-...@hadoop.apache.org
Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2014 8:47:32 AM
Subject: Re: Next releases
This merge to branch-2 is complete. The changes have been merged to
branch-2 and target version set to 2.4.0 (r1556076).
On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Arpit Agarwal aagar...@hortonworks.comwrote:
We plan to merge
Arun,
I propose the following changes for 2.3:
- There have been a lot of improvements related to supporting http policy.
- There is a still discussion going on, but I would like to deprecate
BackupNode in 2.3 as well.
- We are currently working on rolling upgrades related change in HDFS. We
caching, ACLs, etc, so effort
has been focused on those instead.
For now, I think we should put the symlinks-disabling patches
(HADOOP-10020, etc) into branch-2, so that they will be part of the
next releases without additional effort.
I would like to see HDFS caching make it into 2.4
Let's put this in 2.3 - that is going up for vote next week. Thanks.
On Dec 3, 2013, at 3:36 AM, Steve Loughran ste...@hortonworks.com wrote:
would I be able to get this minor, minor patch in, which isn't
blocker/critical for Hadoop -it just adds the toString value of an
exception to the
Ok, I've updated https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/Roadmap with a initial strawman
list for hadoop-2.4 which I feel we can get out in Jan.
What else would folks like to see? Please keep timeframe in mind.
thanks,
Arun
On Dec 2, 2013, at 10:55 AM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
On
We should be able to ship YARN HA in Jan.
We are two sub-tasks away from main functionality (patches in progress for
both). YARN-149 has some duplicate sub-tasks. We should definitely be able
to test / fix any critical issues by Jan.
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Arun C Murthy
would I be able to get this minor, minor patch in, which isn't
blocker/critical for Hadoop -it just adds the toString value of an
exception to the container failure diagnostics, but which really makes a
difference for anyone downstream writing or debugging YARN apps on a large
cluster
Ok, looks like there are no objections.
I'm starting the work to rename 2.2.1 to 2.3 now. Committers, please hold
commits till I send out the all clear.
thanks,
Arun
On Nov 20, 2013, at 6:38 AM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
Jason,
I'm glad to see we are converging. I'll
On Dec 2, 2013, at 10:31 AM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
Ok, looks like there are no objections.
I'm starting the work to rename 2.2.1 to 2.3 now. Committers, please hold
commits till I send out the all clear.
Done. I've renamed 2.3 - 2.4 and 2.2.1 - 2.3.
I'll create the
On Nov 13, 2013, at 1:55 PM, Jason Lowe jl...@yahoo-inc.com wrote:
+1 to limiting checkins of patch releases to Blockers/Criticals. If
necessary committers check into trunk/branch-2 only and defer to the patch
release manager for the patch release merge. Then there should be fewer
Jason,
I'm glad to see we are converging. I'll update the Roadmap wiki with details
about major/minor/patch releases.
Here is a straight-forward approach for now: I'll just roll contents of
branch-2.2 as a 2.3-rc0 candidate right-away. This way we don't have to get
embroiled in details of
Here are few patches that I put into 2.2.1 and are minimally invasive, but
I don't think are blockers:
YARN-305. Fair scheduler logs too many Node offered to app messages.
YARN-1335. Move duplicate code from FSSchedulerApp and
FiCaSchedulerApp into SchedulerApplication
YARN-1333. Support
On Nov 13, 2013, at 12:38 PM, Sandy Ryza sandy.r...@cloudera.com wrote:
Here are few patches that I put into 2.2.1 and are minimally invasive, but
I don't think are blockers:
YARN-305. Fair scheduler logs too many Node offered to app messages.
YARN-1335. Move duplicate code from
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Colin McCabe cmcc...@alumni.cmu.eduwrote:
To be honest, I'm not aware of anything in 2.2.1 that shouldn't be
there. However, I have only been following the HDFS and common side
of things so I may not have the full picture. Arun, can you give a
specific
Arun, thanks for jumping on this.
On hadoop branch-2.2. I've quickly scanned the commit logs starting from
the 2.2.0 release and I've found around 20 JIRAs that I like seeing in
2.2.1. Not all of them are bugs but the don't shake anything and improve
usability.
I presume others will have their
Starting afresh with 2.2.1 and keeping it as small as possible sounds
reasonable to me.
Would love to get 2.3 out soon. To that end, how would people feel about
having code and/or feature freeze and/or ship dates? We've been way behind
out goals for recent releases. Having actual targets on the
-...@hadoop.apache.org,
yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org, mapreduce-...@hadoop.apache.org
Sent: Friday, November 8, 2013 10:42:36 AM
Subject: Next releases
Gang,
Thinking through the next couple of releases here, appreciate f/b.
# hadoop-2.2.1
I was looking through commit logs and there is a *lot* of content here
On 8 November 2013 02:42, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
Gang,
Thinking through the next couple of releases here, appreciate f/b.
# hadoop-2.2.1
I was looking through commit logs and there is a *lot* of content here
(81 commits as on 11/7). Some are features/improvements and
Arun, what are your thoughts on test-only patches? I know I've been
merging a lot of Windows test stabilization patches down to branch-2.2.
These can't rightly be called blockers, but they do improve dev
experience, and there is no risk to product code.
Chris Nauroth
Hortonworks
19 matches
Mail list logo
