Re: [DISCUSS] Move non-connectors modules to out of external

;external". >> >> 3. where to move non-connectors >> >> Except Flux they're directly supported by Storm. I mean "storm.py" is >> aware of them and supports them, so for me they are eligible to move to the >> top directory. I'm open to other suggestion a

[ANNOUNCE] Apache Storm 1.1.0 Released

The Apache Storm community is pleased to announce the release of Apache Storm version 1.1.0. Storm is a distributed, fault-tolerant, and high-performance realtime computation system that provides strong guarantees on the processing of data. You can read more about Storm on the project website:

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.1.0 (RC3)

This vote is now closed and passes with X binding +1 votes, X non-binding +1 votes, and no -1 or 0 votes. Vote tally (* indicates a binding vote): +1 Jungtaek Lim* Arun Mahadevan* Bobby Evans* Harsha Chintalapani* Hugo Da Cruz Louro* Satish Duggana* Alexandre Vermeerbergen P. Taylor Goetz* I

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.1.0 (RC3)

+1 (binding) - Verified distribution structure - Verified examples build as packaged - Set up a small cluster and deployed/tested examples -Taylor > On Mar 21, 2017, at 3:26 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@apache.org> wrote: > > This is a call to vote on releasing Apache S

Re: [DISCUSS] Move non-connectors modules to out of external

ands on keeping the current external/storm-* in place and > move just sql and storm-perf into top-level. We can have discussion for > storm 2.0 if we want to do > more changes. > > -Harsha > >> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 4:31 PM P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> wrote: >&g

Re: [DISCUSS] Move non-connectors modules to out of external

ibility is to keep the ‘external' module, and create sub modules > under it. The legacy structure would remain intact, while making things more > modular. An idea would be: > > + external > + connectors > + tools > + monitoring > + etc > > Hugo > >

Re: [DISCUSS] Move non-connectors modules to out of external

For the background on why “external” was selected, you have to go back to a lengthy discussion in Feb. 2014. Here’s the start of the thread: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3cee2bd0e2-254c-47af-8a53-257db7f05...@gmail.com%3e

[DISCUSS] Storm 2.0 Roadmap

With the 1.1.0 release nearing completion, I’d like to turn our attention to 2.0 and develop a plan for what features, etc. to include. The following 3 are what I feel are the minimum for a 2.0 release. These could likely be resolved relatively quickly: * Performance — I’ve not benchmarked the

New Committer/PMC Member: Hugo Louro

Activity in another email thread reminded me of something I forgot to do… The Apache Storm PMC has voted to add Hugo Louro as a Committer and PMC Member. Please join me in congratulating Hugo for his new role! (And my apologies for not sending out the announcement sooner. ;) ) -Taylor

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.1.0 (RC3)

o on) has been recommended for creating topology jar. > > For me it's not a blocker for release. > > Arun, I initiated another thread to discuss moving non-connectors to the > top directory. > Could you cast your vote? If you are still not satisfied with excluding > jars yo

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.1.0 (RC3)

ed but I am missing it. The sql directory however seems to > include the jars so it looks inconsistent. > > - Arun > > > On 3/22/17, 12:56 AM, "P. Taylor Goetz" <ptgo...@apache.org> wrote: > >> This is a call to vote on releasing Apache Storm 1.1

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.1.0 (RC3)

jar starting with Storm 1.1.0 release? Please note that > we're not using maven to build our code, hence the need of this JAR. > > Best regards, > Alexandre Vermeerbergen > > > > 2017-03-21 20:26 GMT+01:00 P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@apache.org>: > >> This

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.1.0 (RC3)

I forgot to say thank you for the feedback on the release candidate! Feedback, positive or negative, is always welcome and a great way to get involved in the project. -Taylor > On Mar 21, 2017, at 6:37 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Alexandre, > >

[VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.1.0 (RC3)

This is a call to vote on releasing Apache Storm 1.1.0 (rc3) Full list of changes in this release: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGELOG.md;h=68fbab3c4f91359bd397d93a157830542839b002;hb=e40d213de7067f7d3aa4d4992b81890d8ed6ff31 The tag/commit to be voted

Re: [CANCELED] [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.1.0 (RC2)

art. The examples are all uber jars and pull in lots of dependencies. Some > of them multiple times over. Do we want the examples to only be a source > release so before running an example they have to build it? > > > - Bobby > > On Thursday, March 9, 2017, 2:22:42 PM CST

