Re: [Discuss] RBF: Aynchronous router RPC.

gt; > internal practice, it will improve the throughput of requests forward >> > significantly >> > and is very valuable to push it forward. >> > Thanks again and good luck! >> > >> > Best Regards, >> > - He Xiaoqiao >> > >> >

Re: [Discuss] RBF: Aynchronous router RPC.

Thanks for the great proposal, Zhangjian. On point #3, I suspect it should be fairly straightforward to create a small isolated synthetic test to prove (or disprove) the benefits of this approach. By driving a controlled amount of requests per second, you could see latency, memory, CPU, etc. Ideall

[jira] [Resolved] (HDFS-16304) Locate OpenSSL libs for libhdfspp

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-16304?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Sangjin Lee resolved HDFS-16304. Fix Version/s: 3.4.0 Hadoop Flags: Reviewed Resolution: Fixed > Locate OpenSSL l

[jira] [Created] (HDFS-16304) hadoop-hdfs-native-client Docker build is broken

Sangjin Lee created HDFS-16304: -- Summary: hadoop-hdfs-native-client Docker build is broken Key: HDFS-16304 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-16304 Project: Hadoop HDFS Issue Type

Re: [VOTE] Hadoop 3.1.x EOL

+1 On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 7:35 AM Sean Busbey wrote: > +1 > > > On Jun 3, 2021, at 1:14 AM, Akira Ajisaka wrote: > > > > Dear Hadoop developers, > > > > Given the feedback from the discussion thread [1], I'd like to start > > an official vote > > thread for the community to vote and start the 3

Re: [DISCUSS] Change project style guidelines to allow line length 100

+1 (binding). It's long overdue IMHO. On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 2:11 PM Gergely Pollak wrote: > I really like this initiative, thank you! > +1 for line length increase to 100 characters. > > Regards, > Gergely Pollak > > On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 8:30 PM Vivek Ratnavel > wrote: > > > +1 (non-bind

Re: [VOTE] Force "squash and merge" option for PR merge on github UI

+1. Sounds good to me. On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 10:20 AM Iñigo Goiri wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 4:17 AM Steve Loughran > > wrote: > > > +1 for squash and merge, with whoever does the merge adding the full > commit > > message for the logs, with JIRA, contributor(s) etc > > > > One l

Re: HADOOP-14163 proposal for new hadoop.apache.org

+1. Thanks for the work, Marton! On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 8:37 AM Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli wrote: > Is there no way to host the new site and the old site concurrently? And > link back & forth? > > +Vinod > > > > On Aug 31, 2018, at 1:07 AM, Elek, Marton wrote: > > > > Bumping this thread at last

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 3.0.0 RC1

+1 (binding) - downloaded the binary tarball and the source tarball and checked signatures - verified that the source builds cleanly - verified that the shaded client jars are correct - checked the basic pseudo-distributed cluster set-up and checked UI and logs (hdfs and YARN) - ran some test jobs

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 3.0.0 RC1

ec 10, 2017 at 8:31 PM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli < > vino...@apache.org> wrote: > >> I couldn't find the release tag for RC1 either - is it just me or has the >> release-process changed? >> >> +Vinod >> >> > On Dec 10, 2017, at 4:31 PM, Sangjin

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 3.0.0 RC1

Hi Andrew, Thanks much for your effort! Just to be clear, could you please state the git commit id of the RC1 we're voting for? Sangjin On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 12:31 PM, Andrew Wang wrote: > Hi all, > > Let me start, as always, by thanking the efforts of all the contributors > who contributed t

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 3.0.0 RC0

ht be enough to cancel the RC. Thoughts? > IMO yes. This was one of the key features mentioned in the 3.0 release notes. I appreciate your effort for the release Andrew! > > Best, > Andrew > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > >> I checked the clien

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 3.0.0 RC0

at 5:52 PM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 5:26 PM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli < > vino...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Thanks for all the push, Andrew! >> >> Looking at the RC. Went through my usual check-list. Here's my summary. >> Will c

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 3.0.0 RC0

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 5:26 PM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli wrote: > Thanks for all the push, Andrew! > > Looking at the RC. Went through my usual check-list. Here's my summary. > Will cast my final vote after comparing and validating my findings with > others. > > Verification > > - [Check] Succes

