+1 on RC0.
- Verified signatures
- Built from sources
- Ran unit tests for new features
- Checked artifacts on Nexus, made sure the sources are present.
Thanks
--Konstantin
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 6:01 PM Jonathan Hung wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> This is the first release candidate for the first re
+1 on RC1
- Verified signatures
- Verified maven artifacts on Nexus for sources
- Checked rat reports
- Checked documentation
- Checked packaging contents
- Built from sources on RHEL 7 box
- Ran unit tests for new HDFS features with Java 8
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 2:55 PM Jo
Hi Eric,
We had a long discussion on this list regarding making the 2.10 release the
last of branch-2 releases. We intended 2.10 as a bridge release between
Hadoop 2 and 3. We may have bug-fix releases or 2.10, but 2.11 is not in
the picture right now, and many people may object this idea.
I unde
they should
>>> commit
>>> their patches.
>>>
>>> Eric
>>>
>>> [1]
>>>
>>> https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.10.0/hadoop-project-dist/hadoop-common/Compatibility.html
>>> [2]
>>>
>>> https://hadoop.apach
+1
Stay safe,
--Konstantin
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 10:59 PM Elek, Marton wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Thank you for all the feedback and requests,
>
> As we discussed in the previous thread(s) [1], Ozone is proposed to be a
> separated Apache Top Level Project (TLP)
>
> The proposal with all the detail
Hi Steve,
I am not sure I fully understand what is broken here. It is not an
incompatible change, right?
Could you please explain what you think the process is.
Would be best if you could share a link to a document describing it.
I would be glad to follow up with tests and documentation that are n
both branch-3.2.2 and branch-3.2.3
> missed. And have updated them manually. Please have a look. Thanks.
> HADOOP-15691
> HDFS-15464
> HDFS-15478
> HDFS-15567
> HDFS-15574
> HDFS-15583
> HDFS-15628
> YARN-10430
>
> Regards,
> - He Xiaoqiao
>
> On Mon, Dec 1
make sure it calls msync() on
all mount points that enabled observer reads.
--Konst
On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 11:15 AM Steve Loughran wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, 13 Dec 2020 at 21:08, Konstantin Shvachko
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Steve,
>>
>> I am not sure I fully understand
Hi Steve,
I created HDFS-15751 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-15751> for
documenting msync API.
Would appreciate your suggestions.
Stay safe,
--Konstantin
On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 5:19 AM Steve Loughran wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 18 Dec 2020 at 23:29, Konstantin Sh
Sorry for bringing this up late.
I think we should pick up HDFS-9516 for this release.
Rather critical bug fix, but up to you, Vinod.
Thanks,
--Konst
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>
> I've created a release candidate RC0 for Apache Hadoop 2.7.2.
>
>
Sounds like branch-2.8 was cut off prematurely.
What is the point of forking off if the release is not imminent.
We don't want this thing branching like a banyan again, with each commit
going into 5 branches.
I think it would be easier to retire branch-2.8 for now, and reset it to
branch-2.9 when
+1
Downloaded src and binaries.
Built from sources on CentOS 6.3
Ran dfsio, slive, examples, terasort.
Tried gridmix, but it failed with some NPEs.
Built HBase 0.94 with Hadoop 2.0.3
Ran HBase shell commands.
Recompiled and ran different loads of YCSB.
Checked documentation and the release notes.
> I have attached a patch to the jira:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12571338/branch-trunk-win-min.patch
> The number of lines goes to 1537 lines from the original patch with 15958
> lines.
Suresh, this might be a confusing statement as your patch includes
only Yarn changes.
C
-1
We should have a CI infrastructure in place before we can commit to
supporting Windows platform.
Eric is right Win/Cygwin was supported since day one.
I had a Windows box under my desk running nightly builds back in 2006-07.
People were irritated but I was filing windows bugs until 0.22 release
sity of CI and related infrastructure to
> support the platform well. Suresh outlined the support to effect this
> here: http://s.apache.org/s1
>
> Is the commitment to establish this infrastructure after the merge
> sufficient? -C
>
> On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Konstantin Sh
sh it to
Apache Jenkins.
Who is the volunteer for this work, please speak up when it can be done.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 6:03 PM, sanjay Radia wrote:
>
> On Mar 1, 2013, at 1:57 PM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
>
>> Commitment is a good thing.
