Re: [VOTE] Moving Ozone to a separated Apache project

+1 Stay safe, --Konstantin On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 10:59 PM Elek, Marton wrote: > Hi all, > > Thank you for all the feedback and requests, > > As we discussed in the previous thread(s) [1], Ozone is proposed to be a > separated Apache Top Level Project (TLP) > > The proposal with all the

Re: [DISCUSS] Making 2.10 the last minor 2.x release

>>> >>> Eric >>> >>> [1] >>> >>> https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r2.10.0/hadoop-project-dist/hadoop-common/Compatibility.html >>> [2] >>> >>> https://hadoop.apache.org/docs/r3.0.0/hadoop-project-dist/hadoop-common/Compatib

Re: [DISCUSS] Making 2.10 the last minor 2.x release

Hi Eric, We had a long discussion on this list regarding making the 2.10 release the last of branch-2 releases. We intended 2.10 as a bridge release between Hadoop 2 and 3. We may have bug-fix releases or 2.10, but 2.11 is not in the picture right now, and many people may object this idea. I

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.10.0 (RC1)

+1 on RC1 - Verified signatures - Verified maven artifacts on Nexus for sources - Checked rat reports - Checked documentation - Checked packaging contents - Built from sources on RHEL 7 box - Ran unit tests for new HDFS features with Java 8 Thanks, --Konstantin On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 2:55 PM

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.10.0 (RC0)

+1 on RC0. - Verified signatures - Built from sources - Ran unit tests for new features - Checked artifacts on Nexus, made sure the sources are present. Thanks --Konstantin On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 6:01 PM Jonathan Hung wrote: > Hi folks, > > This is the first release candidate for the first

Re: [VOTE] Merge YARN-8200 to branch-2 and branch-3.0

+1 for the merge. We probably should not bother with branch-3.0 merge since it's been voted EOL. Thanks, --Konstantin On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 4:43 PM Jonathan Hung wrote: > Hi folks, > > As per [1], starting a vote to merge YARN-8200 (and YARN-8200.branch3) > feature branch to branch-2 (and

Re: [VOTE] Mark 2.6, 2.7, 3.0 release lines EOL

+1 for the proposal. I thought we already EOL-ed 2.6 though some time ago. Thanks, --Konstantin On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 8:03 PM Wangda Tan wrote: > Hi all, > > This is a vote thread to mark any versions smaller than 2.7 (inclusive), > and 3.0 EOL. This is based on discussions of [1] > > This

Re: Make EOL branches to public?

I would also suggest making an explicit commit to the branch stating it is EOL. Thanks, --Konstantin On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 7:59 PM Wangda Tan wrote: > Thank you all for suggestions. Let me send a vote email to mark 2.6, 2.7, > 3.0 EOL. > > - Wangda > > On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 9:34 AM Akira

Re: [DISCUSS] Merging YARN-8200 to branch-3.0 and branch-2

Sounds like a good idea to me. This has been tested on branch-2 in production for some time and benchmarks look good. Thanks, --Konstantin On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 12:14 PM Jonathan Hung wrote: > Hello devs, > > Starting a discuss thread to merge resource types/native GPU scheduling > support

Re: [VOTE] Moving branch-2 precommit/nightly test builds to java 8

+1 Makes sense to me. Thanks, --Konst On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 6:14 PM Jonathan Hung wrote: > Hello, > > Starting a vote based on the discuss thread [1] for moving branch-2 > precommit/nightly test builds to openjdk8. After this change, the test > phase for precommit builds [2] and branch-2

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving branch-2 to java 8

Just to make sure we are on the same page, as the subject of this thread is too generic and confusing. *The proposal is to move branch-2 Jenkins builds such as precommit to run tests on openJDK-8.* We do not want to break Java 7 source compatibility. The sources and releases will still depend on

Re: [Result] [VOTE - 2] Merge HDFS-12943 branch to trunk - Consistent Reads from Standby

reat work. > > -Original Message- > From: Konstantin Shvachko [mailto:shv.had...@gmail.com] > Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2018 6:48 AM > To: Hadoop Common ; hdfs-dev < > hdfs-...@hadoop.apache.org> > Cc: mapreduce-...@hadoop.apache.org; yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org >