Re: [VOTE] Merge feature branch YARN-5355 (Timeline Service v2) to trunk

figurable entity sort ordering > >>> - Richer REST APIs for apps, app attempts, containers, fetching > metrics by > >>> timerange, pagination, sub-app entities > >>> - Support for storing sub-application entities (entities that exist > >>> outside >

Re: [VOTE] Merge feature branch YARN-5355 (Timeline Service v2) to trunk

; configurable hbase cluster > > > - Flow level aggregations done as dynamic (table level) coprocessors > > > - Uses latest stable HBase release 1.2.6 > > > > > > There are a total of 82 subtasks that were completed as part of this > > > effort. > >

Re: [DISCUSS] Merging YARN-5355 (Timeline Service v.2) to trunk

gt; This testing will also be done once YARN-5355 branch code freezed > completely as well in couple of days. > > Thanks & Regards > Rohith Sharma K S > > On 18 August 2017 at 22:56, Sangjin Lee wrote: > > > Kudos to Vrushali and the team for getting ready for this lar

Re: [DISCUSS] Merging YARN-5355 (Timeline Service v.2) to trunk

C%20priority%20DESC% > >>> 2C%20created%20ASC> > >>> ] > >>> - HBase specific improvements [atsv2-hbase > >>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-6604?jql=project > >>> %20%3D%20YARN%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20YARN-5355%20AND%20l > >

Re: About 2.7.4 Release

I don't think there should be any linkage between releasing 2.8.0 and 2.7.4. If we have a volunteer for releasing 2.7.4, we should go full speed ahead. We still need a volunteer from a PMC member or a committer as some tasks may require certain privileges, but I don't think it precludes working wit

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 3.0.0-alpha2 RC0

File MAPREDUCE-6836 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-6836>. On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > Sorry for missing the cutoff. > > I'm also +1 (binding) if that counts. > > I did find a small issue with MR, and I'll file a separat

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 3.0.0-alpha2 RC0

Sorry for missing the cutoff. I'm also +1 (binding) if that counts. I did find a small issue with MR, and I'll file a separate JIRA, but it shouldn't stop the release. On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Andrew Wang wrote: > Thanks guys. With that, I'm going to close the VOTE for 3.0.0-alpha2 wi

Re: [VOTE] Release cadence and EOL

I'm going to stop the vote and go back to the discussion. It shouldn't be a big surprise given the reservation we have so far. I do hope there will be some actionable outcome as a result of that discussion. Regards, Sangjin On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 8:17 AM, Allen Wittenauer wrote: > > > On Jan

Re: [VOTE] Release cadence and EOL

Thanks for great feedback thus far. I agree with some that this is more of a guideline than a policy. I also agree to some extent that this is not very enforceable given the current practice. I do differ, though, on whether there is value in something like this if it is not completely enforceable

Re: Planning for 3.0.0-alpha2

It looks like hadoop-cloud-storage-project was missed in the version set? On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Andrew Wang wrote: > I've branched branch-3.0.0-alpha2 and moved out the target versions except > for our last blocker to a new 3.0.0-alpha3 version. > > Business can continue as usual, ple

Re: [VOTE] Release cadence and EOL

17 at 9:58 AM, Daniel Templeton wrote: > Thanks for driving this, Sangjin. Quick question, though: the subject line > is "Release cadence and EOL," but I don't see anything about cadence in the > proposal. Did I miss something? > > Daniel > > > On 1/17/17 8

[VOTE] Release cadence and EOL

Following up on the discussion thread on this topic ( https://s.apache.org/eFOf), I'd like to put the proposal for a vote for the release cadence and EOL. The proposal is as follows: "A minor release line is end-of-lifed 2 years after it is released or there are 2 newer minor releases, whichever i

Re: [DISCUSS] Release cadence and EOL

gt; For > > instance, testing with 3.0.0-alpha1 has found a number of latent > > incompatibilities in the 2.8.0 branch. If we want to meaningfully speed > up > > the minor release cycle, continuous integration testing is a must. > > > > Best, > > Andrew > >

Re: [Continued] [Release thread] 2.8.0 release activities

looked at all existing 2.8.0 blockers and criticals > today. > > To me more than half of MR/YARN blockers/criticals of 2.8 should be moved > > out. Left comments on these JIRAs asked original owners, plan to update > > target version of these JIRAs early next week. > > > > Wil

