I apologize that I mistakenly sent the email to dev@ozone. It is totally my fault.
Tsz-Wo On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 10:44 PM Sumit Agrawal <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Nicholas, > > Thanks for the feedback and seems this feedback is just based on *only last > interaction* for HDDS-14040 which induced the issue and where we tried to > fix the actual issue. > > *The interaction was not good due to fact in difference in expection > between us for discussion (since the problem is complicated),* > - I prefer POC code for experiments and getting quick test result, but > you prefer exact implementation and test result. But I feel we get same > output, and its based on different working style to achieve same result. > - You expect more details written on temporary doc and full flow to take > decision, but as I know the flow related to that area, I tend to skip for > discussion as seems un-necessary. Some deep unrelated behavior, as not in > finger tip, needs relook code. > > *Coming to fact of process being followed for the bug:* > HDDS-14040: > - This was reviewed and approved by you as expert review for ratis & ozone > integration and merged only after that. > - Test cases are added with due-deligence, covering scenarios and covering > scenario impact as thought during that time. > > Fix: all test cases are added and merged only after approval. > > *Improvement for Ratis integration with ozone for DN flow:* > - Already lot of discussion has happened to handle flaky nature of ratis > and ozone integration. Still no concrete solution. > > > *Coming to the concerns you have mentioned:* > > > *- Why did the change get merged? No tests added along with the changes.* > I have never merged any PR without the approval and being reviewed. If any > facts, please share. > Showing *urgency* to fix problem is justifiable (still taken 2 monts to get > fixed) and expected for delivery. > > - When we were discussing the issue, I found he actually neither understood > the code nor the problem, > - Sumit initially proposed some other changes without trying to > completely understand > the code first. > *This is a communication gap* of your expectation and my delivery as *doc*. > I may know the flow as required for the bug, but you have asked for > complete flow in doc as you might be trying to understand and to take > decision for solution. This does not provide any outcome of my > understanding. > > - When we came up with a potential bug fix, Sumit wanted to merge it > without adding new tests. > - When Sumit agreed to add tests, the tests he proposed again were way too > simple. > IMO, have added all required test cases and scenario as suggested. Adding > test cases are never being objected and neither in comments being ignored. > I do appreciate your opinion about getting tested on multiple internal > environment. > > Still if any sceanrio is missed for test case in apache ozone, and need > some improvement, eager to fix and handle. Please share if anything > remaining as not handled. > > So I think all comments are based on different expectation that happened > during discussion, but *Apache* *Ozone process is never compromised and > eager to take expert opinion as I lack Ratis depth code flow*. And always > there is an improvement. > > @Nicholas: Apache Ozone contribution can never be denied based on internal > discussion and differences in opinion about the proceeding. Please recheck > your opinion over this. > > > Regards > Sumit > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 1:49 PM Tsz Wo Sze <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Sammi and others, > > > > Thanks for bringing up this discussion! > > > > I worked with him closely in the same company previously. One of the > > issues caused job slowness, which was reported by some users. Sumit > tried > > to fix it. He committed some code changes. Unfortunately, that > particular > > change could cause data loss, a much more severe problem. The good thing > > was that, although the change was merged, the problem had been discovered > > before causing real data loss. > > > > Of course, all developers including you and me are susceptible to > > introducing bugs. However, the manner in which the bug was introduced, > > along with Sumit’s subsequent handling of the issue, has given rise to > > significant concern. > > > > - Why did the change get merged? No tests added along with the changes. > > Sumit did test it manually but the manual tests conducted were way too > > simple. > > > > - When we were discussing the issue, I found he actually > > neither understood the code nor the problem, but he dared to merge > > the code. Note that the code he changed was at the most important data > > path in Ozone. > > > > - Sumit initially proposed some other changes without trying to > completely > > understand the code first. > > > > - When we came up with a potential bug fix, Sumit wanted to merge it > > without adding new tests. The reason was that adding new tests was not > > easy. It was understandable but unacceptable. > > > > - When Sumit agreed to add tests, the tests he proposed again were way > too > > simple. > > > > We spent a long time having many discussions. He finally was convinced > -- > > for that particular issue, we had to understand the problem first and > also > > had to test the change seriously. > > > > I would agree that Sumit is smart and very good at debugging, and he has > > made a lot of contributions to Ozone. However, he might be immature to > > handle important issues. Therefore, I would disagree with nominating him > > as a PMC member. > > > > Regards, > > Tsz-Wo > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 30, 2026 at 12:14 AM Sammi Chen <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > Dear PMCs, > > > > > > I would like to propose adding Sumit Agrawal[1] to the PMC. > > > > > > Sumit > > > - has been a committer on 2023-05-22, 3 years ago [2] > > > - has contributed 156 PRs [3], 476 reviews [4] > > > > > > These are the highlights of his contributions > > > - Fix broken Quota function with FSO bucket and Legacy bucket, and > later > > > quota for snapshot support. [5][6] > > > - Improve HDDS block deletion efficiency. [7] > > > - Handling disk issues, preventing disk becomes full, and handle > > duplicate > > > container replicas on a datanode[8] > > > - Distributed tracing improvement, migrate from OpenTracing to > > > OpenTelemetry[9] > > > - Migrating Ozone Manager replication from post Ratis execution to Pre > > > Ratis execution, design discussion, and work on the POC. [10][11] > > > > > > Besides above feature based contributions, Sumit also has a lot of > > > production cluster issue investigation and fix experiences, and > > contributed > > > a lot of critical fixes to Ozone, > > > including performance bottleneck resolve, data loss prevention, etc. > > > I think he is a good candidate for Ozone PMC. He will bring his unique > > > insight to the community. What do you think? > > > > > > Disclaimer: We share the same employer. > > > > > > - Sammi Chen > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/sumitagrawl > > > [2] https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/committer/sumitagrawal > > > [3] > > > > https://github.com/apache/ozone/issues?q=is%3Apr%20author%3Asumitagrawl > > > [4] > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/ozone/pulls?q=is%3Apr+reviewed-by%3Asumitagrawl+ > > > [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-7479 > > > [6] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-7598 > > > [7] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-6548 > > > [8] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-12564 > > > [9] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-13679 > > > [10] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-11897 > > > [11] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-11900 > > > > > > > > -- > *Sumit Agrawal* | Senior Staff Engineer > cloudera.com <https://www.cloudera.com> > [image: Cloudera] <https://www.cloudera.com/> > [image: Cloudera on Twitter] <https://twitter.com/cloudera> [image: > Cloudera on Facebook] <https://www.facebook.com/cloudera> [image: Cloudera > on LinkedIn] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/cloudera> > ------------------------------ >