Re: [CANCELED] [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.1.0 (RC2)

like to propose excluding connector > libraries in binary dist. at all. > > Others look great to me. > > - Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) > > 2017년 3월 9일 (목) 오전 6:12, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com>님이 작성: > >> I’d like to propose the following to address

Re: [CANCELED] [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.1.0 (RC2)

m-druid-1.1.0.jar >>>>> >>>>> -rwxr-xr-x@ 1 roshan staff 7.3M Feb 24 12:11 >>>>> ./external/storm-eventhubs/storm-eventhubs-1.1.0-jar- >>>> with-dependencies.jar >>>>> >>>>> -rwxr-xr-x@ 1 roshan staff 5.6M Feb

Re: [CANCELED] [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.1.0 (RC2)

filed Jiras so for the 3 issues mentioned. Not sure if we need a JIRA > for the file size getting bloated by that much. > Somebody better familiar with the matter may want to take about that? > -roshan > > > On 3/1/17, 8:13 AM, "P. Taylor Goetz" <ptgo...@gmail.co

Re: [CANCELED] [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.1.0 (RC2)

Thanks for bringing these up Roshan. Feel free to file JIRA tickets for these issues and assign the “Release Apache Storm 1.1.0” epic so they can be tracked for this release. -Taylor > On Mar 1, 2017, at 9:27 AM, Roshan Naik wrote: > > Found these additional issues: >

[CANCELED] [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.1.0 (RC2)

Canceling to include fix for JDK7 compatibility issue. -Taylor > On Feb 24, 2017, at 3:40 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@apache.org> wrote: > > This is a call to vote on releasing Apache Storm 1.1.0 (rc2) > > Full list of changes in this release: > > https://git-wi

[VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.1.0 (RC2)

This is a call to vote on releasing Apache Storm 1.1.0 (rc2) Full list of changes in this release: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGELOG.md;hb=17a2017fb644e353fb2a0f5bf50d400ee28036ba The tag/commit to be voted upon is v1.1.0:

[CANCELED] [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.1.0 (RC1)

Canceling this RC to address a critical issue. -Taylor > On Feb 17, 2017, at 2:42 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > This is a call to vote on releasing Apache Storm 1.1.0 (rc1) > > Full list of changes in this release: > > https://git-wip-us.apach

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.1.0 (RC1)

ance / kill : OK > - logviewer (worker dir, daemon dir) : OK > - change log level : OK > - thread dump, heap dump, restart worker : OK > - log search : OK > - run WordCountTopology (multilang, remote) : OK > - run StatefulTopology (local) : OK > - run StatefulTopology (remote) : OK

[VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.1.0 (RC1)

This is a call to vote on releasing Apache Storm 1.1.0 (rc1) Full list of changes in this release: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGELOG.md;hb=17a2017fb644e353fb2a0f5bf50d400ee28036ba The tag/commit to be voted upon is v1.1.0:

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Storm 1.1.0

even closer) we can >> postpone, but if not, it might be better to coordinate these things ASAP >> and include to 1.1.0. >> >> There seems to be other small PRs, but nothing seems critical so it would >> be OK to not wait for merging. >> >> - Jungtaek Lim &g

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Storm 1.0.3 Released

oad: > http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/storm/apache-storm-1.0.3/ > <http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/storm/apache-storm-1.0.3/> > > Changelog: https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/v1.0.3/CHANGELOG.md > <https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/v1.0.3/CHANG

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Storm 1.0.3 Released

-Taylor > On Feb 14, 2017, at 3:43 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@apache.org> wrote: > > The Apache Storm community is pleased to announce the release of Apache Storm > version 1.0.3. > > Storm is a distributed, fault-tolerant, and high-performance realtime > computation

[ANNOUNCE] Apache Storm 1.0.3 Released

The Apache Storm community is pleased to announce the release of Apache Storm version 1.0.3. Storm is a distributed, fault-tolerant, and high-performance realtime computation system that provides strong guarantees on the processing of data. You can read more about Storm on the project website:

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.0.3 (RC2)

.com.INVALID> > wrote: > > The files are missing from dist. I am getting 404. > -Kishor > > >On Monday, February 13, 2017 2:36 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > +1 > > Performed my typical checks and verified topology