Re: Updated 2.8.0-SNAPSHOT artifact

rthik Kambatla > *To:* Ming Ma > *Cc:* Sangjin Lee ; Jason Lowe ; > Akira Ajisaka ; Brahma Reddy Battula < > brahmareddy.batt...@huawei.com>; Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli < > vino...@apache.org>; "common-...@hadoop.apache.org" < > common-...@hadoop.apac

Re: Updated 2.8.0-SNAPSHOT artifact

e releases might not be desirable as there >> could be some potential compatibility issues involved. Therefore if we >> recut 2.8 it means we have to work on those items before the new 2.8 is >> released which could cause major delay on the schedule. >> >> On Mon, Nov 7, 20

Re: Updated 2.8.0-SNAPSHOT artifact

+1. Resetting the 2.8 effort and the branch at this point may be counter-productive. IMO we should focus on resolving the remaining blockers and getting it out the door. I also think that we should seriously consider 2.9 as well, as a fairly large number of changes have accumulated in branch-2 (ove

Re: [DISCUSS] Release cadence and EOL

for ~9 months before moving onto a new minor: > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/35997352/how-to- > determine-end-of-life-for-eclipse-versions > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > > > Reviving an old thread. I think we had a fairly concrete pr

Re: [DISCUSS] Release cadence and EOL

Reviving an old thread. I think we had a fairly concrete proposal on the table that we can vote for. The proposal is a minor release on the latest major line every 6 months, and a maintenance release on a minor release (as there may be concurrently maintained minor releases) every 2 months. A min

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.6.5 (RC1)

> +1 (binding) > > - Verified signatures and digests > - Built native from source > - Deployed to a single-node cluster and ran some sample jobs > > Jason > > > On Sunday, October 2, 2016 7:13 PM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > > > Hi folks, > > I have pushed a new

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.6.5 (RC1)

t; > > > * Downloaded and built from source > > > * Verified md5 checksums and signature > > > * Deployed a pseudo cluster > > > * verified basic HDFS operations and Pi job. > > > * Did a sanity check for RM and NM UI. > > > > > > Than

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.6.5 (RC1)

> +1(non-binding) > > * verified signature and md5. > * built with -Pnative on CentOS6 and OpenJDK7. > * built documentation and skimmed the contents. > * built rpms by bigtop and ran smoke-tests of hdfs, yarn and mapreduce on > 3-node cluster. > > Thanks, > Masatake I

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.6.5 (RC1)

on the WebUI. > > Maybe file a follow-on JIRA to remove it for the future? > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 3:09 PM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > > > I looked into building it on jenkins earlier, but it appears that this > > jenkins job is busted (at least for 2.6.x): > >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.6.5 (RC1)

I looked into building it on jenkins earlier, but it appears that this jenkins job is busted (at least for 2.6.x): https://builds.apache.org/job/HADOOP2_Release_Artifacts_Builder/ I don't have access to the job configuration, so I'm unable to fix it atm. That said, I do think Allen has a point. I

[VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.6.5 (RC1)

Hi folks, I have pushed a new release candidate (R1) for the Apache Hadoop 2.6.5 release (the next maintenance release in the 2.6.x release line). RC1 contains fixes to CHANGES.txt, and is otherwise identical to RC0. Below are the details of this release candidate: The RC is available for valida

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.6.5 (RC0)

ng entries in CHANGES.txt. > When upgrading to 2.6.5, most of admins look at the change logs and see > what bugs are fixed. Therefore I'm thinking the change logs are important > and they should be fixed. > > Thanks, > Akira > > > On 9/28/16 05:28, Sangjin Lee wrote: &g

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.6.5 (RC0)

et me know what you all think (whether this is something that should stop the RC). Regards, Sangjin On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > Thanks John and Brahma for reporting issues with CHANGES.txt. > > IMO, we can move ahead with the current RC0 and address these issues

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.6.5 (RC0)

P-13290 > > ,HDFS-10544, > > HADOOP-13255 > > ,HADOOP-13189 > > > > > --Brahma Reddy Battula > > > -- > *From:* sjl...@gmail.com on behalf of Sangjin Lee < > sj...@apache.org> > *Sent:* Wednesday, September 28, 2016 1:58 AM > *To:* common-...@hado

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.6.5 (RC0)

; > > > > The steps I've done: > > > > > > * Downloaded release tar and source tar, verified MD5. > > > * Run a HDFS cluster, and copy files between local filesystem and HDFS. > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 1:28 PM, San

[VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.6.5 (RC0)

