On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Raymie Stata <rst...@altiscale.com> wrote:
> I took a look at items in 2.3 and 2.4, as well as CDH5 and HDP2 (also
> looked at a few of the patches to assess their risk levels), and came
> up with the following strawman propose of bug-patches to be included
> in a 2.2.1 release:
>
> HADOOP-10029 [major] - Specifying har file to MR job fails in secure
> cluster
>
> HDFS-5089 [major] - When a LayoutVersion supports SNAPSHOT, it must
> support FSIMAGE_NAME_OPTIMIZATION
> HDFS-5403 [major] - WebHdfs client cannot communicate with older
> WebHdfs servers post HDFS-5306
> HDFS-5433 [critical] - When reloading fsimage during checkpointing, we
> should clear existing snapshottable directories
>
> MAPREDUCE-5028 [critical] - Maps fail when io.sort.mb is set to high value
>
Has only been fixed in branch-1. Still to be fixed in branch-2; IMO, it is
critical, but not enough to include it in 2.2.1
>
> YARN-1295 [major] - In UnixLocalWrapperScriptBuilder, using bash -c
> can cause Text file busy errors
> YARN-1374 [blocker] - Resource Manager fails to start due to
> ConcurrentModificationException
>
I don't think this is a bug in 2.2. It was introduced by changes in
branch-2, not in 2.2
> YARN-1176 [critical] - RM web services ClusterMetricsInfo total nodes
> doesn't include unhealthy nodes
>
> There are lots of outstanding bug fixes, so this list is definitely a
> bit arbitrary, but it seemed like a good list to me. Any thoughts?
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Sandy Ryza <sandy.r...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> > Re-reading the thread, it seems what I said about 2.2.1 never happening
> was
> > incorrect. My impression is still that nobody has plans to drive a 2.2.1
> > release on any particular timeline.
> >
> > The changes that are now in 2.3 have been moved out of the branch-2.2.1.
> I
> > suppose the idea is that changes slated for 2.2.1 should be committed
> both
> > to branch-2.2 and branch-2.2.1.
> >
> > -Sandy
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Raymie Stata <rst...@altiscale.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Yes, that thread is part of what's confusing me. Arun's initial 11/8
> >> message suggests that there would be room for blocker fixes leading to
> >> a 2.2.1 patch release ("...and then be very careful about including
> >> only *blocker* fixes in branch-2.2"). And nothing else in that thread
> >> suggests that there wouldn't be a patch release. And yet, Sandy seems
> >> to think that "2.2.1 isn't happening at all" (YARN-1295), a view
> >> that's consistent with the currently confused state of the repo
> >> (branch-2.2.1 exists but not released, branch-2.2 version is
> >> 2.2.2-SNAPSHOT).
> >>
> >> Seems to me that we should be planning for a 2.2.1 patch release at
> >> some point...
> >>
> >> Raymie
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 1:17 AM, Steve Loughran <ste...@hortonworks.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > the last discussion on this was in november -I presume that's still
> the
> >> plan
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-common-dev/201311.mbox/%3CA31E1430-33BE-437C-A61E-050F9A67C109%40hortonworks.com%3E
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 3 January 2014 04:10, Raymie Stata <rst...@altiscale.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Nudge, any thoughts?
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 1:25 AM, Raymie Stata <rst...@altiscale.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> > In discussing YARN-1295 it's become clear that I'm confused about
> the
> >> >> > outcome of the "Next releases" thread. I had assumed there would
> be
> >> >> > patch releases to 2.2, and indeed one would be coming out early Q1.
> >> >> > Is this correct?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > If so, then things seem a little messed-up right now in 2.2-land.
> >> >> > There already is a branch-2.2.1, but there hasn't been a release.
> And
> >> >> > branch-2.2 has Maven version 2.2.2-SNAPSHOT. Due to the "2.3
> rename"
> >> >> > a few weeks ago, it might be that the first patch release for 2.2
> >> >> > needs to be 2.2.2. But if so, notice these lists of fixes for
> 2.2.1:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN/fixforversion/12325667
> >> >> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS/fixforversion/12325666
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Do these need to have their fix-versions updated?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Raymie
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > P.S. While we're on the subject of point releases, let me check my
> >> >> assumptions.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I assumed that, for release x.y.z, fixes deemed to be "critical bug
> >> >> > fixes" would be put into branch-x.y as a matter of course. The
> Maven
> >> >> > release-number in branch-x.y would be x.y.(z+1)-SNAPSHOT, and JIRAs
> >> >> > (to be) committed to branch-x.y would have x.y.(z+1) as one of
> their
> >> >> > fix-versions.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > When enough fixes have accumulated to warrant a release, or when a
> fix
> >> >> > comes up that is critical enough to warrant an immediate release,
> then
> >> >> > branch-x-y is branched to branch-x.y.(z+1), and a release is made.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > (As Hadoop itself moves from x.y to x.(y+1) and then x.(y+2), the
> >> >> > threshold for what is considered to be a "critical bug" would
> >> >> > naturally start to rise, as the effort of back-porting goes up.)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Do I have it right?
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> >> > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> entity
> >> to
> >> > which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> confidential,
> >> > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> reader
> >> > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> >> that
> >> > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> >> > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> >> > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> >> immediately
> >> > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> >>
>