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.0.3 (RC2)

This vote is now closed and passes with 4 +1 votes and no +0/-1 votes. Vote tally (* indicates a binding vote): +1: Jungtaek Lim* Bobby Evans* Xin Wang* P. Taylor Goetz* I will release the staged artifacts and announce the release after a 24 hour waiting period for mirror catch up. -Taylor

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.0.3 (RC2)

+1 Performed my typical checks and verified topology visualization fix and local shutdown issue. -Taylor > On Feb 7, 2017, at 3:51 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > This is a call to vote on releasing Apache Storm 1.0.3 (rc2) > > Full list of ch

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Storm 1.1.0

Right now we’re down to 1 open issue on the 1.1.0 release epic: STORM-2250 which is under active review/discussion. Assuming that is mergeable in the near future, are there any other open issues that should be considered for this release? -Taylor > On Feb 2, 2017, at 4:48 PM, P. Taylor Go

[VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.0.3 (RC2)

This is a call to vote on releasing Apache Storm 1.0.3 (rc2) Full list of changes in this release: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGELOG.md;h=50878fab679973a1230466920006dc0746ffddd5;hb=eac433b0beb3798c4723deb39b3c4fad446378f4 The tag/commit to be voted

[CANCELED] [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.0.3 (rc1)

Canceling this rc in order to include a number of additional patches. -Taylor > On Jan 31, 2017, at 3:55 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > This is a call to vote on releasing Apache Storm 1.0.3 (rc1) > > Full list of changes in this release: > > ht

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.0.3 (rc1)

ed in apache binary > distributions. > Raised a ticket (without resolution): STORM-2341 > > I hope it is not too late to address those issues. > > Thanks, > Tibor > > > On 1/31/17, 9:55 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz" <ptgo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >T

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.0.3 (rc1)

+1 (binding) Ran on a 3-node cluster and verified several bug fixes. -Taylor > On Jan 31, 2017, at 3:55 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > This is a call to vote on releasing Apache Storm 1.0.3 (rc1) > > Full list of changes in this release: > > ht

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Storm 1.1.0

is release anytime soon? >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:50 PM S G <sg.online.em...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Not sure if its a little late to include for the 1.1.0 and 1.0.3 releases >>> now, but can we consider using zookeeper 3.4.9 for th

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.0.3 (rc1)

this is a blocker, but we should definitely follow up with a JIRA. This could affect users who rely on local mode for integration tests. > > I'll file two issues afterwards. > > Thanks, > Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) > > 2017년 2월 1일 (수) 오전 5:55, P. Taylor Goetz

[VOTE] Release Apache Storm 1.0.3 (rc1)

This is a call to vote on releasing Apache Storm 1.0.3 (rc1) Full list of changes in this release: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=storm.git;a=tree;h=6cb735d18ec11eccd3e80bab8f879c989a9b3967;hb=a81ec2580fce1f2ee6349a9028dcb75763798bec The tag/commit to be voted upon is v1.0.3:

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Storm 1.0.3

Sounds good. I’ll prepare a release candidate and as I mentioned in another thread use the opportunity to document the release process. -Taylor > On Jan 27, 2017, at 10:41 AM, Bobby Evans wrote: > > I am +1 on a release of 1.0.3 > > > - Bobby > > On Wednesday,

Re: [DISCUSS] Adopt pull request template

+1 for adopting a template. Not sure if it is possible, but I wouldn't mind eyeing the same for JIRA. -Taylor > On Jan 18, 2017, at 9:10 PM, Jungtaek Lim wrote: > > Hi devs, > > I have seen some pull requests which are not having JIRA issue, or bad > title, or no

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Storm 1.1.0

/jira/browse/STORM-1694> (patch for 2.0 is >>> merged, patch for 1.x is ready for reviewing) >>> storm-cassandra: STORM-1369 >>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-1369> >>> storm-mongodb: STORM-1607 <https://issues.apache.org/ >>>

Re: [DISCUSS] Prioritizing works in progress

Hi Jungtaek, > - Beam runner There’s not been much activity around this, and I haven’t had much time to work on it recently, but there’s a decent foundation to build upon. So it would be fairly easy for others to start contributing to that effort. There’s also interest from the Beam community