Hi folks, I have created a release candidate RC0 for the Apache Hadoop 2.6.5 release (the next maintenance release in the 2.6.x release line). Below are the details of this release candidate: The RC is available for validation at: http://home.apache.org/~sjlee/hadoop-2.6.5-RC0/. The RC tag in gi

Re: [Release thread] 2.6.5 release activities

We ported 16 issues to branch-2.6. We will go ahead and start the release process, including cutting the release branch. If you have any critical change that should be made part of 2.6.5, please reach out to us and commit the changes. Thanks! Sangjin On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Sangjin Lee

Re: [Release thread] 2.6.5 release activities

Thanks Chris! I'll help Chris to get those JIRAs marked in his spreadsheet committed. We'll cut the release branch shortly after that. If you have any critical change that should be made part of 2.6.5 (CVE patches included), please reach out to us and commit the changes. If all things go well, we'

Re: [DISCUSS] Release cadence and EOL

Thanks Karthik for opening a long overdue discussion on the release cadence and EOL. As for the EOL, I think we need to weigh between the benefit for the users and the maintenance cost for the community. I'd also love to find out what other (major) open source projects do in terms of the EOL. Her

Re: [Release thread] 2.6.5 release activities

Thanks folks for opening up the discussion on our EOL policy. That's also exactly what I wanted to discuss when I opened up the 2.6.5 discussion: I also want to gauge the community's interest in maintaining the 2.6.x > line. How long do we maintain this line? What would be a sensible EOL > policy?

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.3 RC0

+1 (binding) - downloaded both source and binary tarballs and verified the signatures - set up a pseudo-distributed cluster - ran some simple mapreduce jobs - checked the basic web UI Sangjin On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:57 PM, John Zhuge wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > - Build source with Java 1.

Re: [DISCUSS] The order of classpath isolation work and updating/shading dependencies on trunk

oesn't really have an impact on that. > > > On Jul 22, 2016, at 9:57 AM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > > > > The work on HADOOP-13070 and the ApplicationClassLoader are generic and > go beyond YARN. It can be used in any JVM that uses hadoop. The current use > cases are MR

Re: [DISCUSS] The order of classpath isolation work and updating/shading dependencies on trunk

The work on HADOOP-13070 and the ApplicationClassLoader are generic and go beyond YARN. It can be used in any JVM that uses hadoop. The current use cases are MR containers, hadoop's RunJar (as in "hadoop jar"), and the YARN node manager auxiliary services. I'm not sure if that's what you were askin

Re: [DISCUSS] The order of classpath isolation work and updating/shading dependencies on trunk

Thanks Tsuyoshi for opening the discussion. One benefit of the dependency/classpath isolation work is that it can open up a possibility of having diverging dependencies in a safe manner so that upgrading libraries may have less impact. I'll spend some more time on HADOOP-13070 to make some progress

Re: [DICUSS] Upgrading Guice to 4.0(HADOOP-12064)

Yeah it would be awesome if we can get feedback and/or suggestions on these JIRAs (HADOOP-11804 and HADOOP-13070). Thanks, Sangjin On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Sean Busbey wrote: > At the very least, I'm running through an updated shaded hadoop client > this week[1] (HBase is my test appli

Re: [DISCUSS] Increased use of feature branches

a 3-day voting period > instead of 7, or treat it just like today’s commit to trunk – but with 2 > people signing-off? > > What I am suggesting is reducing the administrative overheads of using a > branch to encourage use of branching. > Right now it feels like Apache’s process en

Re: [DISCUSS] Increased use of feature branches

Having worked on a major feature in a feature branch, I have some thoughts and observations on feature branch development. IMO feature branch development v. direct commits to trunk in piecemeal is really a choice of *granularity*. Do we want a series of fine-grained state changes on trunk or fewer

[jira] [Created] (HDFS-10415) TestDistributedFileSystem#testDFSCloseOrdering() fails on branch-2

Sangjin Lee created HDFS-10415: -- Summary: TestDistributedFileSystem#testDFSCloseOrdering() fails on branch-2 Key: HDFS-10415 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10415 Project: Hadoop HDFS

Re: [Release thread] 2.8.0 release activities

gda > > > On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 5:06 PM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > >> How about this? I'll review the HADOOP/HDFS bugs in that list to come up >> with true blockers for 2.8.0 or JIRAs that are close to being ready. I'll >> report the list here. Then folks ca