[Result] [VOTE - 2] Merge HDFS-12943 branch to trunk - Consistent Reads from Standby

Obviously +1 from me. With four binding +1s, two non-binding +1s, and no -1s this vote passes. Thank you folks for working on the feature and for voting. Will do the merge in bit. Thanks, --Konst On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 6:16 PM Konstantin Shvachko wrote: > Hi Hadoop developers, > >

[VOTE - 2] Merge HDFS-12943 branch to trunk - Consistent Reads from Standby

Hi Hadoop developers, I would like to propose to merge to trunk the feature branch HDFS-12943 for Consistent Reads from Standby Node. The feature is intended to scale read RPC workloads. On large clusters reads comprise 95% of all RPCs to the NameNode. We should be able to accommodate higher

Re: [VOTE] Merge HDFS-12943 branch to trunk - Consistent Reads from Standby

r with real workload. > > Comments? > > --Yongjun > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 4:10 PM Konstantin Shvachko > wrote: > >> Hi Daryn, >> >> Wanted to backup Chen's earlier response to your concerns about rotating >> calls in the call queue. >> O

[Result] [VOTE] Merge HDFS-12943 branch to trunk - Consistent Reads from Standby

of this community. Please check your availability for followup discussions if you choose to get involved with important decisions. On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 4:10 PM Konstantin Shvachko wrote: > Hi Daryn, > > Wanted to backup Chen's earlier response to your concerns about rotating > calls

Re: [VOTE] Merge HDFS-12943 branch to trunk - Consistent Reads from Standby

to fix automatic failover with ZKFC. Currently it does not doesn't >> know about ObserverNodes trying to convert them to SBNs. >> >> Thanks. >> --Yongjun >> >> >> On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 5:27 PM Konstantin Shvachko >> wrote: >> >> >

Re: [VOTE] Merge HDFS-12943 branch to trunk - Consistent Reads from Standby

why > #2 is not needed for the feature to complete? > 2. Need to fix automatic failover with ZKFC. Currently it does not doesn't > know about ObserverNodes trying to convert them to SBNs. > > Thanks. > --Yongjun > > > On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 5:27 PM Konstantin Shvachko > wr

[VOTE] Merge HDFS-12943 branch to trunk - Consistent Reads from Standby

Hi Hadoop developers, I would like to propose to merge to trunk the feature branch HDFS-12943 for Consistent Reads from Standby Node. The feature is intended to scale read RPC workloads. On large clusters reads comprise 95% of all RPCs to the NameNode. We should be able to accommodate higher

Re: Hadoop 3.2 Release Plan proposal

tin for pointing out. > As 3.2 is pretty much on RC level, its better we try to find a good > solution to this issue. > > I ll follow up on this in the jira. > > - Sunil > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 11:35 AM Konstantin Shvachko > wrote: > >> I've tried to attract attent

Re: Hadoop 3.2 Release Plan proposal

I've tried to attract attention to an incompatibility issue through the jira, but it didn't work. So pitching in in this thread. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-12026 It introduced binary incompatibility, which will prevent people from upgrading from 3.1 to 3.2. I think it can get messy

[jira] [Closed] (YARN-7249) Fix CapacityScheduler NPE issue when a container preempted while the node is being removed

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-7249?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Konstantin Shvachko closed YARN-7249. - > Fix CapacityScheduler NPE issue when a container preempted while the node is >

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.6 (RC0)

Hi everybody, With 4 binding and 4 non-binding +1s and no -1s the vote for Apache Release 2.7.6 passes. Thank you everybody for contributing to the release, testing, and voting. Binding +1s Zhe Zhang Brahma Reddy Battula Jason Lowe Konstantin Shvachko Non-binding +1s Chen Liang Erik Krogen

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.6 (RC0)

My formal +1 for 2.7.6 RC0 Thanks, --Konstantin On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 4:14 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi everybody, > > This is the next dot release of Apache Hadoop 2.7 line. The previous one > 2.7.5 was released on December 14, 2017. > R

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 3.0.2 (RC0)