Re: Are storm metrics reported through JMX too?

e default reporter up. I'll focus on that since you could > use it. Will update JIRA with more. > > Alessandro > > > ----- Forwarded Message - > From: P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> > To: "dev@storm.apache.org" <dev@storm.apache.org> > Cc: S

Re: [BROKEN BUILD] - Master not compiling for me

ouro <hlo...@hortonworks.com> wrote: > > java version "1.8.0_45" > Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_45-b14) > Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.45-b02, mixed mode) > > On Dec 2, 2016, at 11:01 AM, P. Taylor Goetz > <ptgo...@gmail.co

Re: [BROKEN BUILD] - Master not compiling for me

I’m able to build the master branch just fine. What JDK version are you using? -Taylor > On Dec 2, 2016, at 1:54 PM, Hugo Da Cruz Louro wrote: > > [ERROR] >

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Branch for Apache Beam Runner

nges going on in Beam. It seem they plan to >> get >>> that done by the end of 2016. >>> >>> ~Satish. >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 9:19 PM, Bobby Evans <ev...@yahoo-inc.com.invalid >>> >>> wrote: >>> >&g

Re: Are storm metrics reported through JMX too?

>>> >>> So I cast my vote in favor of JMX-implementation of metrics. >>> Other approaches are welcome to be discussed. >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 7:30 PM, Alessandro Bellina < >>> abell...@yahoo-inc.com.invalid> wrote: >>>

Fwd: JSON License and Apache Projects

FYI. Official statement from VP Legal regarding use of json.org licensed code. -Taylor > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Jim Jagielski > Subject: JSON License and Apache Projects > Date: November 23, 2016 at 9:08:30 AM EST > To: legal-disc...@apache.org

Twitter4j dependency (can't release Apache Storm)

The ASF recently made the determination that the org.json license is category x, meaning projects can’t release code that depends on it (the short reason is the license has a “no evil” clause that is inappropriate for a license). Storm is largely unaffected since we use json-simple or Jackson

Re: Some reviews please

I got one review done (Nimbus). Second one will likely have to wait until after the holiday as I will be out. Nice work and thanks for pushing this forward. -Taylor > On Nov 21, 2016, at 10:46 AM, Bobby Evans wrote: > > I have been pushing hard to get some of

Re: NullPointerException on startup

(Moving thread to dev@ to discuss versions not yet released) Nick, I suspect you might be hitting a bug in 1.0.2 that might be fixed in one of the next releases. Can you try setting the version of storm-kafka-client to 1.1.0-SNAPSHOT (leave other storm components at 1.0.2)? If that fixes the

Re: Request write access to Storm's wiki page on Confluent

Done. -Taylor > On Nov 17, 2016, at 1:27 PM, Hugo Da Cruz Louro > wrote: > > Hi, > > I would like to request write access to the wiki page on > Confluent. I am > currently registered but I don't have

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Storm 1.1.0

and join on Storm SQL >> Trident mode before releasing. I'll assign it too. >> >> - Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) >> >> >> 2016년 11월 15일 (화) 오전 5:55, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com>님이 작성: >> >>> I think we’re very close. I would like

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Storm 1.1.0

I think we’re very close. I would like to confirm that the 1.x-branch is not affected by STORM-2176. The worker lifecycle API was added in 1.0, but doesn’t work in any released version due to STORM-2176. If there are any other open JIRAs that anyone is passionate about, now would be a good

Re: [DISCUSS] breaking changes in 2.x

I agree with Kyle. I think trying to cling to being able to do rolling upgrades across major versions would be too limiting in terms of adding new features. If we can keep RU capability within major version lines, that seems like a fair tradeoff. -Taylor > On Nov 7, 2016, at 12:16 PM, Kyle

Re: [DISCUSS] breaking changes in 2.x

riv...@storm.apache.org" <priv...@storm.apache.org>Sent: Monday, November > 7, 2016, 3:37:50 AM CST Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] breaking changes in 2.x > Sorry you are right, I put in the wrong mailing list. I feel dumb. Will > move it to dev. > - Bobby > > On Sunday, Nov

Re: Storm UI does not load

What Storm version are you on? -Taylor > On Oct 25, 2016, at 7:01 PM, Serkan Uzunbaz wrote: > > Hi all, > I am having a similar issue to the one in this old thread. I am having the > issue in Firefox and clearing the cache did not work for me. I also tried in > Chrome and

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Branch for Apache Beam Runner

Taylor, > I am interested in contributing to this effort. Gone through Beam APIs > earlier and had some initial thoughts on Storm runner. We can start with > existing core storm constructs but it is better to design in such a way > that these can be replaced with new APIs. > > Thanks, >

Re: Does one port in supervisor.slots.ports translate to one physical JVM?

