+1 (non binding)

*Verified - User Group Queue mapping - Node labels with New UI- Dynamic
queuesThanksSuma*


On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 11:48 AM, Steve Loughran <ste...@hortonworks.com>
wrote:

> that's "dangerously interesting". I think you are right, and I also think
> it'll just be the version files which get generated
>
> anyway, +1 binding
>
> * ran my new Hadoop-3 profile on spark (SPARK-23807), with the committer
> binding, then my downstream tests. All is well, provided you also have a
> spark hive JAR patched to accept hadoop 3 as a legitimate hadoop version.
> That's an ongoing issue in the Spark project. With that JAR on my CP my
> downstream tests were all happy (yesterday)
>
> * today the staging files seem to be missing, at least maven is unable to
> find them even when I turn the spark snapshots-and-staging profile on.
> That'll be the maven dist process at play, nothing else
>
> On 4 Apr 2018, at 04:13, Wangda Tan <wheele...@gmail.com<mailto:wh
> eele...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Vinod / Arpit,
>
> I checked following versions:
> - 2.6.5 / 2.7.5 / 2.8.3 / 2.9.0 / 3.0.1:
>
> Jars in maven repo [1] are *always* different from jars in the binary
> tarball [2]: (I only checked hadoop-yarn-api-version.jar)
>
> (Following numbers are sizes of the jar)
> 2.6.5:
> - Jar in Maven: 1896185
> - Jar in tarball: 1891485
>
> 2.7.5:
> - Jar in Maven: 2039371 (md5: 15e76f7c734b49315ef2bce952509ddf)
> - Jar in tarball: 2039371 (md5: 0ef9f42f587401f5b49b39f27459f3ef)
> (Even size is same, md5 is different)
>
> 2.8.3:
> - Jar in Maven: 2451433
> - Jar in tarball: 2438975
>
> 2.9.0:
> - Jar in Maven: 2791477
> - Jar in tarball: 2777789
>
> 3.0.1:
> - Jar in Maven: 2852604
> - Jar in tarball: 2851373
>
> I guess the differences come from our release process.
>
> Thanks,
> Wangda
>
> [1] Maven jars are downloaded from
> https://repository.apache.org/service/local/repositories/
> releases/content/org/apache/hadoop/hadoop-yarn-api/
> <version>/hadoop-yarn-api-<version>.jar
> [2] Binary tarballs downloaded from http://apache.claz.org/hadoop/common/
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 4:25 PM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli <
> vino...@apache.org<mailto:vino...@apache.org>>
> wrote:
>
> We vote on the source code. The binaries are convenience artifacts.
>
> This is what I would do - (a) Just replace both the maven jars as well as
> the binaries to be consistent and correct. And then (b) Give a couple more
> days for folks who tested on the binaries to reverify - I count one such
> clear vote as of now.
>
> Thanks
> +Vinod
>
>
> On Apr 3, 2018, at 3:30 PM, Wangda Tan <wheele...@gmail.com<mailto:wh
> eele...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> HI Arpit,
>
> I think it won't match if we do rebuild. It should be fine as far as
> they're signed, correct? I don't see any policy doesn't allow this.
>
> Thanks,
> Wangda
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 9:33 AM, Arpit Agarwal <aagar...@hortonworks.com<
> mailto:aagar...@hortonworks.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Thanks Wangda, I see the shaded jars now.
>
> Are the repo jars required to be the same as the binary release? They
> don’t match right now, probably they got rebuilt.
>
> +1 (binding), modulo that remaining question.
>
> * Verified signatures
> * Verified checksums for source and binary artefacts
> * Sanity checked jars on r.a.o.
> * Built from source
> * Deployed to 3 node secure cluster with NameNode HA
> * Verified HDFS web UIs
> * Tried out HDFS shell commands
> * Ran sample MapReduce jobs
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> From: Wangda Tan <wheele...@gmail.com<mailto:wheele...@gmail.com>>
> Date: Monday, April 2, 2018 at 9:25 PM
> To: Arpit Agarwal <aagar...@hortonworks.com<mailto:aagarwal@hortonworks.
> com>>
> Cc: Gera Shegalov <ger...@gmail.com<mailto:ger...@gmail.com>>, Sunil G <
> sun...@apache.org<mailto:sun...@apache.org>>, "
> yarn-...@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:yarn-...@hadoop.apache.org>" <
> yarn-...@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:yarn-...@hadoop.apache.org>>, Hdfs-dev <
> hdfs-...@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:hdfs-...@hadoop.apache.org>>, Hadoop
> Common <common-...@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:common-...@hadoop.apache.org
> >>,
> "mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org>"
> <mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org<mailto:mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org>>,
> Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli <vino...@apache.org<mailto:vino...@apache.org>>
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 3.1.0 (RC1)
>
> As pointed by Arpit, the previously deployed shared jars are incorrect.
> Just redeployed jars and staged. @Arpit, could you please check the updated
> Maven repo? https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapachehadoop-1092