Hi Lei, Did you have any luck with deploy? Could you please post your findings on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-15205 Thanks, --Konstantin On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:10 PM, Lei Xu wrote: > Ajay, thanks for spotting this. > > I am working on fix the deploy. >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 3.0.2 (RC0)

A note to release managers. As discussed in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-15205 We are producing release artifacts without sources jars. See e.g. https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/releases/org/apache/hadoop/hadoop-common/3.0.1/ Based on what is staged on Nexus for

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 3.1.0 (RC1)

A note to release managers. As discussed in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-15205 We are producing release artifacts without sources jars. See e.g. https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/releases/org/apache/hadoop/hadoop-common/3.1.0/ I believe this has something to do

[VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.6 (RC0)

Hi everybody, This is the next dot release of Apache Hadoop 2.7 line. The previous one 2.7.5 was released on December 14, 2017. Release 2.7.6 includes critical bug fixes and optimizations. See more details in Release Note: http://home.apache.org/~shv/hadoop-2.7.6-RC0/releasenotes.html The RC0 is

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Hadoop 2.7.6 Release Plan

Just heads up, working on the release candidate now. It's been a while, I know. But we had some blockers. Thanks, --Konstantin On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 5:59 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com> wrote: > Planning to do a maintenance 2.7.6 release with close to 40 chan

[jira] [Resolved] (YARN-7249) Fix CapacityScheduler NPE issue when a container preempted while the node is being removed

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-7249?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Konstantin Shvachko resolved YARN-7249. --- Resolution: Fixed Hadoop Flags: Reviewed Fix Version/s: 2.7.6 Just

Re: [VOTE] Merging branch HDFS-7240 to trunk

The proposal to add it as a subproject of Hadoop makes sense to me. Thank you Owen. I am glad to have a path for scaling HDFS further, especially as it enters areas like IoT and self-driving cars, where storage requirements are huge. I am not very fond of the name HDSL, though. "Storage Layer"

Re: [DISCUSS] 2.9+ stabilization branch

Thanks Subru for initiating the thread about GPU support. I think the path of taking 2.9 as a base for 2.10 and adding new resource types into it is quite reasonable. That way we can combine stabilization effort on 2.9 with GPUs. Arun, upgrading Java is probably a separate topic. We should

[DISCUSS] Apache Hadoop 2.7.6 Release Plan

Planning to do a maintenance 2.7.6 release with close to 40 changes since the last release. If there are no objections I'll start preparations. Please let me know if there are blockers: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-12641?filter=12343253 Thanks, --Konstantin

Re: [DISCUSSION] Merging HDFS-7240 Object Store (Ozone) to trunk

Hi Sanjay, With respect to Ozone my two main concerns were: 1. Wether Ozone can help scaling out the namespace service in handling higher RPC workloads. I think we came to common conclusion that using Ozone as a block management layer is a reasonable path to scaling HDFS. The discussions are

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.5 (RC1)

Zhang Konstantin Shvachko Naganarasimha Garla Non-binding +1s Erik Krogen Brahma Reddy Battula Eric Badger Jonathan Hung >> On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 7:22 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com >> > wrote: >> >>> Hi everybody, >>> >>>

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.5 (RC1)

Brahma Reddy Battula Eric Badger Jonathan Hung On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 7:22 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi everybody, > > I updated CHANGES.txt and fixed documentation links. > Also committed MAPREDUCE-6165, which fixes a consistently failing tes

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.5 (RC1)

Here is my formal +1. Thanks, --Konstantin On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 7:22 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi everybody, > > I updated CHANGES.txt and fixed documentation links. > Also committed MAPREDUCE-6165, which fixes a consistently failing tes

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.8.3 (RC0)

> Junping > > > -- > *From:* Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Saturday, December 9, 2017 11:06 AM > *To:* Junping Du > *Cc:* common-...@hadoop.apache.org; hdfs-...@hadoop.apache.org; > mapreduce-...@hadoop.apache.org; yarn-

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.8.3 (RC0)