Answered there as well, but yes, one port == one slot == one JVM. -Taylor > On Oct 13, 2016, at 6:17 PM, Tech Id wrote: > > Hi, > > Does anyone know the answer to this question? >

Re: Are storm metrics reported through JMX too?

that project. > Alessandro, could you forward the upcoming news for the project to dev@ > list? > > - Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) > > 2016년 10월 12일 (수) 오전 10:22, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com>님이 작성: > >> I was thinking on a smaller scale in terms of effort, b

Re: Are storm metrics reported through JMX too?

nts to know). But then we support pre-aggregation of the metrics >> with >>>> IReducer so the number I get might be an average instead of either a >>> gauge >>>> or a counter, which no good metrics system will want to collect >> because I >>>> cann

Re: Are storm metrics reported through JMX too?

ably start by opening a JIRA for this and adding a design > approach for the same? > I would like to help in the coding-effort for this. > > -SG > >> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 1:51 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I’ve b

Re: Are storm metrics reported through JMX too?

which no good metrics system will want to collect >> because I >>>> cannot aggregate it with anything else, the math just does not work. >>>> The proposal I have said before and I still believe is that we need to >>> put >>>> in place a parallel metric

Re: Are storm metrics reported through JMX too?

I’ve been thinking about metrics lately, specifically the fact that people tend to struggle with implementing a metrics consumer. (Like this one [1]). The IMetricsConsumer interface is pretty low level, and common aggregations, calculations, etc. are left up to each individual implementation.

Re: [DISCUSS] Receiving branch(es) for storm-jms

lt;ev...@yahoo-inc.com.invalid> >> wrote: >> >>> +1 on those. Not sure if 1.0.x is the best place as it is a new feature >>> (but it is separate from storm-core so I am OK with it) - Bobby >>> >>>On Tuesday, October 4, 2016 12:24 PM, P. Tayl

[DISCUSS] Receiving branch(es) for storm-jms

The IP Clearance for storm-jms has passed and we are clear to import the code. What branches do we want it to land in? My initial thoughts are master, 1.x and 1.0.x., but I’m curious to hear others’ thoughts. -Taylor signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: [DISCUSS] Plan for merge SQE and Storm SQL

ia general > review process. > If it can be integrated to SQE without changing storm-redis, that would be > nice. > > Does it make sense? > > - Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) > > 2016년 9월 29일 (목) 오전 6:08, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com>님이 작성: > >> The change

Re: [DISCUSS] Plan for merge SQE and Storm SQL

d be pretty easy. The storm-redis one >> will require more work to make it more complete. >> >> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 6:09 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Thanks for the explanation Morrigan! >>> >>>

Re: [DISCUSS] Plan for merge SQE and Storm SQL

If there are no objections, I’d like to proceed with this approach. -Taylor > On Sep 27, 2016, at 2:22 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Indeed it does not compile against any version due to the missing changes to > storm-kafka and storm-redis that Mo

Re: [DISCUSS] Plan for merge SQE and Storm SQL

address that part, we can also address it. > > 2016년 9월 27일 (화) 오전 7:19, Morrigan Jones <morri...@jwplayer.com>님이 작성: > >> Sure, when I can. Storm-kafka should be pretty easy. The storm-redis one >> will require more work to make it more complete. >> >> On Mon,

Re: [DISCUSS] Plan for merge SQE and Storm SQL

feature complete" overall. > > > > >> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 4:03 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Sounds good. I’ll find out if it builds against 2.x. If so I’ll go that >> direction. Otherwise I’ll come back with my findings a

Re: [DISCUSS] Plan for merge SQE and Storm SQL

r to have it go there, and > then possibly 1.x if people what it there too. - Bobby > >On Monday, September 26, 2016 12:47 PM, P. Taylor Goetz > <ptgo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > The IP Clearance vote has passed and we are now able to import the SQE code. > > The questi

