This has gotten fairly delayed. 0.9 seems to be a moving target at this
point. I believe there's at least one issue related to Unordered Output
which needs to be resolved.
I think we should get that in, and then create an RC with whatever has gone
in by 06/30. The blocker jira does not list anything at the moment.

On Sun, Jun 4, 2017 at 6:47 PM, Siddharth Seth <[email protected]> wrote:

> Jon, Thanks for getting back.
>
> For the three jiras mentioned.
> TEZ-3617. Wonder if there is a way to do this without having to change the
> dependency to 2.7.2?
> 3605. Will try reviewing the patch this week, unless someone else gets to
> it first.
> TEZ-3274. I tend to agree that this would be better suited to go in early
> in a release cycle. Shouldn't block a 0.9 release anyway.
>
> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Jonathan Eagles <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hey Sid, thanks for a callout of jiras for 0.9 release. There are a couple
>> of jiras I felt are worthy of considering. None are blocking in that
>> sense,
>> but all are in patch available. As always, I can wait another release
>> cycle
>> if the community is eager for a release sooner rather than later.
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3617
>>  - This jira itself is relating only to a test failure on certain
>> architectures. The reason I call this one out is that is bumps the YARN
>> dependency from 2.7.0 to 2.7.2. A first 0.9 release gives expectations of
>> minimum requirements. Again we can live with this one for a while, but now
>> might be a chance to put this in.
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3605
>>  - This jira is a follow on to the Tez Shuffle Handler. This avoids the
>> fetching of empty partitions while doing composite fetch. This gives the
>> fetcher better decision making in the empty fetch case and avoids flooding
>> the log file with warnings as well as some performance benefits.
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3274
>>  - This jira provides considerable utilization reduction for certain
>> category of jobs. The change in the root input vertex manager behavior may
>> be better suited earlier rather than later in a release cycle.
>>
>> Regards,
>> jeagles
>>
>
>

Reply via email to