>> I think t
ows machine as the nightly build.
Such build will let people test their patches for Windows on Jenkins
if they don't posses a license for the right version of Windows.
I hope this will not turn into extraordinary or impractical effort.
Thanks,
--Konst
> Thanks,
> --Matt
>
>
>
> triggered by Jira "Patch Available" state) satisfy your request for
> functionality #1 and #2? Yes or no, please.
>
> Thanks,
> --Matt
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Matt,
>>
>> On Sat, Mar
ng them to Jiras.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
> In agile terms, you are the Owner of these requirements. Please give me
> owner feedback as to whether my proposed work sounds like it will satisfy
> the requirements.
>
> Thank you,
> --Matt
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 12:16 PM
an input
>> parameter, which would let people run the build on their patches
>> chosen from local machine rather than attaching them to Jiras.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --Konstantin
>>
>> > In agile terms, you are the Owner of these requirements. Please give me
>>
che.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-9359. Giri Kesavan has
>> agreed
>> > to help with the parts that require Jenkins admin access.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > --Matt
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <
Arun,
Could you please define the release plan and put it into vote.
In accordance with the ByLaws. After this discussion of course.
http://hadoop.apache.org/bylaws.html
Release Plan
Defines the timetable and actions for a release. The plan also nominates a
Release Manager.
Lazy majority of activ
Arun, Suresh,
Very exciting to hear about this final push to stable Hadoop 2.
But I have a problem. Either with the plan or with the version number.
I'll be arguing for the number change below rather than the plan.
1. Based on features listed by Suresh it looks that you plan a heavy
feature-full
x27;s integration testing proved to be
very productive.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 6:06 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
> Konstantin,
>
> On Apr 26, 2013, at 4:34 PM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
>
> > Do you think we can call the version you proposed to release
>
If there are no objections, I'll start a vote on this proposal now.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
wrote:
> Hi Arun,
>
> I am agnostic about version numbers too, as long as the count goes up.
> The discussion you are referring to is
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
>
> On Apr 30, 2013, at 4:28 PM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
>
> > If the next release has to be 2.0.5 I would like to make an alternative
> > proposal, which would include
> > - stabilization of current 2.0.4
>
tantin Shvachko wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Arun C Murthy
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Apr 30, 2013, at 4:28 PM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
> >>
> >>> If the next release has to be 2.0.5 I would like to make an alternative
> >>>
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 12:07 AM, Chris Douglas wrote:
> Can anyone remember why we vote on release plans? -C
To vote on features to include in the release.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
Hi Arun and Suresh,
I am glad my choice of words attracted your attention. I consider this
important for the project otherwise I wouldn't waste everybody's time.
You tend reacting on a latest message taken out of context, which does not
reveal full picture.
I'll try here to summarize my proposal a
+1
I verified checksums, the signature, built sources on CentOS, ran tests and
a few hadoop commands.
Thanks,
--Konst
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 8:48 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> All,
>
> I have created a release candidate (rc0) for hadoop-2.0.4.1-alpha that I
> would
> like to release.
>
> Th
> Why not call this 2.0.5-alpha?
Technically, current branch-2 uses 2.0.5-SNAPSHOT and produces maven
artifacts with that version.
So having another version with the same numbers will be confusing.
Therefore 4-level numbers.
I thought I mentioned it to you before.
Thanks,
--Konst
On Thu, May 30
Sounds like a plan.
Thanks,
--Konst
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 8:41 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur wrote:
> Konstantin, Cos,
>
> As we change from 2.0.4.1 to 2.0.5 you'll need to do the following
> housekeeping as you work the new RC.
>
> * rename the svn branch
> * update the versions in the POMs
> * upd
+1
Did basic verification and testing.
Thanks,
--Konst
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 9:27 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> All,
>
> I have created a release candidate (rc1) for hadoop-2.0.5-alpha that I
> would
> like to release.
>
> This is a stabilization release that includes fixed for a couple a
+1
Thanks,
--Konst
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> I have rolled out release candidate (rc2) for hadoop-2.0.5-alpha.
>
> The difference between rc1 and rc2 is the "optimistic release date" is set
> for
> 06/06/2013 in the CHANGES.txt files.
>
> The binary artifact
+1
I did basic verification and testing of the rc.
