Thank you for opening a PR for this. Chesnay, do you need more reviews for the metrics changes / backports?
Are there any other release blockers for 1.2.1, or are we good to go? On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 6:48 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org> wrote: > I created a PR for the revert: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3664 > > > On 3. Apr 2017, at 18:32, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > +1 for options (1), but also invest the time to fix it properly for 1.2.2 > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Kostas Kloudas < > k.klou...@data-artisans.com> > > wrote: > > > >> +1 for 1 > >> > >>> On Apr 3, 2017, at 5:52 PM, Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> > wrote: > >>> > >>> +1 for option 1) > >>> > >>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 5:48 PM, Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>>> +1 to option 1) > >>>> > >>>> 2017-04-03 16:57 GMT+02:00 Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com>: > >>>> > >>>>> Looks like #1 is better - 1.2.1 would be at least as stable as 1.2.0 > >>>>> > >>>>> Cheers > >>>>> > >>>>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 7:39 AM, Aljoscha Krettek < > aljos...@apache.org> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Just so we’re all on the same page. ;-) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> There was https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5808 which > was > >> a > >>>>>> bug that we initially discovered in Flink 1.2 which was/is about > >>>> missing > >>>>>> verification for the correctness of the combination of parallelism > and > >>>>>> max-parallelism. Due to lacking test coverage this introduced two > more > >>>>> bugs: > >>>>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6188: Some > >>>>>> setParallelism() methods can't cope with default parallelism > >>>>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6209: > >>>>>> StreamPlanEnvironment always has a parallelism of 1 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> IMHO, the options are: > >>>>>> 1) revert the changes made for FLINK-5808 on the release-1.2 branch > >>>> and > >>>>>> live with the bug still being present > >>>>>> 2) put in more work to fix FLINK-5808 which requires fixing some > >>>>> problems > >>>>>> that have existed for a long time with how the parallelism is set in > >>>>>> streaming programs > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Best, > >>>>>> Aljoscha > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 31. Mar 2017, at 21:34, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I don't know what is best to do, but I think releasing 1.2.1 with > >>>>>>> potentially more bugs than 1.2.0 is not a good option. > >>>>>>> I suspect a good workaround for FLINK-6188 > >>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6188> is setting the > >>>>>>> parallelism manually for operators that can't cope with the default > >>>> -1 > >>>>>>> parallelism. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 9:06 PM, Aljoscha Krettek < > >>>> aljos...@apache.org > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> You mean reverting the changes around FLINK-5808 [1]? This is what > >>>>>>>> introduced the follow-up FLINK-6188 [2]. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5808 > >>>>>>>> [2]https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6188 > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017, at 19:10, Robert Metzger wrote: > >>>>>>>>> I think reverting FLINK-6188 for the 1.2 branch might be a good > >>>> idea. > >>>>>>>>> FLINK-6188 introduced two new bugs, so undoing the FLINK-6188 fix > >>>>> will > >>>>>>>>> lead > >>>>>>>>> only to one known bug in 1.2.1, instead of an uncertain number of > >>>>>> issues. > >>>>>>>>> So 1.2.1 is not going to be worse than 1.2.0 > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> The fix will hopefully make it into 1.2.2 then. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Any other thoughts on this? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 6:46 PM, Fabian Hueske < > fhue...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I merged the fix for FLINK-6044 to the release-1.2 and > release-1.1 > >>>>>>>> branch. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-31 15:02 GMT+02:00 Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com>: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> We should also backport the fix for FLINK-6044 to Flink 1.2.1. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I'll take care of that. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-30 18:50 GMT+02:00 Aljoscha Krettek < > aljos...@apache.org > >>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6188 turns out to > >>>> be > >>>>> a > >>>>>>>> bit > >>>>>>>>>>>> more involved, see my comments on the PR: > >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3616. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> As I said there, maybe we should revert the commits regarding > >>>>>>>>>>>> parallelism/max-parallelism changes and release and then fix > it > >>>>>>>> later. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017, at 23:08, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I commented on FLINK-6214: I think it's working as intended, > >>>>>>>> although > >>>>>>>>>> we > >>>>>>>>>>>>> could fix the javadoc/doc. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017, at 17:35, Timo Walther wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> A user reported that all tumbling and slinding window > >>>> assigners > >>>>>>>>>>>> contain > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a pretty obvious bug about offsets. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6214 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should also fix this for 1.2.1. What do you > think? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Timo > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 29/03/17 um 11:30 schrieb Robert Metzger: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Haohui, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree that we should fix the parallelism issue. > Otherwise, > >>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>> 1.2.1 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release would introduce a new bug. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:59 PM, Haohui Mai < > >>>>>>>> ricet...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -1 (non-binding) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We recently found out that all jobs submitted via UI will > >>>>>>>> have a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parallelism of 1, potentially due to FLINK-5808. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Filed FLINK-6209 to track it. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ~Haohui > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 2:59 AM Chesnay Schepler < > >>>>>>>>>>>> ches...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If possible I would like to include FLINK-6183 & > FLINK-6184 > >>>>>>>> as > >>>>>>>>>>>> well. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They fix 2 metric-related issues that could arise when a > >>>>>>>> Task is > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cancelled very early. (like, right away) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FLINK-6183 fixes a memory leak where the TaskMetricGroup > >>>> was > >>>>>>>>>>>> never closed > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FLINK-6184 fixes a NullPointerExceptions in the buffer > >>>>>>>> metrics > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PR here: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3611 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 26.03.2017 12:35, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I opened a PR for FLINK-6188: > https://github.com/apache/ > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flink/pull/3616 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3616> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This improves the previously very sparse test coverage > for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> timestamp/watermark assigners and fixes the bug. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 25 Mar 2017, at 10:22, Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree with Aljoscha. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -1 because of FLINK-6188 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Aljoscha Krettek < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aljos...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I filed this issue, which was observed by a user: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6188 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that’s blocking for 1.2.1. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 24 Mar 2017, at 18:57, Ufuk Celebi < > u...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RC1 doesn't contain Stefan's backport for the > >>>>>>>> Asynchronous > >>>>>>>>>>>> snapshots > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for heap-based keyed state that has been merged. > Should > >>>>>>>> we > >>>>>>>>>>>> create > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RC2 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with that fix since the voting period only starts on > >>>>>>>> Monday? > >>>>>>>>>>>> I think > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it would only mean rerunning the scripts on your > side, > >>>>>>>>>> right? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> – Ufuk > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Robert Metzger < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rmetz...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear Flink community, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please vote on releasing the following candidate as > >>>>>>>> Apache > >>>>>>>>>>>> Flink > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version 1.2 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .1. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The commit to be voted on: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *732e55bd* (* > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/flink/commit/ > >>>>>>>> 732e55bd > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://git-wip-us.apache.org/ > >>>>>>>>>> repos/asf/flink/commit/732e55b > >>>>>>>>>>>> d>*) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Branch: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release-1.2.1-rc1 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The release artifacts to be voted on can be found > at: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *http://people.apache.org/~ > rmetzger/flink-1.2.1-rc1/ > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://people.apache.org/~ > rmetzger/flink-1.2.1-rc1/ > >>>>> * > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The release artifacts are signed with the key with > >>>>>>>>>>>> fingerprint > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> D9839159: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/flink/KEYS > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The staging repository for this release can be found > >>>>>>>> at: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/ > >>>>>>>> content/repositories/orgapache > >>>>>>>>>>>> flink-1116 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------ > >>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------ > >>>>>>>>>>>> - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The vote ends on Wednesday, March 29, 2017, 3pm CET. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Flink 1.2.1 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package, because ... > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > >
