21:39
> To: dev@flink.apache.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [ANNOUNCE] Release 1.18.0, release candidate #0
> Hi David,
>
> It’s a deliberate choice to decouple the connectors. We shouldn’t block
> Flink 1.18 on connector statuses. There’s already work being done to fix
> the Flink
regression like this,
Kind regards, David.
From: Martijn Visser
Date: Thursday, 5 October 2023 at 21:39
To: dev@flink.apache.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [ANNOUNCE] Release 1.18.0, release candidate #0
Hi David,
It’s a deliberate choice to decouple the connectors. We shouldn’t block
Flink 1.18
wanting to release a Kafka connector when there are no changes just to have
> a match with the Flink core version.
>
> Kind regards, David.
>
>
>
> From: Jing Ge
> Date: Wednesday, 4 October 2023 at 17:36
> To: dev@flink.apache.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [ANNOUNCE]
October 2023 at 17:36
To: dev@flink.apache.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [ANNOUNCE] Release 1.18.0, release candidate #0
Hi David,
First of all, we should have enough time to wait for those issues to
be resolved. Secondly, it makes less sense to block upstream release by
downstream build issues. In case
and
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33017 are resolved before
> releasing 1.18?
>
> Kind regards, David.
>
>
> From: Jing Ge
> Date: Wednesday, 27 September 2023 at 15:11
> To: dev@flink.apache.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [ANNOUNCE] Release 1.18.0,
?
Kind regards, David.
From: Jing Ge
Date: Wednesday, 27 September 2023 at 15:11
To: dev@flink.apache.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [ANNOUNCE] Release 1.18.0, release candidate #0
Hi Folks,
@Ryan FYI: CI passed and the PR has been merged. Thanks!
If there are no more other concerns, I will
Hi Folks,
@Ryan FYI: CI passed and the PR has been merged. Thanks!
If there are no more other concerns, I will start publishing 1.18-rc1.
Best regards,
Jing
On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 1:40 PM Jing Ge wrote:
> Hi Ryan,
>
> Thanks for reaching out. It is fine to include it but we need to wait
> un
Hi Ryan,
Thanks for reaching out. It is fine to include it but we need to wait until
the CI passes. I am not sure how long it will take, since there seems to be
some infra issues.
Best regards,
Jing
On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 11:34 AM Ryan Skraba
wrote:
> Hello! There's a security fix that proba
Hello! There's a security fix that probably should be applied to 1.18
in the next RC1 : https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/23461 (bump to
snappy-java). Do you think this would be possible to include?
All my best, Ryan
[1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33149 "Bump
snappy-java to
Thanks Zakelly for the update! Appreciate it!
@Piotr Nowojski If you do not have any other
concerns, I will move forward to create 1.18 rc1 and start voting. WDYT?
Best regards,
Jing
On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 2:20 AM Zakelly Lan wrote:
> Hi Jing and everyone,
>
> I have conducted three rounds o
Hi Jing and everyone,
I have conducted three rounds of benchmarking with Java11, comparing
release 1.18 (commit: deb07e99560[1]) with commit 6d62f9918ea[2]. The
results are attached[3]. Most of the tests show no obvious regression.
However, I did observe significant change in several tests. Upon
r
+1 for testing with Java 17
Jing Ge 于2023年9月24日周日 09:40写道：
> +1 for testing with Java 17 too. Thanks Zakelly for your effort!
>
> Best regards,
> Jing
>
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 1:01 PM Zakelly Lan wrote:
>
> > Hi Jing,
> >
> > I agree we could wait for the result with Java 11. And it should b
+1 for testing with Java 17 too. Thanks Zakelly for your effort!
Best regards,
Jing
On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 1:01 PM Zakelly Lan wrote:
> Hi Jing,
>
> I agree we could wait for the result with Java 11. And it should be
> available next Monday.
> Additionally, I could also build a pipeline with J
Hi Jing,
I agree we could wait for the result with Java 11. And it should be
available next Monday.
Additionally, I could also build a pipeline with Java 17 later since
it is supported in 1.18[1].
Best regards,
Zakelly
[1]
https://github.com/apache/flink/commit/9c1318ca7fa5b2e7b11827068ad12884
Hi Zakelly,
Thanks for your effort and the update! Since Java 8 has been deprecated[1],
let's wait for the result with Java 11. It should be available after the
weekend and there should be no big surprise. WDYT?
Best regards,
Jing
[1]
https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-docs-master/release-
Hi everyone,
I want to provide an update on the benchmark results that I have been
working on. After spending some time preparing the environment and
adjusting the benchmark script, I finally got a comparison between
release 1.18 (commit: 2aeb99804ba[1]) and the commit before the old
codespeed ser
Hi, Zakelly,
No benchmark tests currently are affected by this issue. We
may add benchmarks to guard it later. Thanks.
