Source code has been deleted from branch-2. Thanks Akira for taking this up!
Jonathan Hung
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:40 AM Jonathan Hung wrote:
> Makes sense. I've cherry-picked the commits in branch-2 that were missed
> in branch-2.10.
>
> Jonathan Hung
>
>
> On We
Makes sense. I've cherry-picked the commits in branch-2 that were missed in
branch-2.10.
Jonathan Hung
On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 2:25 AM Akira Ajisaka wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I am still seeing some changes are being committed to branch-2.
> I'd like to delete the source
- Delete old branch-2.10
- Rename branch-2 to (new) branch-2.10
- Set version in new branch-2.10 to 2.10.1-SNAPSHOT
- Renamed fix versions from 2.11.0 to 2.10.1
- Removed 2.11.0 as a version in HADOOP/YARN/HDFS/MAPREDUCE
Jonathan Hung
On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 10:55 AM Jonathan Hung wrote:
&
FYI, starting the rename process, beginning with INFRA-19521.
Jonathan Hung
On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 12:15 PM Konstantin Shvachko
wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I think we diverged a bit from the initial topic of this discussion, which
> is removing branch-2.10, and changing the version
ly want to use java 11 on branch-2, we can always
revive branch-2. But for now I think the convenience of not needing to port
to both branch-2 and branch-2.10 (and below) outweighs the cost of
potentially needing to revive branch-2.
Jonathan Hung
On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 10:50 AM Eric Yang wrote:
nch-2. But this proposal would reduce a lot of confusion IMO.
Jonathan Hung
On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 11:41 AM epa...@apache.org
wrote:
> Thanks Jonathan for opening the discussion.
>
> I am not in favor of this proposal. 2.10 was very recently released, and
> moving to 2.10 will take some
Some other additional items we would need:
- Mark all fix-versions in YARN/HDFS/MAPREDUCE/HADOOP from 2.11.0 to
2.10.1
- Remove 2.11.0 as a version in these projects
Jonathan Hung
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 6:51 PM Jonathan Hung wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Given the release of 2.
0 to 2.10.1-SNAPSHOT
This way we get all the current branch-2 fixes into the 2.10.x release
line. Then the commit chain will look like: trunk -> branch-3.2 ->
branch-3.1 -> branch-2.10 -> branch-2.9 -> branch-2.8
Thoughts?
Jonathan Hung
[1] https://www.mail-archive.com/yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org/msg29479.html
Hi all,
I am happy to announce that the Apache Hadoop 2.10.0 has been released.
Apache Hadoop 2.10.0 is the first release in the Apache Hadoop 2.10 line.
The release details, including links to downloads, list of major features,
release notes, and changelog, are on the 2.10.0 announcement page [1
+1 from me too. The vote passed, so I'll continue with the rest of the
release.
Thanks everyone!
Jonathan Hung
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 1:40 PM Giovanni Matteo Fumarola <
giovanni.fumar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 (non-binding).
>
> - Built from source on Ubuntu with OpenJDK
Thanks Eric! I sent out an RC1 earlier last week, not sure if you saw that.
The only diff between RC1 and RC0 is HDFS-14667. If RC1 looks good to you
then it'd be great to get your testing results on that thread.
Jonathan Hung
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 1:06 PM epa...@apache.org
Hi Eric, I took a quick look, are you using
mapreduce.application.framework.path to run your MR jobs? If not, this
seems like expected behavior if AM and tasks get launched on different NMs
with different locally installed hadoop versions?
Jonathan Hung
On Sat, Oct 26, 2019 at 8:55 AM epa
;t be up to date, but
I think that's fine.
I'll go ahead with this plan if no objections.
Jonathan Hung
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:19 PM Jonathan Hung wrote:
> Thanks for looking Erik.
>
> For the release notes, yeah I think it's because there's no release notes
&
tifacts and it appears to be correct.
I think we could easily overwrite the current RC1 artifacts with ones
containing proper release notes. Not sure what to do about the javadoc
issue though, that would require overwriting the release-2.10.0-RC1 tag
which I don't want to do. What do others
d to changes in dominant resource calculator, but root cause remains
to be seen.
Jonathan Hung
On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 9:02 AM epa...@apache.org wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> Thanks very much for all of your work on this release.
>
> I have a concern about cross-queue (inter-queue) preemp
Hi Eric, we've run some basic HDFS commands with a 3.2.1 namenode and
2.10.0 clients and datanodes. Everything worked as expected.
Jonathan Hung
On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 3:04 PM Eric Badger
wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> Thanks for putting this RC together. You stated that there are
://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehadoop-1243/
My public key is available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/hadoop/common/KEYS
The vote will run for 5 weekdays, until Tuesday, October 29 at 3:00 pm PDT.
Thanks,
Jonathan Hung
[1]
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql
Thanks Konstantin and Zhankun. Unfortunately a feature slipped our radar
(HDFS-14667). Since this is the first of a minor release, we would like to
get it into 2.10.0.