Re: [Release thread] 2.8.0 release activities

elp with reviewing Common/HDFS > JIRAs. > > Thanks, > Wangda > > > On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > > > Where do we stand in terms of closing out blocker/critical issues for > > 2.8.0? I still see 50 open JIRAs in Vinod's list: > > http

Re: [Release thread] 2.8.0 release activities

Where do we stand in terms of closing out blocker/critical issues for 2.8.0? I still see 50 open JIRAs in Vinod's list: https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12334985 But I see a lot of JIRAs with no patches or very stale patches. It would be a good exercise to come up with the list of JIR

Re: Looking to a Hadoop 3 release

Another thing to throw in there is the dependency/classpath isolation (HADOOP-11656). Some efforts have already been made by Sean, and it'd be great to complete this to have a much better dependency isolation solution for 3.x. On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Gangumalla, Uma wrote: > Yes. I thin

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.6.4 RC0

+1 (not binding) - downloaded both the source and the binary tarballs, and checked the checksums and signatures - started a pseudo-distributed cluster and ran test MR jobs - spot checked the URI and the logs Sangjin On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Jason Lowe wrote: > +1 (binding) > - verified

Re: [UPDATE] New ASF git policy on force-pushes / Tags / Stale branches

ture-YARN-2928 to YARN-2928 to follow our practice for branch > development. Thoughts? > > > Thanks, > > Junping > ________ > From: sjl...@gmail.com on behalf of Sangjin Lee < > sj...@apache.org> > Sent: Friday, January 15, 2016 7:17

Re: [UPDATE] New ASF git policy on force-pushes / Tags / Stale branches

Thanks Vinod for the proposal. I deleted my branch (sjlee/hdfs-merge) the other day. Sangjin On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli wrote: > Hi all, > > As some of you have noticed, we have an update from ASF infra on git > branching policy: We no longer have a ASF wide mandat

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.2 RC1

I agree that it would be a good practice to maintain parity between 2.6.x and 2.7.x as much as possible. Departure from it should be more of an exception than the norm. That said, it is also true that we're not exactly following the semantic versioning the moment we started to maintain multiple si

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.6.3 RC0

+1 (non-binding) - downloaded source and binary and verified the signatures (although I didn't connect with Junping via web of trust) - started a pseudo-distributed cluster and ran test jobs - browsed the RM and NN UI - looked through the daemon logs Thanks Junping. Sangjin On Wed, Dec 16, 2015

Re: continuing releases on Apache Hadoop 2.6.x

less they are > critical enough as blocker. We can nominate more fixes later in 2.6.4. > Thoughts? > > Thanks, > > Junping > > From: sjl...@gmail.com on behalf of Sangjin Lee < > sj...@apache.org> > Sent: Frid

Re: continuing releases on Apache Hadoop 2.6.x

> > > > In the mean while, we should also review 2.7.3 and 2.8.0 blocker / > > critical list and see if it makes sense to backport any of those into > 2.6.3. > > > > +Vinod > > > > > > On Nov 17, 2015, at 5:10 PM, Sangjin Lee > sj...@apac

Re: continuing releases on Apache Hadoop 2.6.x

do end up backporting patches after that, you > should set the fix-version to be 2.6.1. > > Thanks > +Vinod > > > > On Nov 2, 2015, at 11:29 AM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > > > > As you may have seen, 2.6.2 is out > > <http://markmail.org/thread/yw53xgz6wzpqncl

Re: [DISCUSS] Looking to a 2.8.0 release

oks rather challenging given the suggested timeframe. We also need to complete several major tasks before it is ready. Sangjin On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Vinod Vavilapalli < > vino...@hortonworks.com> wrote: > &g

Re: [DISCUSS] Looking to a 2.8.0 release

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Vinod Vavilapalli wrote: > — YARN Timeline Service Next generation: YARN-2928: Lots of momentum, > but clearly a work in progress. Two options here > — If it is safe to ship it into 2.8 in a disable manner, we can > get the early code into trunk and a

continuing releases on Apache Hadoop 2.6.x

As you may have seen, 2.6.2 is out . I have also retargeted all open issues that were targeted for 2.6.2 to 2.6.3. Continuing the discussion in the email thread here , I'd like us to maintain the cadence of m

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.6.2

ase/hadoop/common/KEYS > > > > Also only PMC votes are binding on releases, so I think we currently > still > > stand at 0 binding +1s. > > > > On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > > > >> That makes sense. Thanks for pointing that ou

