I agree with Attila we should do our best to come out with the next GA soon. In order to do that we should treat the TPCDS regressions that are already reported. It doesn't make much sense to give out a GA that cannot run the whole TPCDS suite without crashing or returning wrong results.
If solving all the problems in a reasonable timeframe is not possible then I would suggest to cut another alpha or beta release. Best, Stamatis On Fri, May 12, 2023, 6:36 PM Attila Turoczy <aturo...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote: > Could we please give some attention to this topic? I strongly believe that > we should put in every effort to release Hive 4. The Hive community needs > to demonstrate that we are active and accomplishing exciting developments. > It is quite disheartening to note that our last major GA release was a > staggering 5 years ago on 18th May 2018! The significance of version 4.0 > cannot be overstated, and we should definitely prioritize its promotion. > > [image: image.png] > > -Attila > > On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 8:23 PM Kirti Ruge <kirtirug...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I see a few tickets like HIVE-26400 which is a major milestone, are >> resolved . >> Can we reevaluate priorities of other JIRAs so that It may give us clarity >> GO/NO-GO for 4.0.0 GA release and its timeline? >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> Kirti >> >> On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 3:27 PM Stamatis Zampetakis <zabe...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > Regarding correctness, I think it makes sense to change default values >> and >> > possibly add a warning note when there's a known risk of wrong results. >> > Needless to say that we should try to fix as many issues as possible; we >> > still need volunteers to review open PRS. >> > >> > Performances regressions are trickier but if we have the query plans >> (CBO + >> > full) along with logs (including task counters) for fast and slow >> execution >> > we may be able to understand what happens. Don't hesitate to create Jira >> > tickets with these information if available. >> > >> > Last regarding 4.0.0 blockers, I don't think we need a special label. >> The >> > built-in and widely used priority "blocker" seems enough to capture the >> > importance and urgency of a ticket. >> > Since I am the release manager for the next release I will go over >> tickets >> > marked as blockers and reevaluate priorities if necessary. >> > >> > Best, >> > Stamatis >> > >> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2023, 10:27 AM Denys Kuzmenko <dkuzme...@apache.org> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Thanks, Sungwoo for running the TPC-DS benchmark. Do we know if the >> same >> > > level of performance degradation was present in 4.0.0-alpha1? >> > > >> > > All: please use the `hive-4.0.0-must` label in a ticket if you think >> it's >> > > a show-stopper for the release. >> > > >> > >> >