HDFS-14667 has been committed to branch-2.10.0, I will be rolling an RC1
shortly.
Jonathan Hung
On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 1:39
/repositories/orgapachehadoop-1241/
My public key is available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/hadoop/common/KEYS
The vote will run for 5 weekdays, until Wednesday, October 23 at 6:00 pm
PDT.
Thanks,
Jonathan Hung
[1]
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20in%20(HDFS%2C
I've moved all jiras with target version 2.10.0 to 2.10.1. Also I've
created branch-2.10 and branch-2.10.0, please commit any 2.10.x bug fixes
to branch-2.10.
I'll send out a vote thread for 2.10.0-RC0 shortly.
Jonathan Hung
On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 10:32 AM Jonathan Hung wrote:
Edit: seems a 2.10.0 blocker was reopened (HDFS-14305). I'll continue
watching this jira and start the release once this is resolved.
Jonathan Hung
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 5:13 PM Jonathan Hung wrote:
> Hi folks, as of now all 2.10.0 blockers have been resolved [1]. So I'l
Hi folks, as of now all 2.10.0 blockers have been resolved [1]. So I'll
start the release process soon (cutting branches, updating target versions,
etc).
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12346975
Jonathan Hung
On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 10:19 AM Jonathan Hung wrote:
>
.9+. But rolling upgrade
would still work IIUC.
Jonathan Hung
On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 2:52 PM Eric Badger
wrote:
> * For YARN-6616, for branch-2.8 and below, it was only committed to
> 2.7.8/2.8.6 which have not been released (as I understand). Perhaps we can
> revert YARN-6616 fr
Sorry, let me edit my first point. We can just create addendums for YARN-6616
in branch-2.7 and branch-2.8 to edit the submitTime field to the correct id 28.
We don’t need to revert YARN-6616 from these branches completely.
Jonathan
From: Jonathan Hung
Sent
could be to move the
intraQueuePreemptionDisabled field from id 12 to id 13 in branch-2.8, then
users would upgrade from 2.8.4/2.8.5 to 2.8.6 (someone would have to
release this), then upgrade from 2.8.6 to 2.9+.
Jonathan Hung
On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 9:23 AM Eric Badger
wrote:
> We (Verizon Media) are c
Thanks all, +1 from me too.
There's three binding +1, two non-binding +1, and no -1 so I'll merge
YARN-8200 to branch-2 shortly. I'll skip branch-3.0 since it's EOL as
others have mentioned.
Jonathan Hung
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 11:49 AM Konstantin Shvachko
wrote:
> +
Jonathan Hung created HDFS-14779:
Summary: Fix logging error in
TestEditLog#testMultiStreamsLoadEditWithConfMaxTxns
Key: HDFS-14779
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14779
Project
ugh this filter.
We're targeting a release at end of September.
Please share any thoughts you have about this. Thanks!
[1] https://www.mail-archive.com/yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org/msg29461.html
[2]
https://www.mail-archive.com/mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org/msg21293.html
[3] https://www.mail-archive.com/yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org/msg33440.html
Jonathan Hung
=csrqgysvpdf7mh-iu17femgx89dhr+1...@mail.gmail.com%3e
Jonathan Hung
+1. Thanks!
Jonathan Hung
On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 8:03 PM Wangda Tan wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This is a vote thread to mark any versions smaller than 2.7 (inclusive),
> and 3.0 EOL. This is based on discussions of [1]
>
> This discussion runs for 7 days and will conclude on Aug
Hi Wangda, Thanks for starting the discussion. We would also like to
release 2.10.0 which was discussed previously
<https://www.mail-archive.com/yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org/msg29479.html> and
at various contributor meetups. I'm interested in being release manager for
that.
Thanks,
Jo
My non-binding +1 to finish. This vote passes with 6 binding +1, 3
non-binding +1, and no vetoes. We will make the changes as part
of HADOOP-15711, please follow there.
Thanks all!
Jonathan Hung
On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 11:38 PM Akira Ajisaka wrote:
> +1
>
> -Akira
>
> On Wed, F
-Build/
[3]
https://builds.apache.org/view/H-L/view/Hadoop/job/hadoop-qbt-branch2-java7-linux-x86/
Jonathan Hung
only.
Jonathan Hung
On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 10:45 AM Anu Engineer
wrote:
> Konstantin,
>
> Just a nitpicky thought, if we move this branch to Java-8 on Jenkins, but
> still hope to release code that can run on Java 7, how will we detect
> Java 8 only changes? I am asking because
Yeah, it's possible with yetus, there's one example here
<https://builds.apache.org/view/H-L/view/Hadoop/job/hadoop-qbt-branch2-java7-linux-x86-jhung/60/console>
which
runs compilation on openjdk7 (and openjdk8), and runs tests on openjdk8
only.