>
> Since the jars inside binary tarballs are correct (
> http://people.apache.org/~wangda/hadoop-3.1.0-RC1/). I think we don't
> need roll another RC, just update Maven repo should be sufficient.
>
> Best,
> Wangda
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 2:39 PM, Wangda Tan <mailto:wheele...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> Hi Arpit,
>
> Thanks for pointing out this.
>
> I just removed all .md5 files from artifacts. I found md5 checksums still
> exist in .mds files and I didn't remove them from .mds file because it is
> generated by create-release script and Apache guidance is "should not"
> instead of "must not". Please let me know if you think they need to be
> removed as well.
>
> - Wangda
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 1:37 PM, Arpit Agarwal <mailto:
> aagar...@hortonworks.com<mailto:aagar...@hortonworks.com>> wrote:
> Thanks for putting together this RC, Wangda.
>
> The guidance from Apache is to omit MD5s, specifically:
> SHOULD NOT supply a MD5 checksum file (because MD5 is too broken).
>
> https://www.apache.org/dev/release-distribution#sigs-and-sums
>
>
>
>
> On Apr 2, 2018, at 7:03 AM, Wangda Tan <mailto:wheele...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Gera,
>
> It's my bad, I thought only src/bin tarball is enough.
>
> I just uploaded all other things under artifact/ to
> http://people.apache.org/~wangda/hadoop-3.1.0-RC1/
>
> Please let me know if you have any other comments.
>
> Thanks,
> Wangda
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 12:50 AM, Gera Shegalov <mailto:ger...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks, Wangda!
>
> There are many more artifacts in previous votes, e.g., see
> http://home.apache.org/~junping_du/hadoop-2.8.3-RC0/ .  Among others the
> site tarball is missing.
>
> On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 11:54 PM Sunil G <mailto:sun...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks Wangda for initiating the release.
>
> I tested this RC built from source file.
>
>
>  - Tested MR apps (sleep, wc) and verified both new YARN UI and old RM
> UI.
>  - Below feature sanity is done
>     - Application priority
>     - Application timeout
>     - Intra Queue preemption with priority based
>     - DS based affinity tests to verify placement constraints.
>  - Tested basic NodeLabel scenarios.
>     - Added couple of labels to few of nodes and behavior is coming
>     correct.
>     - Verified old UI  and new YARN UI for labels.
>     - Submitted apps to labelled cluster and it works fine.
>     - Also performed few cli commands related to nodelabel.
>  - Test basic HA cases and seems correct.
>  - Tested new YARN UI . All pages are getting loaded correctly.
>
>
> - Sunil
>
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 9:45 AM Wangda Tan <mailto:wheele...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Hi folks,
>
> Thanks to the many who helped with this release since Dec 2017 [1].
> We've
>
> created RC1 for Apache Hadoop 3.1.0. The artifacts are available here:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~wangda/hadoop-3.1.0-RC1
>
> The RC tag in git is release-3.1.0-RC1. Last git commit SHA is
> 16b70619a24cdcf5d3b0fcf4b58ca77238ccbe6d
>
> The maven artifacts are available via http://repository.apache.org<h
> ttp://repository.apache.org/> at
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapachehadoop-1090/
>
> This vote will run 5 days, ending on Apr 3 at 11:59 pm Pacific.
>
> 3.1.0 contains 766 [2] fixed JIRA issues since 3.0.0. Notable additions
> include the first class GPU/FPGA support on YARN, Native services,
> Support
>
> rich placement constraints in YARN, S3-related enhancements, allow HDFS
> block replicas to be provided by an external storage system, etc.
>
> For 3.1.0 RC0 vote discussion, please see [3].
>
> We’d like to use this as a starting release for 3.1.x [1], depending on
> how
>
> it goes, get it stabilized and potentially use a 3.1.1 in several weeks
> as
>
> the stable release.
>
> We have done testing with a pseudo cluster:
> - Ran distributed job.
> - GPU scheduling/isolation.
> - Placement constraints (intra-application anti-affinity) by using
> distributed shell.
>
> My +1 to start.
>
> Best,
> Wangda/Vinod
>
> [1]
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b3fb3b6da8b6357a68513a6dfd104b
> c9e19e559aedc5ebedb4ca08c8@%http://3Cyarn-dev.hadoop.apache.org<
> http://3cyarn-dev.hadoop.apache.org/>
> <http://3cyarn-dev.hadoop.apache.org/>%3E
>
> [2] project in (YARN, HADOOP, MAPREDUCE, HDFS) AND fixVersion in (3.1.0)
> AND fixVersion not in (3.0.0, 3.0.0-beta1) AND status = Resolved ORDER
> BY
>
> fixVersion ASC
> [3]
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b3a7dc075b7329fd660f65b48237d7
> 2d4061f26f83547e41d0983ea6@%http://3Cyarn-dev.hadoop.apache.org<
> http://3cyarn-dev.hadoop.apache.org/>
> <http://3cyarn-dev.hadoop.apache.org/>%3E
>
>

Reply via email to