Re: [Vote] merge feature branch YARN-2915 (Federation) to trunk

I'll conclude the vote with my obligatory +1. With 8 binding +1s, 2 non-binding +1s and 2 +0s (Daniel's may actually be 0.5 --> 1:)), the vote passes. We'll be merging this to trunk shortly. Thanks everyone for the taking the time/effort to vote. Cheers, Subru/Carlo On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 3:22

Re: [Vote] merge feature branch YARN-2915 (Federation) to trunk

+1. Looking forward to it. Regards, Varun Saxena. On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 8:54 AM, Subru Krishnan wrote: > Hi all, > > Per earlier discussion [9], I'd like to start a formal vote to merge > feature YARN Federation (YARN-2915) [1] to trunk. The vote will run for 7 > days, and

Re: [Vote] merge feature branch YARN-2915 (Federation) to trunk

Thanks, Subru! Carry on. :) Daniel On 8/1/17 1:42 PM, Subru Krishnan wrote: Hi Daniel, You were just on time, myself & Carlo were just talking about moving forward with the merge :). To answer your questions: 1. The expectation about the store is that user will have a database set

Re: [Vote] merge feature branch YARN-2915 (Federation) to trunk

Hi Daniel, You were just on time, myself & Carlo were just talking about moving forward with the merge :). To answer your questions: 1. The expectation about the store is that user will have a database set up (we only link to install instructions page) but we do have the scripts for

Re: [Vote] merge feature branch YARN-2915 (Federation) to trunk

Subru, sorry for the last minute contribution... :) I've been looking at the branch, and I have two questions. First, what's the out-of-box experience regarding the data store? Is the expectation that the user will have a database set up and ready to go? Will the state store set up the

Re: [Vote] merge feature branch YARN-2915 (Federation) to trunk

Subru, sorry for the last minute contribution... :) I've been looking at the branch, and I have two questions. First, what's the out-of-box experience regarding the data store? Is the expectation that the user will have a database set up and ready to go? Will the state store set up the

Re: [Vote] merge feature branch YARN-2915 (Federation) to trunk

+1. finally! Jian > On Jul 25, 2017, at 8:24 PM, Subru Krishnan wrote: > > Hi all, > > Per earlier discussion [9], I'd like to start a formal vote to merge > feature YARN Federation (YARN-2915) [1] to trunk. The vote will run for 7 > days, and will end Aug 1 7PM PDT. > >

Re: [Vote] merge feature branch YARN-2915 (Federation) to trunk

*+1* (non binding) I am part of the team, which has deployed Federation on 40K of nodes on 8 clusters and seeing over 240K jobs running daily. I am looking forward to further contributing to enhance the functionality and to backport to 2.9 release. > >

Re: [Vote] merge feature branch YARN-2915 (Federation) to trunk

Thanks for the quick response Subru! Here's my +0, FWIW. On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Subru Krishnan wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > You are raising pertinent questions: one of the key design points of > Federation was to be completely transparent to applications, i.e. there >

Re: [Vote] merge feature branch YARN-2915 (Federation) to trunk

Hi Andrew, You are raising pertinent questions: one of the key design points of Federation was to be completely transparent to applications, i.e. there should no code change or even recompile required to run existing apps in a federated cluster. In summary apps simply get the appearance of a

Re: [Vote] merge feature branch YARN-2915 (Federation) to trunk

Hi all, Sorry for coming to this late, I wasn't on yarn-dev and someone else mentioned that this feature was being merged. With my RM hat on, trunk is an active release branch, so we want to be merging features when they are production-ready. This feature has done one better, and has already

Re: [Vote] merge feature branch YARN-2915 (Federation) to trunk

+1, Quite interesting and useful feature. Hoping to see it 2.9 too. On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 1:31 AM, Jason Lowe wrote: > +1 > Jason > > > On Tuesday, July 25, 2017 10:24 PM, Subru Krishnan > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > Per earlier discussion [9],

Re: [Vote] merge feature branch YARN-2915 (Federation) to trunk

+1 Jason On Tuesday, July 25, 2017 10:24 PM, Subru Krishnan wrote: Hi all, Per earlier discussion [9], I'd like to start a formal vote to merge feature YARN Federation (YARN-2915) [1] to trunk. The vote will run for 7 days, and will end Aug 1 7PM PDT. We have been

Re: [Vote] merge feature branch YARN-2915 (Federation) to trunk

+1. Thanks for delivering this important piece of work! I look forward to seeing it in the trunk. Regards, Sangjin On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 2:49 PM, Botong Huang wrote: > +1 (non-bindings) > > We have just deployed the latest bits (62f1ce2a3d9) from YARN-2915 in our > test

Re: [Vote] merge feature branch YARN-2915 (Federation) to trunk

+1 (non-bindings) We have just deployed the latest bits (62f1ce2a3d9) from YARN-2915 in our test cluster and ran multiple jobs. We confirm that Federation is working e2e! Our cluster setup: eight sub-clusters, each with one RM and four NM nodes. One Router machine. SQL Server in Ubuntu is used

Re: [Vote] merge feature branch YARN-2915 (Federation) to trunk

+1 Cheers, Carlo On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Arun Suresh wrote: > +1 > > Cheers > -Arun > > On Jul 25, 2017 8:24 PM, "Subru Krishnan" wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> Per earlier discussion [9], I'd like to start a formal vote to merge >> feature YARN

Re: [Vote] merge feature branch YARN-2915 (Federation) to trunk

+1 Cheers -Arun On Jul 25, 2017 8:24 PM, "Subru Krishnan" wrote: > Hi all, > > Per earlier discussion [9], I'd like to start a formal vote to merge > feature YARN Federation (YARN-2915) [1] to trunk. The vote will run for 7 > days, and will end Aug 1 7PM PDT. > > We have been

[Vote] merge feature branch YARN-2915 (Federation) to trunk

Hi all, Per earlier discussion [9], I'd like to start a formal vote to merge feature YARN Federation (YARN-2915) [1] to trunk. The vote will run for 7 days, and will end Aug 1 7PM PDT. We have been developing the feature in a branch (YARN-2915 [2]) for a while, and we are reasonably confident