Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 12:40 PM, Ismaël Mejía wrote: > From the Apache point of view nothing impedes anyone from doing > intermediate releases for non LTS releases, only needed thing is > someone willing to do the release and the due vote process. > Agreed. I was not suggesting not doing a

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

>From the Apache point of view nothing impedes anyone from doing intermediate releases for non LTS releases, only needed thing is someone willing to do the release and the due vote process. I don’t know however how will we decide this, we are exactly in the middle of the release cycle and in 3

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Kenneth Knowles wrote: > I think definitely open a cherry pick PR to a 2.8.x branch. I think we > must not corrupt maven central, so if it is published to users this has to > be 2.8.1. Ahmet - we are to this point, right? > Yes, if someone is willing to make a

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

Mmm 2.8.0 is already in maven central, so probably worth to discuss if other backports are needed too. On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 4:55 PM Kenneth Knowles wrote: > > I think definitely open a cherry pick PR to a 2.8.x branch. I think we must > not corrupt maven central, so if it is published to

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

I think definitely open a cherry pick PR to a 2.8.x branch. I think we must not corrupt maven central, so if it is published to users this has to be 2.8.1. Ahmet - we are to this point, right? Kenn On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 8:40 AM Ismaël Mejía wrote: > First thanks Etienne and Kenn for noting

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

I didn't isolate it to a cause and commit, so that is extremely useful to know. To bring some details on thread: query 4: a single aggregation in sliding windows query 8: a single join with no other interesting logic query 9 (prefix of query 6*): find the winning bid for each auction query 6:

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

Oops, just saw than Kenn already mentioned spark perf degradation on spark runner around 10/05. Sorry for the repetition.Nevertheless, IMHO, I think it will be still worth checking PR #6181. Etienne Le lundi 29 octobre 2018 à 10:42 +0100, Etienne Chauchot a écrit : > Hey,I would vote -0 : here is

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

Hey,I would vote -0 : here is the explanation: I took a look at Nexmark dashboards for output size and performance for all the runners in all the modes around the date of the release cut to search for regressions. I noted a regression on the performance of the spark runner. Query4, Query6,

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

+1 (binding) Quickly tested with beam-samples. Regards JB On 26/10/2018 17:05, Tim Robertson wrote: > A colleague and I tested on 2.7.0 and 2.8.0RC1: > > 1. Quickstart on Spark/YARN/HDFS (CDH 5.12.0) (commented in spreadsheet) > 2. Our Avro to Avro pipelines on Spark/YARN/HDFS (note we

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

I pushed binaries to the repositories. I started a blog post draft, please feel to make any changes directly, or comment on it [1]. I plan to publish the blog post along with an email to user@ on Monday 10/29. Ahmet [1] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6852 On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 10:16 AM,

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

+1 (binding) Thank you all for running validations and voting. I'm pleased to announce that the 2.8.0 RC1 is approved for release with 5 +1 votes (4 binding) and no -1 votes. I will start pushing the bits around. On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 9:20 AM, Maximilian Michels wrote: > +1 (binding) > >

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

+1 (binding) On 26.10.18 17:45, Kenneth Knowles wrote: Nice. Thanks. +1 On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 8:44 AM Robert Bradshaw > wrote: Thanks Tim! This was my only hesitation, and sounds like we're in the clear here. +1 (binding) On Fri, Oct 26, 2018

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

Nice. Thanks. +1 On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 8:44 AM Robert Bradshaw wrote: > Thanks Tim! > > This was my only hesitation, and sounds like we're in the clear here. > > +1 (binding) > On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 5:05 PM Tim Robertson > wrote: > > > > A colleague and I tested on 2.7.0 and 2.8.0RC1: >

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

Thanks Tim! This was my only hesitation, and sounds like we're in the clear here. +1 (binding) On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 5:05 PM Tim Robertson wrote: > > A colleague and I tested on 2.7.0 and 2.8.0RC1: > > 1. Quickstart on Spark/YARN/HDFS (CDH 5.12.0) (commented in spreadsheet) > 2. Our Avro to

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

A colleague and I tested on 2.7.0 and 2.8.0RC1: 1. Quickstart on Spark/YARN/HDFS (CDH 5.12.0) (commented in spreadsheet) 2. Our Avro to Avro pipelines on Spark/YARN/HDFS (note we backport the un-merged BEAM-5036 fix in our code) 3. Our Avro to Elasticsearch pipelines on Spark/YARN/HDFS

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

I can do some tests on Spark / YARN tomorrow (CEST timezone). Sorry I’ve just been too busy to assist. Tim > On 25 Oct 2018, at 18:59, Kenneth Knowles wrote: > > I tried to do a more thorough job on this. > > - I could not reproduce the slowdown in Query 9. I believe the variance was >

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

I tried to do a more thorough job on this. - I could not reproduce the slowdown in Query 9. I believe the variance was simply high given the parameters and environment - I saw the same slowdown in Query 8 when running as part of the suite, but it vanished when I ran repeatedly on its own, so

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

I've run WordCount using Quickstart with the FlinkRunner (locally and against a Flink cluster). Would give a +1 but waiting what Kenn finds. -Max On 23.10.18 07:11, Ahmet Altay wrote: On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 10:06 PM, Kenneth Knowles > wrote: You two did so

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

You two did so much verification I had a hard time finding something where my help was meaningful! :-) I did run the Nexmark suite on the DirectRunner against 2.7.0 and 2.8.0 following https://beam.apache.org/documentation/sdks/java/nexmark/#running-smoke-suite-on-the-directrunner-local . It is

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

Hi all, Did you have a chance to review this RC? Between me and Robert we ran a significant chunk of the validations. Let me know if you have any questions. Ahmet On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 5:26 PM, Ahmet Altay wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the

[VOTE] Release 2.8.0, release candidate #1

Hi everyone, Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the version 2.8.0, as follows: [ ] +1, Approve the release [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments) The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes: * JIRA release notes [1], *