Hi Kenn,
As said, I just gave an extra couple of days to Stas and I to try to fix the
issue. However, we didn't fix it yet, and I'm still struggling to find the exact
cause as we have different tests failures.
So, I will cut RC3 as it is and we will fix the tests issue for 2.2.0 that we
can release pretty quickly.
We are holding the release for too long (roughly a month).
Regards
JB
On 08/08/2017 01:27 AM, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
I agree with Eugene's proposal.
Suppose it takes <n> days to grok and fix CreateStreamTest. If we compare
delaying 2.1.0 versus releasing it immediately and starting 2.2.0:
- Users get 2.1.0 ASAP and then 2.2.0 in <n> days
- Users get 2.1.0 in <n> days
The now-failing tests were flaky, and we have some confidence that the
changes that caused the failing are good. So if this is an apparent
regression for a user, it is likely that they are in danger already.
A third alternative is that users get 2.1.0 ASAP, 2.2.0 ASAP after that to
keep the cadence going, and 2.3.0 after <n> days if we can't sort this
quickly. This is consistent with treating it as an existing and ongoing
bug, which it likely is.
Kenn
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Eugene Kirpichov <
[email protected]> wrote:
If https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 is a 2.1.0 blocker then
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-1868 also should be, because
it's a failure of another method in the same test and I suppose it
indicates brokenness to the same extent. Or both shouldn't.
Given the progress so far, the chances of resolving the JIRA quickly are
looking bleak to me now, and the release has been going on for almost 1
month, and many large improvements have been added to Beam HEAD since the
first RC was cut.
I'm still in favor of:
1) cutting 2.1.0 RC3 immediately, and acknowledging that streaming in Spark
runner in cluster mode is still (potentially) broken in this release - to
the same or smaller extent than in 2.0.0, so this is not a regression. The
extent is still not clear to me; I asked on the JIRA.
2) immediately or very soon after this 2.1.0, start cutting 2.2.0, and
target these issues to 2.2.0.
My argument is:
- 2.1.0 contains 2.5 months worth of new features, and releasing them will
benefit a lot of existing Beam users
- I don't think there are that many users for whom it's critically
important whether the first release with working Spark streaming will be
2.1.0 or 2.2.0, especially if we start cutting 2.2.0 very soon. This is
speculation though
- (subjective personal feeling) The release process requires participation
and momentum from community members, and letting it drag on for too long
loses that momentum.
We should anyway pursue resolving the issues asap, and users who were
eagerly waiting for Spark streaming to work properly can run Beam at HEAD
in the window between when they are first resolved and when 2.2.0 is
released.
What do you think?
On Sat, Aug 5, 2017 at 9:31 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>
wrote:
Another quick update.
Aviem updated the Jira as he and his team wants to take a look. I'm also
doing a
new bisect on my side. I've given an extra day to move forward. If we
don't have
clear statement tonight, then, I will cut the RC3 tonight or tomorrow
morning
(my time).
Regards
JB
On 08/05/2017 02:37 AM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote:
I did some more investigation on that JIRA
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 and my conclusion is:
We need to postpone that JIRA to 2.2.0 and finalize release 2.1.0
as-is.
The TL;DR of my investigation is that:
- We have some confidence that Spark runner in 2.1.0 generally works
properly: it passes ValidatesRunner tests, and there's been some amount
of
manual testing.
- Release 2.0.0 does not contain a critical fix and, if I understand
correctly, Spark runner at 2.0.0 was basically unusable in streaming
cluster mode.
- So, even if the JIRA signals that there is something wrong in the
Spark
runner at 2.1.0, it's definitely better than 2.0.0 so there is no
regression for the user.
I moved the JIRA to 2.2.0 so there are no blocking issues remaining for
2.1.0. JB - the next step is for you to proceed with cutting the RC,
correct?
Thanks.
On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 7:04 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>
wrote:
Another quick update. Regarding BEAM-2671, I asked help from Stas and
Aviem on
this one. It's our high priority as it's the main blocking issue
before
cutting RC3.
At some point, if we are not able to move fast on this one, I would
propose to
cut RC3 as it is.
Regards
JB
On 08/02/2017 08:52 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi,
Thanks Eugene for the sumup.
BEAM-2708 is now fixed.
The last blocking issue for RC3 is BEAM-2671. I spent time today on
this
one,
investigating the different issues.
Agree that help from Aviem and Kenn would help for sure.
Aviem already started to kindly take a look on the Jira today.
Clearly, it would be great to fix BEAM-2671 in the coming 36 hours. I
would like
to submit RC3 to vote tomorrow or the day after (my time).
Thanks !
Regards
JB
On 08/02/2017 08:24 PM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote:
We're down to 2 issues.
BEAM-2670 has been fixed.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2708 has a fix in review
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2671 is the nasty one
and
we
don't understand it nor have a fix. Help is needed; some people who
could
help are +Kenn Knowles <[email protected]> and +Aviem Zur <
[email protected]>
.
On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 6:41 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
[email protected]
wrote:
Hi guys,
We have three open issues for the 2.1.0 that we need to fix before
I
will
be
able to cut RC3:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/BEAM/versions/12340528
I'm working on BEAM-2671.
Any help is welcome for the two other Jiras (BEAM-2587 and
BEAM-2670).
Thanks !
Regards
JB
On 07/18/2017 06:30 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi everyone,
Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version
2.1.0, as
follows:
[ ] +1, Approve the release
[ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific
comments)
The complete staging area is available for your review, which
includes:
* JIRA release notes [1],
* the official Apache source release to be deployed to
dist.apache.org
[2],
which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3],
* all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository
[4],
* source code tag "v2.1.0-RC2" [5],
* website pull request listing the release and publishing the API
reference
manual [6].
* Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to
the
dist.apache.org [2].
The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by
majority
approval,
with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.
Thanks,
JB
[1]
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
projectId=12319527&version=12340528
[2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.1.0/
[3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS
[4]
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1019/
[5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.1.0-RC2
[6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/270
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[email protected]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[email protected]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[email protected]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
[email protected]
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