Best,
Yuxin
Zakelly Lan 于2023年9月21日周四 11:56写道：
> Hi Jing,
>
> Sure, I will run the benchmark with this fix.
>
> Hi Yunxin,
>
> I'm not familiar with the hybrid shuffle. Is th
Hi Jing,
Sure, I will run the benchmark with this fix.
Hi Yunxin,
I'm not familiar with the hybrid shuffle. Is there any specific
benchmark test that may be affected by this issue? I will pay special
attention to it.
Thanks.
Best,
Zakelly
On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 10:08 AM Yuxin Tan wrote:
>
>
Hi, Jing, Qingsheng,
Thanks a lot.
The fix has been backported.
Best,
Yuxin
Jing Ge 于2023年9月21日周四 00:42写道：
> Hi Lijie,
>
> Thanks for reaching out. Please backport it to release-1.18.
>
> Best regards,
> Jing
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 4:35 PM Lijie Wang
> wrote:
>
> > Hi community and rele
Hi Lijie,
Thanks for reaching out. Please backport it to release-1.18.
Best regards,
Jing
On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 4:35 PM Lijie Wang wrote:
> Hi community and release managers:
>
> We found a critical bug[1] of the rest client a few days ago, which may
> cause the inode to be used up. Now the
Hi, dear community and release managers,
Thanks for bringing this up.
When testing the release candidate #0 for the batch scenario, I found an
issue of frequent flushing in Hybrid shuffle. It is a new bug introduced by
1.18 and may significantly impact the performance of shuffle writing.
The fix
Thanks for the update, Lijie! The patch will be included in the next RC.
Best,
Qingsheng
On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 10:12 PM Lijie Wang
wrote:
> Hi community and release managers:
>
> We found a critical bug[1] of the rest client a few days ago, which may
> cause the inode to be used up. Now the f
Hi, dear community and release managers,
Thanks for bringing this up.
When testing the release candidate #0 for the batch scenario, I found an
issue of frequent flushing in Hybrid shuffle. It is a new bug introduced by
1.18 and may significantly impact the performance of shuffle writing.
The fix
Hi, dear community and release managers,
Thanks for bringing this up.
When testing the release candidate #0 for the batch scenario, I found an
issue of frequent flushing in Hybrid shuffle. It is a new bug introduced by
1.18 and may significantly impact the performance of shuffle writing.
The fix
Hi, dear community and release managers,
Thanks for bringing this up.
When testing the release candidate #0 for the batch scenario, I found an
issue of frequent flushing in Hybrid shuffle. It is a new bug introduced by
1.18 and may significantly impact the performance of shuffle writing.
The fix
Thanks for letting us know, Yuxin.
Please go ahead and backport it to 1.18. We will include the patch in the
next release candidate.
Best,
Qingsheng
On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 8:54 PM Yuxin Tan wrote:
> Hi, dear community and release managers,
>
> Thanks for bringing this up.
>
> When testing the
Hi community and release managers:
We found a critical bug[1] of the rest client a few days ago, which may
cause the inode to be used up. Now the fix-PR[2] is ready for merging, I
hope to backport it to release-1.18.
Please let me know if you have any concerns. Thanks.
[1] https://issues.apache.
Hi Yuxin,
Thanks for the update. LGTM. @Zakelly Please please be aware of that and
make sure the benchmarks test will include that fix. Thanks!
Best regards,
Jing
On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 8:51 AM Yuxin Tan wrote:
> Hi, dear community and release managers,
>
> Thanks for bringing this up.
>
> Wh
Hi, dear community and release managers,
Thanks for bringing this up.
When testing the release candidate #0 for the batch scenario, I found an
issue of frequent flushing in Hybrid shuffle. It is a new bug introduced by
1.18 and may significantly impact the performance of shuffle writing.
The fix
Hi Yuan and Jing,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I completely agree that it is our
top priority to ensure that there are no regressions from the last
commit the previous benchmark pipeline covered to the final commit of
this release. I will try to get this result first.
Best,
Zakelly
On T
Hi
Thanks Zakelly and Yuan for your effort and update. Since we changed the
hardware, IMHO, if we are able to reach a consensus in the community that
there is no regression with the benchmarks, we could consider releasing rc1
without waiting for the new baseline scores which might take days.
Best
Hey Zakelly,
Thanks very much for the efforts to re-build the entire benchmark
environment.
As long as we have
1) the pipeline set up and ready (no need for the entire portal ready),
2) get benchmark comparison numbers (comparing with the commit just before
the benchmark pipeline is down) and
3)
Hi everyone,
I am working on rebuilding the benchmark pipeline and it's almost
done. However, due to the change in machines for benchmarking, I will
need a few more days to run tests and gather the baseline scores for
further comparison. Once the pipeline is fully ready, we will proceed
with the p
33 matches
Mail list logo
