Vinod, I have the patches to revert most of the JIRAs, the first batch, I'll send them off line to you.
Thanks. On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 8:56 PM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli <vino...@apache.org>wrote: > > Thanks. please post your findings, Jian wrote this part of the code and > between him/me, we can take care of those issues. > > +1 for going ahead with the revert on branch-2.3. I'll go do that tomorrow > morning unless I hear otherwise from Jian. > > Thanks, > +Vinod > > > On Feb 6, 2014, at 8:28 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <t...@cloudera.com> wrote: > > > Hi Vinod, > > > > Nothing confidential, > > > > * With umanaged AMs I'm seeing the trace I've posted a couple of days ago > > in YARN-1577 ( > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-1577?focusedCommentId=13891853&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13891853 > > ). > > > > * Also, Robert has been digging in Oozie testcases failing/getting suck > > with several token renewer threads, this failures happened consistently > at > > different places around the same testcases (like some file descriptors > > leaking out), reverting YARN-1490 fixes the problem. The potential issue > > with this is that a long running client (oozie) my run into this > situation > > thus becoming unstable. > > > > *Robert,* mind posting to YARN-1490 the jvm thread dump at the time of > test > > hanging? > > > > After YARN-1493 & YARN-1490 we have a couple of JIRAs trying to fix > issues > > introduced by them, and we still didn't get them right. > > > > Because this, the improvements driven by YARN-1493 & YARN-1490 seem that > > require more work before being stable. > > > > IMO, being conservative, we should do 2.3 without them and roll them with > > 2.4. If we want to do regular releases we will have to make this kind of > > calls, else we will start dragging the releases. > > > > Sounds like a plan? > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli > > <vino...@apache.org>wrote: > > > >> Hey > >> > >> I am not against removing them from 2.3 if that is helpful for progress. > >> But I want to understand what the issues are before we make that > decision. > >> > >> There is the issue with unmanaged AM that is clearly known and I was > >> thinking of coming to the past two days, but couldn't. What is this new > >> issue that we (confidently?) pinned down to YARN-1490? > >> > >> Thanks > >> +Vinod > >> > >> On Feb 6, 2014, at 5:07 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <t...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > >> > >>> Thanks Robert, > >>> > >>> All, > >>> > >>> So it seems that YARN-1493 and YARN-1490 are introducing serious > >>> regressions. > >>> > >>> I would propose to revert them and the follow up JIRAs from the 2.3 > >> branch > >>> and keep working on them on trunk/branch-2 until the are stable (I > would > >>> even prefer reverting them from branch-2 not to block a 2.4 if they are > >> not > >>> ready in time). > >>> > >>> As I've mentioned before, the list of JIRAs to revert were: > >>> > >>> YARN-1493 > >>> YARN-1490 > >>> YARN-1166 > >>> YARN-1041 > >>> YARN-1566 > >>> > >>> Plus 2 additional JIRAs committed since my email on this issue 2 days > >> ago: > >>> > >>> *YARN-1661 > >>> *YARN-1689 (not sure if this JIRA is related in functionality to the > >>> previous ones but it is creating conflicts). > >>> > >>> I think we should hold on continuing work on top of something that is > >>> broken until the broken stuff is fixed. > >>> > >>> Quoting Arun, "Committers - Henceforth, please use extreme caution > while > >>> committing to branch-2.3. Please commit *only* blockers to 2.3." > >>> > >>> YARN-1661 & YARN-1689 are not blockers. > >>> > >>> Unless there are objections, I'll revert all these JIRAs from > branch-2.3 > >>> tomorrow around noon and I'll update fixedVersion in the JIRAs. > >>> > >>> I'm inclined to revert them from branch-2 as well. > >>> > >>> Thoughts? > >>> > >>> Thanks. > >>> > >>> > >>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Robert Kanter <rkan...@cloudera.com> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>>> I think we should revert YARN-1490 from Hadoop 2.3 branch. I think it > >> was > >>>> causing some strange behavior in the Oozie unit tests: > >>>> > >>>> Basically, we use a single MiniMRCluster and MiniDFSCluster across all > >> unit > >>>> tests in a module. With YARN-1490 we saw that, regardless of test > >> order, > >>>> the last few tests would timeout waiting for an MR job to finish; on > >> slower > >>>> machines, the entire test suite would timeout. Through some digging, > I > >>>> found that we were getting a ton of "Connection refused" Exceptions on > >>>> LeaseRenewer talking to the NN and a few on the AM talking to the RM. > >>>> > >>>> After a bunch of investigation, I found that the problem went away > once > >>>> YARN-1490 was removed. Though I couldn't figure out the exact > problem. > >>>> Even though this occurred in unit tests, it does make me concerned > that > >> it > >>>> could indicate some bigger issue in a long-running real cluster (where > >>>> everything isn't running on the same machine) that we haven't seen > yet. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Karthik Kambatla <ka...@cloudera.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> I have marked MAPREDUCE-5744 a blocker for 2.3. Committing it > shortly. > >>>> Will > >>>>> pull it out of branch-2.3 if anyone objects. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Arpit Agarwal < > >> aagar...@hortonworks.com > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Merged HADOOP-10273 to branch-2.3 as r1565456. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Arpit Agarwal < > >>>> aagar...@hortonworks.com > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> IMO HADOOP-10273 (Fix 'mvn site') should be included in 2.3. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I will merge it to branch-2.3 tomorrow PST if no one disagrees. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur < > >>>> t...@cloudera.com > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> IMO YARN-1577 is a blocker, it is breaking unmanaged AMs in a very > >>>> odd > >>>>>>>> ways > >>>>>>>> (to the point it seems un-deterministic). > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I'd say eiher YARN-1577 is fixed or we revert > >>>>>>>> YARN-1493/YARN-1490/YARN-1166/YARN-1041/YARN-1566 (almost clean > >>>>> reverts) > >>>>>>>> from Hadoop 2.3 branch before doing the release. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I've verified that after reverting those JIRAs things work fine > with > >>>>>>>> unmanaged AMs. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Thanks. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Arun C Murthy < > a...@hortonworks.com > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I punted YARN-1444 to 2.4 since it's a long-standing issue. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Jian is away and I don't see YARN-1577 & YARN-1206 making much > >>>>>> progress > >>>>>>>>> till he is back; so I'm inclined to push both to 2.4 too. Any > >>>>>>>> objections? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Looks like Daryn has both HADOOP-10301 & HDFS-4564 covered. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Overall, I'll try get this out in next couple of days if we can > >>>>> clear > >>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>> list. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> thanks, > >>>>>>>>> Arun > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Feb 3, 2014, at 12:14 PM, Arun C Murthy <a...@hortonworks.com> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> An update. Per https://s.apache.org/hadoop-2.3.0-blockers we > >>>> are > >>>>>> now > >>>>>>>>> down to 5 blockers: 1 Common, 1 HDFS, 3 YARN. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Daryn (thanks!) has both the non-YARN covered. Vinod is helping > >>>>> out > >>>>>>>> with > >>>>>>>>> the YARN ones. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> thanks, > >>>>>>>>>> Arun > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>> Arun C. Murthy > >>>>>>>>> Hortonworks Inc. > >>>>>>>>> http://hortonworks.com/ > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>> 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. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>> Alejandro > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -- > >>>>>> 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. > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Alejandro > >> > >> > >> -- > >> 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. > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Alejandro > > > -- > 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. > -- Alejandro