Thanks,
--Konst
On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 9:00 AM, Thomas Graves wrote:
>
> I've created a release candidate (RC0) for hadoop-0.23.8 that I would like
> to release.
>
> This release is a sustaining release with several important bug fixes in
> it
Should we talk about making HDFS operations idempotent in the spirit of
HDFS-4849 and HDFS-4872?
Physical discussions may be more efficient, which can save us jira writing
time.
I can work on a short summary of what was discussed so far, proposed
approaches.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Mon, Jun 24,
Ok. After installing protobuf 2.5.0 I can compile trunk.
But now I cannot compile Hadoop-2 branches. None of them.
So if I switch between branches I need to reinstall protobuf?
Is there a consensus about going towards protobuf 2.5.0 upgrade in ALL
versions?
I did not get definite impression there
+1
Verified checksums, signatures.
Checked release notes.
Built the sources and ran tests.
Started a small cluster.
Tried hadoop commands, ran a few jobs.
Thanks,
--Konst
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> All,
>
> I have created a release candidate (rc0) for hadoop-
+1
Did the same as with rc0.
Works for me.
Thanks,
--Konst
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 10:29 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> All,
>
> I have created a release candidate (rc1) for hadoop-2.0.6-alpha that I
> would
> like to release.
>
> This is a stabilization release that includes fixed for a cou
Milind,
Seems as a proper time to open a Jira.
Looks to me nobody is objecting to the general idea of AbstractNamesystem.
As usually the details is what finally matters.
FSNamesystem does have a formal interface called Namesystem now, but
it is somewhat arbitrary and probably rudimentary for your
I explained my reasoning in the jira
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-4114?focusedCommentId=13841326&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13841326
And would like to ask people to hold off removing BN from trunk just yet.
I see it beneficial for ev
Yes format should check "in_use.lock".
What is your environment?
Does it support locks on you local file system?
Thanks,
--Konst
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 1:38 AM, Stanley Shi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have encountered this case in my environment:
>
> 1. NameNode is actively running without any problem
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 8:27 AM, Konstantin Shvachko
> wrote:
>
> > Yes format should check "in_use.lock".
> > What is your environment?
> > Does it support locks on you local file system?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --Konst
> >
>
running on vsphere VM with CentOS64 installed, Local file system is
> > ext3;
> >
> > Regards,
> > *Stanley Shi,*
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 8:27 AM, Konstantin Shvachko
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Yes format should check &qu
hat configurations.
> - The configuration storage backend is also pluggable. Currently an
> in-memory, leveldb, and zookeeper implementation are supported.
>
> There were 15 subtasks completed for this feature.
>
> Huge thanks to everyone who helped with reviews, commits, guida
Hey guys,
It is an interesting question whether Ozone should be a part of Hadoop.
There are two main reasons why I think it should not.
1. With close to 500 sub-tasks, with 6 MB of code changes, and with a
sizable community behind, it looks to me like a whole new project.
It is essentially a new
a design for scaling HDFS and how Ozone paves the way
> towards the full solution.
>
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/
> 12895963/HDFS%20Scalability%20and%20Ozone.pdf
>
>
> sanjay
>
>
>
>
> On Oct 28, 2017, at 2:00 PM, Konstantin Shvach
Hi developers,
We have accumulated about 30 commits on branch-2.7. Those are mostly
valuable bug fixes, minor optimizations and test corrections. I would like
to propose to make a quick maintenance release 2.7.5.
If there are no objections I'll start preparations.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
cautious about it.
>
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Konstantin Shvachko > wrote:
>
>> Hi developers,
>>
>> We have accumulated about 30 commits on branch-2.7. Those are mostly
>> valuable bug fixes, minor optimizations and test corrections. I would like
>
I would consider these two blockers for 2.8.3 as they crash NN:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-12638
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-12832
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:16 AM, Junping Du wrote:
> Thanks Andrew and Wangda for comments!
>
> To me, an impr
Hey guys,
I don't think this has been discussed, pardon if it was.
As it stands today hadoop 2.9.0 is marked as stable release. Isn't that
deceptive for users?
Not to diminish the quality and not to understate the effort, which was
huge and very much appreciated.
But it is the first in the series,
ested on fairly large
> clusters, production users can wait for a subsequent point release which
> will contain fixes from further stabilization and downstream adoption."
