https://github.com/apache/ozone/pull/3961 fixed a severe problem. We'd better have it in 1.3.0 release. Bests, Sammi On Wed, 16 Nov 2022 at 02:42, Ethan Rose wrote: > We recently had a PR merged > that fixes SCM HA finalization using the inco

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ozone 1.3.0 RC0

We recently had a PR merged that fixes SCM HA finalization using the incorrect RocksDB table to write information. Since this is a new feature in 1.3.0 it seems like we should cherry pick this to the release branch and make an RC1. MingChao and others, wh

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ozone 1.3.0 RC0

Thanks Kaijie for your confirmation. Previously, we had upgraded ratis mainly to solve the memory leak of grpc. Ratis 2.4.1 does have some improvements, but it doesn't seem to have necessary bugs fixed for ozone.(Please let me know if there is anything patch we need) So we can just upgrade it in m

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ozone 1.3.0 RC0

+1, Thanks mingchao for the work. Verified: 1. Checksum and signature matches. 2. Successfully built from source. 3. Commit hash of the binary matches. 4. Checked LICENSE and NOTICE. 5. Successfully deployed on a cluster. 6. Run basic tests with freon. PS: Should we wait for Ratis 2.4.1 release?

[VOTE] Apache Ozone 1.3.0 RC0

Hello all, As discussed earlier, I am calling for a vote on Apache Ozone 1.3.0 RC0. 735 Jiras were resolved as part of this release: https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20HDDS%20AND%20status%20in%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%201.3.0 The RC0 tag can be fo