I don't have anything conclusive yet; it could also be related to our infra. I would not block the release.
Thomas On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 1:01 PM Udi Meiri <eh...@google.com> wrote: > Thomas, please let us know if you learn more about possible root causes to > the regression you're seeing. > Also, if you believe this should block the release then please vote -1. > > Does Beam have performance tests for the Python Flink portable streaming > case? > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 8:08 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> Quickly tested on beam-samples. >> >> Regards >> JB >> >> On 22/01/2020 16:33, Ismaël Mejía wrote: >> > +1 (binding) >> > >> > - Validated signatures >> > - Run Python wordcount on Direct runner (from wheels) >> > - Run Python wordcount on Flink runner with job-server image (via >> wheels) >> > - Run Python wordcount on Spark runner with job-server from source (via >> > wheels) >> > - Validate no regressions on Nexmark for Spark classic runner >> > - Validate provided artifacts in two external projects beam-samples + >> > one internal company project >> > >> > Thanks Kyle, I run it as you said and everything worked but there was a >> > weird exception on removal of a directory, but everything worked. >> > +1 to update release validation guide/script looks worth for this case. >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 1:59 AM Kyle Weaver <kcwea...@google.com >> > <mailto:kcwea...@google.com>> wrote: >> > >> > > Also, does anyone know how can I (we) validate the new docker >> > image for Flink's job server included in this release? >> > >> > To start the job server: >> > >> > docker run --net=host apachebeam/flink1.9_job_server:2.18.0_rc1 >> > >> > Then you can run any Beam Java/Python/Go job with job endpoint >> > localhost:8099 to validate. >> > >> > I can update the release validation script/guide with more >> instructions. >> > >> > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 1:48 PM Robert Bradshaw < >> rober...@google.com >> > <mailto:rober...@google.com>> wrote: >> > >> > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 12:04 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com >> > <mailto:al...@google.com>> wrote: >> > > >> > > This change (https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/10625) was >> > merged after the RC1 email was out. IMO, we do not need to block >> > RC1 vote for this. If there will be an RC2 the change will be >> > included. >> > >> > Agreed, we do not need to block RC1 due to this PR that didn't >> make >> > it. Just wanted to confirm that it wasn't an oversight. >> > >> > The signatures and wheels look good to me. +1 (binding). >> > >> > > I recall we had a similar thread before. Please, include the >> > release managers in the PRs that are/will be merged into the >> > release branch and tag JIRA issues with the all relevant >> > releases that should be blocked on it. >> > > >> > > Ahmet >> > > >> > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 11:36 AM Udi Meiri <eh...@google.com >> > <mailto:eh...@google.com>> wrote: >> > >> >> > >> I was not aware of >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-9123 or the PR on >> the >> > release branch. >> > >> >> > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 11:16 AM Robert Bradshaw >> > <rober...@google.com <mailto:rober...@google.com>> wrote: >> > >>> >> > >>> The source tarball seems to be missing the commit at >> > >>> >> > >> https://github.com/apache/beam/commit/a61dfbf4570e3adb30e15315c116751faeda897e >> > >>> >> > >>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 9:49 AM Ahmet Altay >> > <al...@google.com <mailto:al...@google.com>> wrote: >> > >>> > >> > >>> > All, could you help with validations and voting? >> > >>> > >> > >>> > On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 6:14 PM Ahmet Altay >> > <al...@google.com <mailto:al...@google.com>> wrote: >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> +1, validated the same things, they still work. Thank >> you. >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 5:01 PM Udi Meiri >> > <eh...@google.com <mailto:eh...@google.com>> wrote: >> > >>> >>> >> > >>> >>> Dataflow containers have been updated. Test away. >> > >>> >>> >> > >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 6:37 PM Udi Meiri >> > <eh...@google.com <mailto:eh...@google.com>> wrote: >> > >>> >>>> >> > >>> >>>> Here my second take: >> > >>> >>>> >> > >>> >>>> Hi everyone, >> > >>> >>>> Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for >> > the version 2.18.0, 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 <http://dist.apache.org> [2], which is signed >> > with the key with fingerprint 8961 F3EF 8E79 6688 4067 87CF >> > 587B 049C 36DA AFE6 [3], >> > >>> >>>> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central >> > Repository [4], >> > >>> >>>> * source code tag "v2.18.0-RC1" [5], >> > >>> >>>> * website pull request listing the release [6], >> > publishing the API reference manual [7], and the blog post [8]. >> > >>> >>>> * Java artifacts were built with Maven N/A and OpenJDK >> > 1.8.0_181-google-v7. >> > >>> >>>> * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source >> > release to the dist.apache.org <http://dist.apache.org> [2]. >> > >>> >>>> * Validation sheet with a tab for 2.18.0 release to >> > help with validation [9]. >> > >>> >>>> * Docker images published to Docker Hub [10]. >> > >>> >>>> >> > >>> >>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is >> > adopted by majority approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative >> votes. >> > >>> >>>> NOTE: The vote will start once new Dataflow containers >> > are built. >> > >>> >>>> >> > >>> >>>> Thanks, >> > >>> >>>> Release Manager >> > >>> >>>> >> > >>> >>>> [1] >> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12346383&projectId=12319527 >> > >>> >>>> [2] >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.18.0/ >> > >>> >>>> [3] >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS >> > >>> >>>> [4] >> > >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1090/ >> > >>> >>>> [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.18.0-RC1 >> > >>> >>>> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/10574 >> > >>> >>>> [7] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/595 >> > >>> >>>> [8] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/10575 >> > >>> >>>> [9] >> > >> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qk-N5vjXvbcEk68GjbkSZTR8AGqyNUM-oLFo_ZXBpJw/edit#gid=1178617819 >> > >>> >>>> [10] https://hub.docker.com/u/apachebeam >> > >>> >>>> >> > >>> >>>> >> > >>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 6:34 PM Udi Meiri >> > <eh...