>
> Hope this suffices.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> shv.had
Hi everybody,
This is the next dot release of Apache Hadoop 2.7 line. The previous one
2.7.4 was release August 4, 2017.
Release 2.7.5 includes critical bug fixes and optimizations. See more
details in Release Note:
http://home.apache.org/~shv/hadoop-2.7.5-RC0/releasenotes.html
The RC0 is availab
nt
>>
>>
>> Looks follow commits are missed in changes.txt.
>>
>> MAPREDUCE-6975
>> HADOOP-14919
>> HDFS-12596
>> YARN-7084
>> HADOOP-14881
>> HADOOP-14827
>> HDFS-12832
>>
>>
>> --Brahma Reddy Battula
>>
>
14919
> HDFS-12596
> YARN-7084
> HADOOP-14881
> HADOOP-14827
> HDFS-12832
>
>
> --Brahma Reddy Battula
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Konstantin Shvachko [mailto:shv.had...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 02 December 2017 10:13
> T
.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 10:17 AM, Konstantin Shvachko
wrote:
> Hey Nagarasimha,
>
> Good find. thanks.
> Indeed we need those as they are linked from the side bar.
> I'll make sure to add CHANGES.txt when publishing new documentation.
>
> Thanks,
> --K
Hi everybody,
I updated CHANGES.txt and fixed documentation links.
Also committed MAPREDUCE-6165, which fixes a consistently failing test.
This is RC1 for the next dot release of Apache Hadoop 2.7 line. The
previous one 2.7.4 was release August 4, 2017.
Release 2.7.5 includes critical bug fixes
Hey Junping,
Could you pls upload mds relative to the tar.gz etc. files rather than
their full path
/build/source/target/artifacts/hadoop-2.8.3-src.tar.gz:
MD5 = E5 3D 04 47 7B 85 E8 B5 8A C0 A2 64 68 F0 47 36
Otherwise mds don't match for me.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 1:5
;
> *jduMBP:hadoop-2.8.3 jdu$ md5 ~/Downloads/hadoop-2.8.3-src.tar.gz*
> *MD5 (/Users/jdu/Downloads/hadoop-2.8.3-src.tar.gz) =
> e53d04477b85e8b58ac0a26468f04736*
>
> What's your md5 checksum for given source tar ball?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Junping
>
>
>
Here is my formal +1.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 7:22 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I updated CHANGES.txt and fixed documentation links.
> Also committed MAPREDUCE-6165, which fixes a consistently failing test.
>
> This is RC1 for the n
Brahma Reddy Battula
Eric Badger
Jonathan Hung
On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 7:22 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I updated CHANGES.txt and fixed documentation links.
> Also committed MAPREDUCE-6165, which fixes a consistently failing test.
>
> This is RC1 for the n
Correction:
With 7 binding and 4 non-binding +1s and no -1s the vote for Apache Release
2.7.5 passes.
Thank you everybody for contributing to the release, testing it, and voting.
Binding +1s
Kihwal Lee
Jason Lowe
John Zhuge
Rohith Sharma K S
Eric Payne
Zhe Zhang
Konstantin Shvachko
Non-binding
Zhang
Konstantin Shvachko
Naganarasimha Garla
Non-binding +1s
Erik Krogen
Brahma Reddy Battula
Eric Badger
Jonathan Hung
>> On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 7:22 PM, Konstantin Shvachko > > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everybody,
>>>
>>> I updated CHANGES.txt and fixed docum
Hi Sanjay,
With respect to Ozone my two main concerns were:
1. Wether Ozone can help scaling out the namespace service in handling
higher RPC workloads.
I think we came to common conclusion that using Ozone as a block management
layer is a reasonable path to scaling HDFS.
The discussions are in-pr
Planning to do a maintenance 2.7.6 release with close to 40 changes since
the last release.
If there are no objections I'll start preparations.
Please let me know if there are blockers:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-12641?filter=12343253
Thanks,
--Konstantin
Thanks Subru for initiating the thread about GPU support.
I think the path of taking 2.9 as a base for 2.10 and adding new resource
types into it is quite reasonable.
That way we can combine stabilization effort on 2.9 with GPUs.
Arun, upgrading Java is probably a separate topic.
We should discuss
The proposal to add it as a subproject of Hadoop makes sense to me. Thank
you Owen.