Hey Junping, Could you pls upload mds relative to the tar.gz etc. files rather than their full path /build/source/target/artifacts/hadoop-2.8.3-src.tar.gz: MD5 = E5 3D 04 47 7B 85 E8 B5 8A C0 A2 64 68 F0 47 36 Otherwise mds don't match for me. Thanks, --Konstantin On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at

[VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.5 (RC1)

Hi everybody, I updated CHANGES.txt and fixed documentation links. Also committed MAPREDUCE-6165, which fixes a consistently failing test. This is RC1 for the next dot release of Apache Hadoop 2.7 line. The previous one 2.7.4 was release August 4, 2017. Release 2.7.5 includes critical bug fixes

CANCELED: VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.5 (RC0)

. Thanks, --Konstantin On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 10:17 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey Nagarasimha, > > Good find. thanks. > Indeed we need those as they are linked from the side bar. > I'll make sure to add CHANGES.txt when publishing new docu

Re: VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.5 (RC0)

issed in changes.txt. > > MAPREDUCE-6975 > HADOOP-14919 > HDFS-12596 > YARN-7084 > HADOOP-14881 > HADOOP-14827 > HDFS-12832 > > > --Brahma Reddy Battula > > -Original Message- > From: Konstantin Shvachko [mailto:s

Re: VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.5 (RC0)

; >> >> Looks follow commits are missed in changes.txt. >> >> MAPREDUCE-6975 >> HADOOP-14919 >> HDFS-12596 >> YARN-7084 >> HADOOP-14881 >> HADOOP-14827 >> HDFS-12832 >> >> >> --Brahma Reddy Battula >> >>

VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.5 (RC0)

Hi everybody, This is the next dot release of Apache Hadoop 2.7 line. The previous one 2.7.4 was release August 4, 2017. Release 2.7.5 includes critical bug fixes and optimizations. See more details in Release Note: http://home.apache.org/~shv/hadoop-2.7.5-RC0/releasenotes.html The RC0 is

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.9.0 (RC3)

this release has been tested on fairly large > clusters, production users can wait for a subsequent point release which > will contain fixes from further stabilization and downstream adoption." > > Hope this suffices. > > > > > On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Konst

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.9.0 (RC3)

Hey guys, I don't think this has been discussed, pardon if it was. As it stands today hadoop 2.9.0 is marked as stable release. Isn't that deceptive for users? Not to diminish the quality and not to understate the effort, which was huge and very much appreciated. But it is the first in the

Re: Apache Hadoop 2.8.3 Release Plan

I would consider these two blockers for 2.8.3 as they crash NN: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-12638 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-12832 Thanks, --Konstantin On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:16 AM, Junping Du wrote: > Thanks Andrew and Wangda for

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Hadoop 2.7.5 Release Plan

and above, I would want to be more > cautious about it. > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com > > wrote: > >> Hi developers, >> >> We have accumulated about 30 commits on branch-2.7. Those are mostly >> valuable bug fixes,

[DISCUSS] Apache Hadoop 2.7.5 Release Plan

Hi developers, We have accumulated about 30 commits on branch-2.7. Those are mostly valuable bug fixes, minor optimizations and test corrections. I would like to propose to make a quick maintenance release 2.7.5. If there are no objections I'll start preparations. Thanks, --Konstantin

Re: [DISCUSSION] Merging HDFS-7240 Object Store (Ozone) to trunk

gt; that explains a design for scaling HDFS and how Ozone paves the way > towards the full solution. > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/ > 12895963/HDFS%20Scalability%20and%20Ozone.pdf > > > sanjay > > > > > On Oct 28, 2017, at 2:00 PM, Konstan

Re: [DISCUSSION] Merging HDFS-7240 Object Store (Ozone) to trunk

Hey guys, It is an interesting question whether Ozone should be a part of Hadoop. There are two main reasons why I think it should not. 1. With close to 500 sub-tasks, with 6 MB of code changes, and with a sizable community behind, it looks to me like a whole new project. It is essentially a new

Re: [VOTE] Merge feature branch YARN-5734 (API based scheduler configuration) to trunk, branch-3.0, branch-2

trol for who can change what configurations. > - The configuration storage backend is also pluggable. Currently an > in-memory, leveldb, and zookeeper implementation are supported. > > There were 15 subtasks completed for this feature. > > Huge thanks to everyone who helped with reviews