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.6.2

ing) > > - Verified signatures and checksums > - Deployed a single node cluster > - Built Tez 0.7.0 with Hadoop 2.6.2 pom > - Built Hive 1.2.1 with Hadoop 2.6.2 pom > - Ran some Hive on Tez queries successfully > > Regards, > Akira > > > On 10/23/15 06:14, Sangjin Lee w

[VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.6.2

Hi all, I have created a release candidate (RC0) for Hadoop 2.6.2. The RC is available at: http://people.apache.org/~sjlee/hadoop-2.6.2-RC0/ The RC tag in git is: release-2.6.2-RC0 The list of JIRAs committed for 2.6.2: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-4101?jql=project%20in%20(HADOOP%

Re: Planning for Apache Hadoop 2.6.2

If you have backported bugfixes to 2.7.2, please take a moment to consider if it is relevant (and important) for 2.6.x too, and if so backport it to branch-2.6. Thanks! On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 9:33 AM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > Another friendly reminder that I'll be cutting the branch and

Re: Planning for Apache Hadoop 2.6.2

Another friendly reminder that I'll be cutting the branch and creating the RC soon. I'm targeting tomorrow. Thanks! Sangjin On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > Hi all, > > We are targeting next week to create the first RC for 2.6.2. Currently > there

Re: [DISCUSS] About the details of JDK-8 support

+1 On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 7:57 AM, Steve Loughran wrote: > > > On 15 Oct 2015, at 14:42, Karthik Kambatla wrote: > > > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Allen Wittenauer > wrote: > > > >> > >> If people want, I could setup a cut off of yetus master to run the > jenkins > >> test-patch. (mul

Re: Planning for Apache Hadoop 2.6.2

review them and commit them to branch-2.6. Also, if you have JIRAs that are targeted to 2.6.2 and are close to being done, this might be a good time to complete them. Do let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Sangjin On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > I have upda

Re: [DISCUSS] About the details of JDK-8 support

Yes, at least for us, dropping the java 7 support (e.g. moving to java 8 source-wise) **at this point** would be an issue. I concur with the sentiment that we should preserve the java 7 support on branch-2 (not not move to java 8 source level) but can consider it for trunk. My 2 cents. Thanks, San

Re: Planning for Apache Hadoop 2.6.2

, Sangjin Lee wrote: > Per Vinod's suggestion, in order to reduce the amount of movement I'll > pick commits from branch-2.6 onto the tip of branch-2.6.1 rather than the > other way around. This means I'll need to move branch-2.6 and force push > that change. >

Re: Planning for Apache Hadoop 2.6.2

-2.6 until I am done relocating the branch? I'll let you know when I'm done with that exercise. I expect I'll be done with this in 24 hours or so. Let me know if you have any concerns. Thanks, Sangjin On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > Thanks folks. I&

Re: Planning for Apache Hadoop 2.6.2

t;> >> Thanks, >> Vinay >> >> On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 12:16 AM, Vinod Vavilapalli < >> vino...@hortonworks.com >> >>> wrote: >>> >> >> +1. Please take it over, I’ll standby for any help needed. >>> >>> T

Re: Planning for Apache Hadoop 2.6.2

Thanks Vinod for starting the discussion for 2.6.2! I'd like to volunteer as the release manager for 2.6.2 unless there is an objection. As I've worked with Vinod and Akira for 2.6.1 and triaged a number of issues, I feel I should be in a good position to take care of 2.6.2. Let me know your thoug

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.6.1 RC1

> > >>> On Sep 17, 2015, at 2:05 PM, Xuan Gong wrote: > >>> > >>> +1 (non-binding) > >>> Download and compile the source code, run several MR jobs. > >>> > >>> Xuan Gong > >>> > >>>> On Sep 16, 2015, at

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.6.1 RC0

oil, with loads of help from Sangjin Lee > and Akira Ajisaka, and 153 commits later, I've created a release candidate > RC0 for hadoop-2.6.1. > > The RC is available at: > http://people.apache.org/~vinodkv/hadoop-2.6.1-RC0/ > > The RC tag in git is: release-2.6.1-RC0 > &

Re: Planning Hadoop 2.6.1 release

2922 and > > >https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-3487. > > > > > >They're not fatal issue, but they can cause lots of issue in a large > > >cluster. > > > > > >Thanks, > > >Wangda > > > > > > > > >