I am glad to have a path for scaling HDFS further, especially as it enters
areas like IoT and self-driving cars, where storage requirements are huge.
I am not very fond of the name HDSL, though. "Storage Layer" sou
Just heads up, working on the release candidate now.
It's been a while, I know. But we had some blockers.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 5:59 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
wrote:
> Planning to do a maintenance 2.7.6 release with close to 40 changes since
> the last release.
Hi everybody,
This is the next dot release of Apache Hadoop 2.7 line. The previous one 2.7.5
was released on December 14, 2017.
Release 2.7.6 includes critical bug fixes and optimizations. See more
details in Release Note:
http://home.apache.org/~shv/hadoop-2.7.6-RC0/releasenotes.html
The RC0 is
A note to release managers. As discussed in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-15205
We are producing release artifacts without sources jars. See e.g.
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/releases/org/apache/hadoop/hadoop-common/3.1.0/
I believe this has something to do with
A note to release managers. As discussed in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-15205
We are producing release artifacts without sources jars. See e.g.
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/releases/org/apache/hadoop/hadoop-common/3.0.1/
Based on what is staged on Nexus for 3.
Hi Lei,
Did you have any luck with deploy?
Could you please post your findings on
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-15205
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:10 PM, Lei Xu wrote:
> Ajay, thanks for spotting this.
>
> I am working on fix the deploy.
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 20
My formal +1 for 2.7.6 RC0
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 4:14 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> This is the next dot release of Apache Hadoop 2.7 line. The previous one
> 2.7.5 was released on December 14, 2017.
> Release 2.7.6 includes critica
Hi everybody,
With 4 binding and 4 non-binding +1s and no -1s the vote for Apache Release
2.7.6 passes.
Thank you everybody for contributing to the release, testing, and voting.
Binding +1s
Zhe Zhang
Brahma Reddy Battula
Jason Lowe
Konstantin Shvachko
Non-binding +1s
Chen Liang
Erik Krogen
Progress is good!
What are the four blockers?
Could you please mark them as such in the Jira.
Thanks,
--Konst
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli <
vino...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> Progress has been really slow, but now we are down to four blockers across
> the board.
>
> I
I don't think it makes sense to imprint the release quality with its
version.
They should be separate. And our recommendation for the quality can be
reflected in the documentation.
(1) is the way to go.
We had "alpha" imprinted in 2.0.5-alpha version, but both 2.0.5 and 2.0.6
releases were quite s
Thank you Allen!
--Konst
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 5:14 PM, Allen Wittenauer wrote:
>
> HDFS, MAPREDUCE, and YARN have been migrated.
>
> Let me know of any issues and I’ll try to get to them as I can. This
> should be the end of the Jenkins race conditions for our pre commits!
> *crosses fingers
thing. Am I right?
>
> I think that it's a good idea to have truly equal NNs doing their work in
> parallel, as Konstantin Shvachko mentioned.
>
> On 07/02/2015 04:49 PM, Esteban Gutierrez wrote:
>
>> Hi Dmitry,
>>
>> Have you looked into the QJM auto
I was wondering
1. What was the test plan that has been executed for testing this
implementation of HA? Besides unit tests.
2. Have you done any benchmarks, comparing current cluster performance
against the branch. Would be good to have numbers for both cases with
HA off and HA on.
I'll post these
rmance comparison at this point.
>
> -Todd
>
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Konstantin Shvachko
> wrote:
>> I was wondering
>> 1. What was the test plan that has been executed for testing this
>> implementation of HA? Besides unit tests.
>> 2. Have you don
Hi Dave,
Your opinion is very much appreciated.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 5:36 AM, Dave Shine
wrote:
> I am not a contributor to this project, so I don't know how much weight my
> opinion carries. But I have been hoping to see append become stable soon.
> We are constantl
Eli,
I went over the entire discussion on the topic, and did not get it. Is
there a problem with append? We know it does not work in hadoop-1,
only flush() does. Is there anything wrong with the new append
(HDFS-265)? If so please file a bug.
I tested it in Hadoop-0.22 branch it works fine.
I agr
Hi Todd,
I was wondering if you considered to make QuorumJournal a separate
project or subproject.
Given that
- it is 6600 lines of code
- the code is all new
- well separated in a separate package
- implements reliable journaling, which can have alternative
approaches (say Bookeeper)
Taking all
I think this is a great work, Todd.