Re: [DISCUSS] Plan for merge SQE and Storm SQL

it as a feature branch, but I’d rather take the former approach. Thought/opinions? -Taylor > On Sep 21, 2016, at 8:39 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > My apologies. I meant to cc dev@, but didn't. Will forward in a bit... > > The vote (lazy consensus) i

Re: [DISCUSS] Plan for merge SQE and Storm SQL

Thank you for the analysis Jungtaek. I particularly appreciate your admitted bias as a big contributor to storm-SQL. It will take time for us to sort out how the merge will happen. Similar to what we are discussing with Kafka and ES, we could support two versions of SQL, and eventually

Fwd: [IP CLEARANCE] JWPlayer SQE (Streaming Query Engine)

Meant to cc dev@ but missed it. -Taylor Begin forwarded message: > From: "P. Taylor Goetz" <ptgo...@gmail.com> > Date: September 21, 2016 at 2:41:21 PM EDT > To: Incubator <gene...@incubator.apache.org> > Subject: [IP CLEARANCE] JWPlayer SQE (Streaming Q

Re: [DISCUSS] Plan for merge SQE and Storm SQL

My apologies. I meant to cc dev@, but didn't. Will forward in a bit... The vote (lazy consensus) is underway on general@incubator, and will close in less than 72 hours. After that the code can be merged. -Taylor > On Sep 21, 2016, at 7:02 PM, Jungtaek Lim wrote: > > Hi

Re: [DISCUSS] ElasticSearch 2.x support

Now might be a time to consider making version-sensitive modules ((kafk, ES) maven multi-modules. I've never really liked "storm-Kafka" and "storm-kafka-client" as differentiators of Kafka 0.9..X and 0.10.x. I'd tend toward something like: storm-Kafka/ /0.9.x /0.10.x I would think the

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature Branch for Apache Beam Runner

top Storm Core > primitives ? > -roshan > > >> On 9/15/16, 2:00 PM, "P. Taylor Goetz" <ptgo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I¹ve been tinkering with implementing an Apache Beam runner on top of >> Storm and would like to open it up so others in the co

[DISCUSS] Feature Branch for Apache Beam Runner

I’ve been tinkering with implementing an Apache Beam runner on top of Storm and would like to open it up so others in the community can contribute. To that end I’d like to propose creating a feature branch for that work if there are others who are interested in getting involved. We did that a

[RESULT] [VOTE] Accept storm-jms Code Donation

. -Taylor > On Sep 8, 2016, at 4:50 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Following an earlier discussion thread, I’d like to start of VOTE on whether > to accept the storm-jms code donation. > > The codebase being donated can be found here [1]. > > [ ] +1 Acc

[RESULT] [VOTE] Accept JW Player SQE Code Donation

This vote is now closed and passes with 5 binding +1 votes and twice as many +1 votes as -1 votes. Vote tally (* indicates a binding vote): +1: Jungtaek Lim* Satish Duggana* Aaron Niskodé-Dossett* Bobby Evans* P. Taylor Goetz* I will proceed with the IP clearance process. -Taylor > On Se

[ANNOUNCE] Apache Storm 0.10.2 Released

The Apache Storm community is pleased to announce the release of Apache Storm version 0.10.2. Storm is a distributed, fault-tolerant, and high-performance realtime computation system that provides strong guarantees on the processing of data. You can read more about Storm on the project

Re: JIRI Notifications Moved to iss...@storm.apache.org

12, 2016, at 5:20 PM, Jungtaek Lim <kabh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Nice work. > > Will Github notification (posted to dev@) be also moved to issues@? Or will > keep posted to dev@? > On 2016년 9월 13일 (화) at 오전 6:00 P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >&

JIRI Notifications Moved to iss...@storm.apache.org

Infra has now moved JIRA notifications from dev@storm.apache.org to issues.storm.apache.org . If you would like to continue to receive JIRA notifications, you should subscribe to that list by sending an email to:

Re: Clojure to Java Migration (was: How does Storm's OutputCollector work?)

