*nod* Ok. Arun
On Jan 13, 2011, at 10:08 PM, "Nigel Daley" <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 >> >