And I think we should not merge it into trunk or other branches.
As I suggested earlier on this list I think this should be spinned off
as a separate project or a subproject.
- The code is well detached as a self contained package.
- It is a logically stand-alon
Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Todd Lipcon wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:21 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> wrote:
>> I think this is a great work, Todd.
>> And I think we should not merge it into trunk or other branches.
>> As I suggested earlier on this list I think this s
Don't understand your argument. Else where?
One way or another users will be talking to Todd.
Thanks,
--Konst
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Stack wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:21 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> wrote:
>> I think this is a great work, Todd.
>> And I th
, because it is still Hadoop.
--Konst
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Stack wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> wrote:
>> Don't understand your argument. Else where?
>
> You suggest users should download HDFS and then go to another project
&
ompeting technologies should exist outside the project.
Let different distributions compete outside the core.
--Konst
> On Thursday, September 27, 2012, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
>
>> Hi Todd,
>>
>> > I had said previously that it's worth
>> > discussing if s
POF in HDFS, within HDFS. I don't see
> how they make sense separately.
>
> On Thursday, September 27, 2012, Konstantin Shvachko wrote:
>
>> The SPOF is in HDFS. This project is about shared storage
>> implementation, that could be replaced by NFS or BookKeeper or
>&g
1. I probably missed something but I didn't get it how "alpha"s made their
way into release numbers again. This was discussed on several occasions and
I thought the common perception was to use just three level numbers for
release versioning and avoid branding them.
It is particularly confusing to
On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Andrew Wang
wrote:
> Hi Konst, thanks for commenting,
>
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 11:29 PM, Konstantin Shvachko > wrote:
>
>> 1. I probably missed something but I didn't get it how "alpha"s made
>> their way into re
Hey guys,
I and a few of my colleagues would like to help here and move 2.7.4 release
forward. A few points in this regard.
1. Reading through this thread since March 1 I see that Vinod hinted on
managing the release. Vinod, if you still want the job / have bandwidth
will be happy to work with yo
Wed, May 3, 2017 at 12:42 AM Konstantin Shvachko
> wrote:
>
>> Hey guys,
>>
>> I and a few of my colleagues would like to help here and move 2.7.4
>> release
>> forward. A few points in this regard.
>>
>> 1. Reading through this thread since March 1 I see th
est version to fix vulnerability in old versions
>
>
>
> Regards
> Brahma Reddy Battula
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Erik Krogen [mailto:ekro...@linkedin.com.INVALID]
> Sent: 06 May 2017 02:40
> To: Konstantin Shvachko
> Cc: Zhe Zhang; Hadoop Common; Hdfs-dev; mapre
e.org/Dzg4
> I couldn't see the link. Maybe is it private filter?
>
> Here is a link I generated: https://s.apache.org/ehKy
> This filter includes resolved issue and excludes fixversion == 2.7.4
>
> Thanks and Regards,
> Akira
>
> On 2017/05/08 19:20, Konstantin Shvac
2:30 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
wrote:
> Hey Akira,
>
> I didn't have private filters. Most probably Jira caches something.
> Your filter is in the right direction, but for some reason it lists only
> 22 issues, while mine has 29.
> It misses e.g. YARN-5543 <https://iss
7.4
>>>
>>> If you want to edit this wiki, please ping me.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Akira
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2017/05/23 4:42, Brahma Reddy Battula wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Konstantin Shvachko
>>>>
>>>&g
more testing is still going on.
I plan to build an RC next week. If there are no objection.
Thanks,
--Konst
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 4:42 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
wrote:
> Hey guys.
>
> An update on 2.7.4 progress.
> We are down to 4 blockers. There is some work remaining on th
+ d...@yetus.apache.org
Guys, could you please take a look. Seems like Yetus problem with
pre-commit build for branch-2.7.
Thanks,
--Konstantin
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 7:19 PM, Brahma Reddy Battula <
brahmareddy.batt...@huawei.com> wrote:
> Looks this problem is in only branc-2.7..
>
>
> --Brah
t 5:46 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> wrote:
> >
> > + d...@yetus.apache.org
> >
> > Guys, could you please take a look. Seems like Yetus problem with
> > pre-commit build for branch-2.7.
>
>
> branch-2.7 is missing stuff in .gitignore.
1 - 100 of 472 matches
Mail list logo