Re: Hadoop 2.6.1 Release process thread

e can add it after we figure out > the why and the dependent tickets. > > Thanks > +Vinod > > On Aug 11, 2015, at 4:37 PM, Sangjin Lee sjl...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Could you double check HDFS-7916? HDFS-7916 is needed only if HDFS-7704 > makes it. However, I see com

Re: Hadoop 2.6.1 Release process thread

Could you double check HDFS-7916? HDFS-7916 is needed only if HDFS-7704 makes it. However, I see commits for HDFS-7916 in this list, but not for HDFS-7704. If HDFS-7704 is not in the list, we should not backport HDFS-7916 as it fixes an issue introduced by HDFS-7704. On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 4:10 P

Re: Planning Hadoop 2.6.1 release

ed HDFS-7916 from the list. > > Thanks > +Vinod > > > On Jul 24, 2015, at 6:32 PM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > > > > Out of the JIRAs we proposed, please remove HDFS-7916. I don't think it > > applies to 2.6. > > > > Thanks, > > Sangjin > >

Re: Planning Hadoop 2.6.1 release

10:07 AM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > Thanks Akira. > > I'd like to make one small correction. If we're getting HDFS-7704, then we > should also get HDFS-7916. My earlier comment was assuming HDFS-7704 was > not included in the list. But if is (and I think it should), then we sh

Re: Planning Hadoop 2.6.1 release

Not yet marked as 2.6.1-candidate. I'd like to drop > > * HDFS-7281 (incompatible change) > * HDFS-7446 (this looks to be an improvement) > * HDFS-7916 (cannot apply to branch-2.6 as Sangjin mentioned) > > Hi Vinod, could you mark the issues in 2) as 2.6.1-candidate? > >

Re: Planning Hadoop 2.6.1 release

Out of the JIRAs we proposed, please remove HDFS-7916. I don't think it applies to 2.6. Thanks, Sangjin On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli < vino...@hortonworks.com> wrote: > I’ve added them all to the 2.6.1-candidate list. I included everything > even though some of them a

[jira] [Created] (HDFS-7598) TestDFSClientCache.testEviction is not quite correct and fails with newer version of guava

Sangjin Lee created HDFS-7598: - Summary: TestDFSClientCache.testEviction is not quite correct and fails with newer version of guava Key: HDFS-7598 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7598

Re: Thinking ahead to hadoop-2.7

If there are not a lot of changes just to make Java 7 a requirement (I understand it's basically pom changes and unit test failure and findbugs fallouts), how about merging that with the next release and declare the next release and on Java-7-only? On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Steve Loughran w

Re: Thinking ahead to hadoop-2.7

> > On Dec 2, 2014, at 11:09 AM, Sangjin Lee wrote: > > > If 2.7 is being positioned as the JDK7-only release, then it would be > good > > to know how 2.8 lines up in terms of timing. Our interest is landing the > > shared cache feature (YARN-1492)... Thanks. > &

Re: Thinking ahead to hadoop-2.7

If 2.7 is being positioned as the JDK7-only release, then it would be good to know how 2.8 lines up in terms of timing. Our interest is landing the shared cache feature (YARN-1492)... Thanks. Sangjin On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Karthik Kambatla wrote: > Thanks for starting this thread, Arun

Re: Guava

FYI, we have an existing ApplicationClassLoader implementation that is used to isolate client/task classes from the rest. If we're going down the route of classloader isolation on this, it would be good to come up with a coherent strategy regarding both of these. As a more practical step, I like t

Re: Thinking ahead to hadoop-2.6

I am also +1 for the end of next week. YARN-1492 (shared cache) is near the final stages of the review, and with a little more time it would make it easier to put it in. On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Subramaniam V K wrote: > +1 for end of next week. > > We have got all the patches for YARN-10

Re: [VOTE] Migration from subversion to git for version control

+1 (non-binding) On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Sandy Ryza wrote: > +1 (binding) > > > On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Karthik Kambatla > wrote: > > > I have put together this proposal based on recent discussion on this > topic. > > > > Please vote on the proposal. The vote runs for 7 days. >

Re: hadoop-2.5 - June end?

, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli < > >> > vino...@apache.org > >> > > wrote: > >> > > >> > > I started reviewing YARN-1492 and synced up offline with Sangjin and > >> > Chris > >> > > who are leading this. I proposed that we shoul

  1   2   >