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)

Chris Douglas Konstantin Shvachko Non-binding +1s (13) John Zhuge Surendra Lilhore Masatake Iwasaki Hanisha Koneru Chen Liang Fnu Ajay Kumar Brahma Reddy Battula Edwina Lu Ye Zhou Eric Badger Mingliang Liu Kuhu Shukla Erik Krogen Thanks, --Konstantin On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Konstantin

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)

Thursday, August 3, 2017, 7:19:07 AM CDT, Sunil G <sun...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Thanks Konstantin >>> >>> +1 (binding) >>> >>> 1. Build tar ball from source package >>> 2. Ran basic MR jobs and verif

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)

://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR#Publishing Thanks, --Konst On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Akira Ajisaka <aajis...@apache.org> wrote: > Thanks Konstantin for the work! > I have a question: Where are the maven artifacts deployed? > > -Akira > > On 2017/07/30 8

Re: Are binary artifacts are part of a release?

It does not. Just adding historical references, as Andrew raised the question. On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 7:38 PM, Allen Wittenauer <a...@effectivemachines.com> wrote: > > ... that doesn't contradict anything I said. > > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 7:23 PM, Konstantin Shvachko

Re: Are binary artifacts are part of a release?

The issue was discussed on several occasions in the past. Took me a while to dig this out as an example: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-general/20.mbox/%3C4EB0827C.6040204%40apache.org%3E Doug Cutting: "Folks should not primarily evaluate binaries when voting. The ASF

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)

Uploaded new binaries hadoop-2.7.4-RC0.tar.gz, which adds lib/native/. Same place: http://home.apache.org/~shv/hadoop-2.7.4-RC0/ Thanks, --Konstantin On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Chris Douglas <cdoug...@apache.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko &

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)

egal/release-policy.html goes into this in more > detail. A release must minimally include source packages, and can also > include binary artifacts. > > Best, > Andrew > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Konstantin Shvachko < > shv.had...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> T

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)

anyways, so no worries there. I think though it would be useful to have it working for testing and as a packaging standard. Thanks, --Konstantin On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Allen Wittenauer <a...@effectivemachines.com > wrote: > > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Sh

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)

/jmx, /conf, /logLevel, and /stacks. It passed in branch-2.8. > > > On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com > > wrote: > >> Hi everybody, >> >> Here is the next release of Apache Hadoop 2.7 line. The previous stable >>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)

5 messagebus 4096 Jul 30 03:01 src > > > > --Brahma Reddy Battula > > -Original Message- > From: Konstantin Shvachko [mailto:shv.had...@gmail.com] > Sent: 30 July 2017 07:29 > To: common-...@hadoop.apache.org; hdfs-...@hadoop.apache.org; > mapreduce-...@hadoop.a

[VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)

Hi everybody, Here is the next release of Apache Hadoop 2.7 line. The previous stable release 2.7.3 was available since 25 August, 2016. Release 2.7.4 includes 264 issues fixed after release 2.7.3, which are critical bug fixes and major optimizations. See more details in Release Note:

Re: Moved remaining 16 Jiras targeted for version 2.7.4 to 2.7.5

And some more. On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 5:11 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks, > --Konst >

Moved remaining 16 Jiras targeted for version 2.7.4 to 2.7.5

Thanks, --Konst

Re: About 2.7.4 Release

sues.apache. > org/jira/browse/HDFS-11742 definitely was something that was deemed a > blocker for 2.8.2, not sure about 2.7.4. > > I’m ‘back’ - let me know if you need any help. > > Thanks > +Vinod > > On Jul 13, 2017, at 5:45 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com> &

Re: Pre-Commit build is failing

on branch-2.7. Could anybody please take a look and help fixing the build. This would be very helpful for the release (2.7.4) process. Thanks, --Konst On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 10:41 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com> wrote: > Or should we backport the entire HADOOP-11917

Re: About 2.7.4 Release

more testing is still going on. I plan to build an RC next week. If there are no objection. Thanks, --Konst On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 4:42 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey guys. > > An update on 2.7.4 progress. > We are down to 4 blockers. There is s