@google.com <mailto:eh...@google.com>> wrote: >> > >>> >>>>> >> > >>> >>>>> Please don't do any Dataflow-based verifications yet, >> > because we'll have to redo them once new Dataflow containers are >> > built. >> > >>> >>>>> >> > >>> >>>>> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 6:27 PM Ahmet Altay >> > <al...@google.com <mailto:al...@google.com>> wrote: >> > >>> >>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>> I verified python 2 quickstarts with batch and >> > streaming pipelines, wheel files, and reviewed changes to the >> > blog/website. >> > >>> >>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>> Udi, could you send an updated version of the voting >> > text with TODOs, template pieces removed? We can discuss changes >> > to the template separately. My vote is +1 pending an updated >> > vote text. >> > >>> >>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>> On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 4:47 PM Udi Meiri >> > <eh...@google.com <mailto:eh...@google.com>> wrote: >> > >>> >>>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>>> Sorry about the messiness. >> > >>> >>>>>>> The links at the bottom should be correct though. >> > >>> >>>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>>> I intentionally did not replace MAVEN_VERSION >> > because I didn't know how to get it (I didn't execute mvn for >> > the release). >> > >>> >>>>>>> As for JDK_VERSION, do we still need that? (If so, >> > what about Python versions, such as the ones used for testing?) >> > >>> >>>>>>> javac -version on my machine is 1.8.0_181-google-v7 >> > >>> >>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>> I believe we can drop MAVEN_VERSION now that it is no >> > longer used. I do not think it is needed to add a Gradle version >> > either because the version itself is part of the repo anyway. >> > >>> >>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>> I do not know if java, python etc. versions are >> > helpful. Maybe others can comment. I would prefer to reduce the >> > load on the release manager and drop this if this is not >> > particularly important. >> > >>> >>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 7:37 PM Valentyn Tymofieiev >> > <valen...@google.com <mailto:valen...@google.com>> wrote: >> > >>> >>>>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>>>> There are some issues in this message, part of the >> > message is still a template (1.2.3, TODO, MAVEN_VERSION). >> > >>> >>>>>>>> Before I noticed these issues, I ran a few Batch >> > and Streaming Python 3.7 pipelines using Direct and Dataflow >> > runners, and they all succeeded. >> > >>> >>>>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 4:09 PM Udi Meiri >> > <eh...@google.com <mailto:eh...@google.com>> wrote: >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> Hi everyone, >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> Please review and vote on the release candidate #3 >> > for the version 1.2.3, 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 <http://dist.apache.org> [2], which >> > is signed with the key with fingerprint 8961 F3EF 8E79 6688 >> > 4067 87CF 587B 049C 36DA AFE6 [3], >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven >> > Central Repository [4], >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> * source code tag "v1.2.3-RC3" [5], >> > >>> >>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>> Tag is "v2.18.0-RC1". This is correct in the >> > referenced link. >> > >>> >>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> * website pull request listing the release [6], >> > publishing the API reference manual [7], and the blog post [8]. >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> * Java artifacts were built with Maven >> > MAVEN_VERSION and OpenJDK/Oracle JDK JDK_VERSION. >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> TODO: do these versions matter, and are they >> > stamped into the artifacts? >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> * Python artifacts are deployed along with the >> > source release to the dist.apache.org <http://dist.apache.org> >> [2]. >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> * Validation sheet with a tab for 2.18.0 release >> > to help with validation [9]. >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> * Docker images published to Docker Hub [10]. >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is >> > adopted by majority approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative >> votes. >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> Release Manager >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> [1] >> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12346383&projectId=12319527 >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> [2] >> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.18.0/ >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> [3] >> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> [4] >> > >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1090/ >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> [5] >> https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.18.0-RC1 >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/10574 >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> [7] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/595 >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> [8] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/10575 >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> [9] >> > >> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qk-N5vjXvbcEk68GjbkSZTR8AGqyNUM-oLFo_ZXBpJw/edit#gid=1178617819 >> > >>> >>>>>>>>> [10] https://hub.docker.com/u/apachebeam >> > >> >> -- >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> jbono...@apache.org >> http://blog.nanthrax.net >> Talend - http://www.talend.com >> >