Jonathan Hung
On Mon, Feb 4,
+1. Thanks Wangda.
Jonathan Hung
On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 2:25 PM Dinesh Chitlangia <
dchitlan...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> +1 (non binding), thanks Wangda for organizing this.
>
> Regards,
> Dinesh
>
>
>
> On 2/1/19, 5:24 PM, "Wangda Tan" wrote:
>
va7 source compatibility we can do that at a later point.
Also based on discussion with others in the community at the contributors
meetup this past Wednesday, seems we are generally in favor of testing
against java8. I'll start a vote soon.
Jonathan Hung
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 4:11 AM Steve
+1. This is important for improving the deep learning on hadoop story.
There's recently a lot of momentum for this, and decoupling
submarine/hadoop will help it continue.
Jonathan Hung
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 11:04 AM Wangda Tan wrote:
> Hi devs,
>
> Since we started submarine-
ound source and binary
compatibility. I don't currently have a great answer, but one initial
thought is to build source/binary against java 7 to ensure compatibility
and run the rest of the build as java 8.
Thoughts?
Jonathan Hung
+1!
Jonathan Hung
On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 8:26 AM Zhe Zhang wrote:
> +1
>
> Thanks for addressing concerns from the previous vote.
>
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 6:24 PM Konstantin Shvachko
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Hadoop developers,
> >
> > I would like to propo
branch-2, syncing any bug fixes in our internal fork
which did not make it to the feature branch, etc. Assuming no objections,
once it's ready we will start a vote to merge.
Thanks,
Jonathan Hung
- verified refreshQueues mutation is disabled in this case
Jonathan Hung
On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 9:10 AM, Wangda Tan wrote:
> Thanks @Bharat for the quick check, the previously staged repository has
> some issues. I re-deployed jars to nexus.
>
> Here's the new repo
versions). Since for us there is
considerable risk and work involved in upgrading to hadoop 3, I think
having a branch-2.10 bridge release for porting important hadoop 3 features
to branch-2 is a good idea.
Thanks,
Jonathan Hung
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 2:37 PM, Subru Krishnan wrote:
> Fo
Thanks Konstantin for working on this.
+1 (non-binding)
- Downloaded binary and verified md5
- Deployed RM HA and tested failover
Jonathan Hung
On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Eric Payne wrote:
> Thanks for the hard work on this release, Konstantin.
> +1 (binding)
> - Built fr
restart/failover
- Verified "yarn rmadmin -refreshQueues" works when scheduler configuration
API disabled, and does not work when scheduler configuration API enabled
Jonathan Hung
On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 5:44 PM, Junping Du wrote:
> Thanks Andrew for pushing new RC for 3.0.0. I
"yarn rmadmin -refreshQueues" enabled when configuration mutation
API disabled (and vice-versa)
- Tested queue admin configuration mutation policy
Jonathan Hung
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 4:10 PM, Arun Suresh wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> Apache Hadoop 2.9.0 is the first release of Hadoo
API
disabled (and vice-versa)
Jonathan Hung
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 2:56 PM, Eric Badger wrote:
> +1 (non-binding) pending the issue that Sunil/Rohith pointed out
>
> - Verified all hashes and checksums
> - Built from source on macOS 10.12.6, Java 1.8.0u65
> - Deployed a pseudo
Thanks for the votes and discussion. It is now past Monday Oct 9 11:00AM
PDT so the vote has ended. There were 4 +1 and no -1, so vote passes. This
feature will be merged to trunk, branch-3.0, and branch-2 shortly (16
subtasks).
Thanks everyone!
Jonathan Hung
On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 9:18 AM
Ye Zhou.
[1]
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-yarn-dev/201709.mbox/%3CCAHzWLgfEAgczjcEOUCg-03ma3ROtO=pkec9dpggyx9rzf3n...@mail.gmail.com%3E
Jonathan Hung
ot sure if
this answers your question.
Thanks,
Jonathan Hung
On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 12:01 PM, larry mccay wrote:
> Hi Jonathan -
>
> Thank you for bringing this up for discussion!
>
> I would personally like to see a specific security review of features like
> this - espe
merge this to trunk (which is what the YARN-7241
diff is based on), and port to branch-2 before the 2.9 release. @Andrew,
what are your thoughts on also merging this to branch-3.0?
Thanks!
Jonathan Hung
last week of Sept.
Please let me know if you have any concerns. Thanks!
Jonathan Hung
On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 11:23 AM, J. Rottinghuis
wrote:
> Thanks Vrushali for being entirely open as to the current status of ATSv2.
> I appreciate that we want to ensure things are tested at scale, and
ble (feature is also turned off by
default). Hoping to get this in before 3.0.0-GA. Just wanted to send this
note so that we are not caught off guard by this feature.
Thanks!
Jonathan Hung
On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Wangda Tan wrote:
> Resource profile is similar to TSv2, the feature is
53 matches
Mail list logo