Re: About 2.7.4 Release

ps://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/HADOOP/Hadoop+2.7.4 >>> >>> If you want to edit this wiki, please ping me. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Akira >>> >>> >>> On 2017/05/23 4:42, Brahma Reddy Battula wrote

Re: About 2.7.4 Release

at 2:30 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey Akira, > > I didn't have private filters. Most probably Jira caches something. > Your filter is in the right direction, but for some reason it lists only > 22 issues, while mine has 29. > It miss

Re: About 2.7.4 Release

works fine: https://s.apache.org/Dzg4 > I couldn't see the link. Maybe is it private filter? > > Here is a link I generated: https://s.apache.org/ehKy > This filter includes resolved issue and excludes fixversion == 2.7.4 > > Thanks and Regards, > Akira > > On 2017/05/08 19:20, Kon

Re: About 2.7.4 Release

ersion to fix vulnerability in old versions > > > > Regards > Brahma Reddy Battula > > -Original Message- > From: Erik Krogen [mailto:ekro...@linkedin.com.INVALID] > Sent: 06 May 2017 02:40 > To: Konstantin Shvachko > Cc: Zhe Zhang; Hadoop Common; Hdfs-dev; mapreduce-

Re: About 2.7.4 Release

> On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 12:42 AM Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hey guys, >> >> I and a few of my colleagues would like to help here and move 2.7.4 >> release >> forward. A few points in this regard. >> >> 1. Re

Re: About 2.7.4 Release

Hey guys, I and a few of my colleagues would like to help here and move 2.7.4 release forward. A few points in this regard. 1. Reading through this thread since March 1 I see that Vinod hinted on managing the release. Vinod, if you still want the job / have bandwidth will be happy to work with

Re: [DISCUSS] Release numbering semantics with concurrent (>2) releases [Was Setting JIRA fix versions for 3.0.0 releases]

On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Andrew Wang <andrew.w...@cloudera.com> wrote: > Hi Konst, thanks for commenting, > > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 11:29 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com > > wrote: > >> 1. I probably missed something but I didn't get

Re: [DISCUSS] Release numbering semantics with concurrent (>2) releases [Was Setting JIRA fix versions for 3.0.0 releases]

1. I probably missed something but I didn't get it how "alpha"s made their way into release numbers again. This was discussed on several occasions and I thought the common perception was to use just three level numbers for release versioning and avoid branding them. It is particularly confusing to

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.2 RC0

Sorry for bringing this up late. I think we should pick up HDFS-9516 for this release. Rather critical bug fix, but up to you, Vinod. Thanks, --Konst On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli wrote: > Hi all, > > > I've created a release candidate RC0 for

Re: Jenkins precommit-*-build

Thank you Allen! --Konst On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 5:14 PM, Allen Wittenauer a...@altiscale.com wrote: HDFS, MAPREDUCE, and YARN have been migrated. Let me know of any issues and I’ll try to get to them as I can. This should be the end of the Jenkins race conditions for our pre commits!

Re: [DISCUSS] Release numbering for stable 2.8 and beyond

I don't think it makes sense to imprint the release quality with its version. They should be separate. And our recommendation for the quality can be reflected in the documentation. (1) is the way to go. We had alpha imprinted in 2.0.5-alpha version, but both 2.0.5 and 2.0.6 releases were quite

Re: 2.7 status

Progress is good! What are the four blockers? Could you please mark them as such in the Jira. Thanks, --Konst On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli vino...@hortonworks.com wrote: Progress has been really slow, but now we are down to four blockers across the board. I plan

Re: Looking to a Hadoop 3 release

Andrew, Hadoop 3 seems in general like a good idea to me. 1. I did not understand if you propose to release 3.0 instead of 2.7 or in addition? I think 2.7 is needed at least as a stabilization step for the 2.x line. 2. If Hadoop 3 and 2.x are meant to exist together, we run a risk to manifest

Re: DISCUSSION: Patch commit criteria.

end up making a small javadoc/documentation change in the last version of patch before committing. It just avoids one more cycle and more delay. It's hard to codify this distinction though. Thanks +Vinod On Feb 27, 2015, at 1:04 PM, Konstantin Shvachko shv.had...@gmail.com wrote

DISCUSSION: Patch commit criteria.