> On Sep 12, 2016, at 3:26 PM, S G wrote: > > Just curious, how much of the code-base is planned to be moved away from > clojure to Java? Ultimately all the Clojure code will move to Java. The initial focus is to get the main (i.e. non-test) code converted before

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.10.2 (rc2)

This vote is now closed, and passes with 4 binding +1 votes and no 0 or -1 votes. Vote tally: +1: P. Taylor Goetz Bobby Evans Jungtaek Lim Satish Duggana Thanks to everyone who took the time to vote. -Taylor > On Sep 2, 2016, at 3:40 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com&

Re: [VOTE] Accept JW Player SQE Code Donation

how SQE features can be added in >> storm-sql. >> >> Thanks, >> Satish. >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 7:00 AM, Jungtaek Lim <kabh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> +1 (binding) >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Jungt

[jira] [Resolved] (STORM-829) Hadoop dependency confusion

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-829?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] P. Taylor Goetz resolved STORM-829. --- Resolution: Fixed Resolving since the pull request was merged. > Hadoop dependency confus

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.10.2 (rc2)

Here’s my +1. The only change between this release candidate and the last is the inclusion of the following bug fix: STORM-2042: Nimbus client connections not closed properly causing connection leaks -Taylor > On Sep 2, 2016, at 3:40 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com&

[VOTE] Accept storm-jms Code Donation

Following an earlier discussion thread, I’d like to start of VOTE on whether to accept the storm-jms code donation. The codebase being donated can be found here [1]. [ ] +1 Accept the code donation. [ ] 0 No opinion [ ] -1 Do not accept the code donation because… Everyone is encouraged to

[VOTE] Accept JW Player SQE Code Donation

Following an earlier discussion thread, I’d like to start of VOTE on whether to accept the SQE donation from JW Player. The codebase being donated can be found here [1]. [ ] +1 Accept the code donation. [ ] 0 No opinion [ ] -1 Do not accept the code donation because… Everyone is encouraged to

Re: [DISCUSS] Accept JW Player SQE Code Donation

One possibility I’m eager to explore is taking the SQL parsing capabilities in storm-sql (i.e. Calcite) and applying it to SQE. Since SQE syntax is already “SQL-like” it should(?) be relatively straightforward to do so. That might be the fastest path to a production ready SQL API. Anyway the

[ANNOUNCE] Apache Storm 0.9.7 Released

The Apache Storm community is pleased to announce the release of Apache Storm version 0.9.7. Storm is a distributed, fault-tolerant, and high-performance realtime computation system that provides strong guarantees on the processing of data. You can read more about Storm on the project website:

Re: [DISCUSS] storm-jms Code Donation

t; 2016년 9월 3일 (토) 오전 8:36, S G <sg.online.em...@gmail.com>님이 작성: > >> I would love to see it part of storm/external and can volunteer to provide >> any help if required during the migration. >> >> -SG >> >> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 12:59 PM, P. Taylo

[DISCUSS] storm-jms Code Donation

I’d like to start a discussion around adding storm-jms as an external module. I’ve gotten a few request to do so and the only thing that’s held me back is tracking down contributors and having them submit ICLAs. The code can be found here: https://github.com/ptgoetz/storm-jms

[VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.10.2 (rc2)

This is a call to vote on releasing Apache Storm 0.10.2 (rc2) Full list of changes in this release: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGELOG.md;hb=d8e4a3b59e6a97165ff769f11c9d4d2d3ecbb9dc The tag/commit to be voted upon is v0.10.2:

Re: [DISCUSS] Accept JW Player SQE Code Donation

Thanks to all the JW Player folks who joined this thread, and welcome to the Storm community! It’s good to see that the code donation comes with a community ready and willing to help out. I’m +1 for accepting the code donation. -Taylor > On Sep 2, 2016, at 12:07 PM, Abhishek Agarwal

[CANCELED] [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.10.2 (RC1)

OK >> - run WordCountTopology (multilang, local) : OK >> - run WordCountTopology (multilang, remote) : OK >> >> Btw, would we want to include STORM-2042 to 0.10.2? >> I agree this is definitely not a blocker, but we have been releasing 0.10.x >> line slowly so might

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.9.7 (RC1)

This vote is now closed and passes with 3 binding +1 votes, and no +0 or -1 votes. Vote tally: +1: P. Taylor Goetz Jungtaek Lim Bobby Evans -Taylor > On Aug 15, 2016, at 4:10 PM, P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > This is a call to vote on releasing Apache S

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >