Accumulo-Master - Build # 3110 - Fixed
The Apache Jenkins build system has built Accumulo-Master (build #3110) Status: Fixed Check console output at https://builds.apache.org/job/Accumulo-Master/3110/ to view the results.
[GitHub] [accumulo] keith-turner commented on pull request #1614: Create max tablets property in new bulk import
keith-turner commented on pull request #1614: URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/1614#issuecomment-639933614 @milleruntime I went ahead and merged this because you said you thought it was ready to merge and I worked up a follow on test in #1623. This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [accumulo] keith-turner opened a new pull request #1623: Added unit test for too many tablets in bulk import
keith-turner opened a new pull request #1623: URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/1623 This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [accumulo] keith-turner merged pull request #1614: Create max tablets property in new bulk import
keith-turner merged pull request #1614: URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/1614 This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [accumulo-proxy] keith-turner commented on pull request #23: accumulo-proxy #22 - Reduce Docker image size
keith-turner commented on pull request #23: URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo-proxy/pull/23#issuecomment-639872939 > So perhaps we can modify this but if so do we need to put any documentation/license information anywhere? I think we would be fine making a modification w/o doing anything additional. We could also wget the two needed jars from maven central possibly instead of getting the hadoop tar ball and then trimming it. > I didn't want to do something in good faith but potentially cause issues for us down the line so hence I haven't included that change currently. I think if anything was done to reduce the Hadoop size, it would make sense to do it in its own PR. This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [accumulo-proxy] keith-turner commented on a change in pull request #23: accumulo-proxy #22 - Reduce Docker image size
keith-turner commented on a change in pull request #23: URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo-proxy/pull/23#discussion_r436193567 ## File path: Dockerfile ## @@ -13,20 +13,18 @@ # See the License for the specific language governing permissions and # limitations under the License. -FROM openjdk:8 +FROM openjdk:8-alpine3.9 Review comment: Very nice analysis and write up of the analysis. This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [accumulo-proxy] keith-turner commented on a change in pull request #23: accumulo-proxy #22 - Reduce Docker image size
keith-turner commented on a change in pull request #23: URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo-proxy/pull/23#discussion_r436193437 ## File path: Dockerfile ## @@ -13,20 +13,18 @@ # See the License for the specific language governing permissions and # limitations under the License. -FROM openjdk:8 +FROM openjdk:8-alpine3.9 Review comment: I am in favor of 8-jre-slim because its more up to date and its based on Debian which I think a larger base of contributors and users may be familiar with. This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [accumulo-proxy] volmasoft commented on a change in pull request #23: accumulo-proxy #22 - Reduce Docker image size
volmasoft commented on a change in pull request #23: URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo-proxy/pull/23#discussion_r436041167 ## File path: Dockerfile ## @@ -13,20 +13,18 @@ # See the License for the specific language governing permissions and # limitations under the License. -FROM openjdk:8 +FROM openjdk:8-alpine3.9 Review comment: I don't think I spotted it to be fair, it's about 3M smaller so might be worth it and as you say it seems to be getting kept up to date. Note, all values here unless specified otherwise are from the Docker command. I did a quick rebuild with the new one and this is the sizes: - openjdk:8-alpine3.9 1058822286 bytes - openjdk:8-jre-slim 1136341123 bytes (+73 MB) So it was actually larger to use the smaller base image, not what I expected, I did have to add wget and removed the installation of bash from the current Dockerfile as it was already present in 8-jre-slim On disk the pulled images were different to dockerhub values - openjdk:8-alpine3.9 - 105MB (disk) 70.09MB (dockerhub) - opendjk:8-jre-slim - 184MB (disk) (dockerhub) Looking into it, it seems that dockerhub reports the compressed size, not the size on disk once you pull the image. I did the comparison for the final image sizes: - openjdk:8-alpine3.9 base - 1.06GB - openjdk:8-jre-slim base - 1.14GB I tested both builds so they both function the same, perhaps taking the 80MB increase is worth it for being up to date? What are your thoughts, stick with what we have or update to 8-jre-slim? This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [accumulo-proxy] volmasoft commented on pull request #23: accumulo-proxy #22 - Reduce Docker image size
volmasoft commented on pull request #23:
URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo-proxy/pull/23#issuecomment-639542202
> @volmasoft on the issue removing the hadoop docs folder was mentioned, but
I did not see it.
>
> Based on the [default Accumulo
classpath](https://github.com/apache/accumulo/blob/rel/2.0.0/assemble/conf/accumulo-env.sh#L59),
maybe everything except `${HADOOP_HOME}/share/hadoop/client/*` and the hadoop
conf dir could be removed.
I wasn't sure if it's allowable to remove it e.g. does the license restrict
it, as I'm no expert in this arena I was hoping someone else would be able to
provide guidance.
Looking at the official license (https://apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0) it
appears that we should be fine (see 4. Redistribution)
"4. Redistribution. You may reproduce and distribute copies of the Work or
Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without modifications, and in
Source or Object form, provided that You meet the following conditions:"
So perhaps we can modify this but if so do we need to put any
documentation/license information anywhere?
I didn't want to do something in good faith but potentially cause issues for
us down the line so hence I haven't included that change currently.
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [accumulo] milleruntime commented on pull request #1614: Create max tablets property in new bulk import
milleruntime commented on pull request #1614: URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/1614#issuecomment-639469949 @keith-turner want to take a last look at this? I think it is ready to merge. This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [accumulo] ivakegg commented on pull request #1622: fixes #1621: The ClientPool thread pool allows all core threads to time out
ivakegg commented on pull request #1622: URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/1622#issuecomment-639458877 Any thoughts on whether this should be done on the 1.9 branch? I was hesitant since we are adding new properties, however I know our system will want this in 1.9. I can always back-port on our internal branch. This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [accumulo] ivakegg commented on a change in pull request #1622: fixes #1621: The ClientPool thread pool allows all core threads to time out
ivakegg commented on a change in pull request #1622:
URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/1622#discussion_r435894344
##
File path: core/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/core/conf/Property.java
##
@@ -452,6 +458,9 @@
"The time to wait for a tablet server to process a bulk import
request."),
TSERV_MINTHREADS("tserver.server.threads.minimum", "20", PropertyType.COUNT,
"The minimum number of threads to use to handle incoming requests."),
+ TSERV_MINTHREADS_ALLOW_TIMEOUT("tserver.server.thread.timeout.allowed",
"true",
Review comment:
ok, I am game for that. I will change it now.
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