There were discussions on several jiras and threads recently about how RTC actually works in Hadoop. My opinion has always been that for a patch to be committed it needs an approval (+1) of at least one committer other than the author and no -1s. The Bylaws seem to be stating just that: Consensus

[jira] [Resolved] (YARN-3255) RM, NM, JobHistoryServer, and WebAppProxyServer's main() should support generic options

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-3255?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Konstantin Shvachko resolved YARN-3255. --- Resolution: Fixed Fix Version/s: 2.7.0 I just committed this. Thank you guys

[jira] [Created] (YARN-3255) RM and NM main() should support generic options

Konstantin Shvachko created YARN-3255: - Summary: RM and NM main() should support generic options Key: YARN-3255 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-3255 Project: Hadoop YARN

[DISCUSS] Porting truncate to branch 2.

Hey devs, This is to discuss whether new truncate feature should be ported to branch 2. Colin suggested in HDFS-3071 that we merge it in a week or two. Makes sense to me too. That way we can get it out in one of the next releases. Please raise your issues, concerns, or support here. Do we need

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 Thanks, --Konstantin On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote: Folks, As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change release votes from 7 days to 5. I've attached the change to by-laws I'm proposing. Please vote, the vote

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 0.23.8

+1 I did basic verification and testing of the rc. Thanks, --Konst On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 9:00 AM, Thomas Graves tgra...@yahoo-inc.comwrote: I've created a release candidate (RC0) for hadoop-0.23.8 that I would like to release. This release is a sustaining release with several important

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.0.5-alpha (rc2)

+1 Thanks, --Konst On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Konstantin Boudnik c...@apache.org wrote: I have rolled out release candidate (rc2) for hadoop-2.0.5-alpha. The difference between rc1 and rc2 is the optimistic release date is set for 06/06/2013 in the CHANGES.txt files. The binary

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.0.4.1-alpha

+1 I verified checksums, the signature, built sources on CentOS, ran tests and a few hadoop commands. Thanks, --Konst On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 8:48 PM, Konstantin Boudnik c...@apache.org wrote: All, I have created a release candidate (rc0) for hadoop-2.0.4.1-alpha that I would like to

Re: Heads up - 2.0.5-beta

Hi Arun and Suresh, I am glad my choice of words attracted your attention. I consider this important for the project otherwise I wouldn't waste everybody's time. You tend reacting on a latest message taken out of context, which does not reveal full picture. I'll try here to summarize my proposal

Re: Heads up - 2.0.5-beta

to be very productive. Thanks, --Konstantin On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 6:06 PM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote: Konstantin, On Apr 26, 2013, at 4:34 PM, Konstantin Shvachko wrote: Do you think we can call the version you proposed to release 2.1.0 or 2.1.0-beta? The proposed new

Re: [Vote] Merge branch-trunk-win to trunk

, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Konstantin Shvachko shv.had...@gmail.comwrote: +1 on the merge. I am glad we agreed. Having Jira to track the CI effort is a good idea. Thanks, --Konstantin On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Matt Foley mfo...@hortonworks.com wrote: Thanks. I agree

Re: [Vote] Merge branch-trunk-win to trunk

of these requirements. Please give me owner feedback as to whether my proposed work sounds like it will satisfy the requirements. Thank you, --Matt On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Konstantin Shvachko shv.had...@gmail.com wrote: Didn't I explain in details what I am asking for? Thanks

Re: [Vote] Merge branch-trunk-win to trunk

PM, Konstantin Shvachko shv.had...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Matt Foley mfo...@hortonworks.com wrote: Konstantine, you have voted -1, and stated some requirements before you'll withdraw that -1. As I plan to do work to fulfill those requirements, I want to make

Re: [Vote] Merge branch-trunk-win to trunk

of CI and related infrastructure to support the platform well. Suresh outlined the support to effect this here: http://s.apache.org/s1 Is the commitment to establish this infrastructure after the merge sufficient? -C On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Konstantin Shvachko shv.had...@gmail.com