I say just do it. Eli said it wasn't a blocker. Sure it ain't perfect, but it's good enough.
Let's move on to 0.22 and beyond. Nige On Jan 13, 2011, at 8:23 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > > On Jan 13, 2011, at 6:50 PM, Eli Collins wrote: > >> The cdh3 patch set Todd is talking about is not vanilla 104.3, it's >> 104.3 re-based onto 20.2 plus patches from branch-20 and trunk (the >> performance and stability fixes I think you're referring to, at least >> the ones that have been posted to Apache jira). >> >> Can you post a pointer to the version you're referring to, eg on >> github? If there isn't a big delta between it and the cdh3 patch set >> (which should have the 20-based patches from jira) perhaps you and >> Todd could easily merge in the delta to create 0.20.x? >> > > I can guarantee it will need work to merge the enhancements since 20.104.3, > it's over 6 months of development. The enhancements includes work on > stability such as iterative ls, limits on JT to prevent single jobs/users > from taking it down etc. and lots of bug-fixes to security. So, unfortunately > the delta is pretty large. > > I'm working on a CHANGES.txt which should reflect all the changes i.e. > bug-fixes and enhancements. > >>> The version I'm offering to push to the community has fixed all of them, >>> *plus* the added benefit of several stability and performance fixes we have >>> done since 20.104.3, almost 10 internal releases. This is a battle tested >>> and hardened version which we have deployed on 40,000+ nodes. It is a >>> significant upgrade on 0.20.104.3 which we never deployed. I'm pretty sure >>> *some* users will find that valuable. ;) >> >> Definitely, but better to hit two birds with one stone right? Instead >> of a security + enhancements release and an append release we could >> have a single security + append + enhancements release and users don't >> have to choose. >> > > > We are discussing two options: > 20 + security + enhancements > 20 + security + append > > I think the value we provide via 20+security+enhancements release is that > it's stable, tested and deployed at scale. Doing any more work merging 6 > months of work at Yahoo (again, I guarantee it's a lot of work) will need a > lots of cycles to validate, test and stabilize. > > I feel the alternative is a distraction for me, I'd rather work on 0.22. > > I can get 20+security+enhancements done very, very, quickly precisely because > I don't have to spend cycles testing it. > > Does that make sense? Thanks for being patient and bearing with me... > > Arun >
