Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.6.2

+1 ( Non-binding) - Downloaded 2.6.1 — created a cluster with namenode and a bunch of data nodes. - verified that Rolling upgrade and Rollback options work correctly in moving from 2.61 to 2.6.2 —Anu On 10/22/15, 2:14 PM, "sjl...@gmail.com on behalf of Sangjin Lee"

Re: [DISCUSS] Increased use of feature branches

I actively work on two branches (Diskbalancer and ozone) and I agree with most of what Sangjin said. There is an overhead in working with branches, there are both technical costs and administrative issues which discourages developers from using branches. I think the biggest issue with branch

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 3.0.0-alpha2 RC0

Hi Andrew, Thank you for all the hard work. I am really excited to see us making progress towards a 3.0 release. +1 (Non-Binding) 1. Deployed the downloaded bits on 4 node cluster with 1 Namenode and 3 datanodes. 2. Verified all normal HDFS operations like create directory, create file ,

Re: [VOTE] Merge HADOOP-13341

+1, Thanks for the effort. It brings in a world of consistency to the hadoop vars; and as usual reading your bash code was very educative. I had a minor suggestion though. since we have classified the _OPTS to client and daemon opts, for new people it is hard to know which of these subcommands

Re: [VOTE] Merge HADOOP-13341

rience. Thanks Anu On 9/9/16, 3:06 PM, "Allen Wittenauer" <a...@effectivemachines.com> wrote: > >> On Sep 9, 2016, at 2:15 PM, Anu Engineer <aengin...@hortonworks.com> wrote: >> >> +1, Thanks for the effort. It brings in a world of consistency to th

Re: Apache Hadoop qbt Report: trunk+JDK8 on Linux/x86

Hi Allen, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13902 That happened with ozone branch too. It was an inadvertent force push. Infra has advised us to force push the latest branch if you have it. Thanks Anu On 4/17/17, 7:10 AM, "Allen Wittenauer" wrote:

Re: LinkedIn Dynamometer Tool (was About 2.7.4 Release)

Hi Erik, Looking forward to the release of this tool. Thank you very much for the contribution. Had a couple of questions about how the tool works. 1. Would you be able to provide the traces along with this tool? In other words, would I be able to use this out of the box, or do I have to

Re: DISCUSS: Hadoop Compatability Guidelines

Could you please attach the PDFs to the JIRA. I think the mailer is stripping them off from the mail. Thanks Anu On 9/5/17, 9:44 AM, "Daniel Templeton" wrote: >Resending with a broader audience, and reattaching the PDFs. > >Daniel > >On 9/4/17 9:01 AM, Daniel

Re: [DISCUSS] Looking to Apache Hadoop 3.1 release

Hi Wangda, We are planning to start the Ozone merge discussion by the end of this month. I am hopeful that it will be merged pretty soon after that. Please add Ozone to the list of features that are being tracked for Apache Hadoop 3.1. We would love to release Ozone as an alpha feature in

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.9.0 (RC2)

-1 (binding) Thank you for all the hard work on 2.9 series. Unfortunately, this is one of the times I have to -1 this release. Looks like HADOOP-14840 added a dependency on “oj! Algorithms - version 43.0”, but we have just added “oj! Algorithms - version 43.0” to the “LICENSE.txt”. The right

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

Hi Steve, In addition to everything Weiwei mentioned (chapter 3 of user guide), if you really want to drill down to REST protocol you might want to apply this patch and build ozone. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-12690 This will generate an Open API (https://www.openapis.org ,

Re: Apache Hadoop 3.0.1 Release plan

Hi Eddy, Thanks for driving this release. Just a quick question, do we have time to close this issue? https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-12990 or are we abandoning it? I believe that this is the last window for us to fix this issue. Should we have a call and get this resolved one way

Namenode RPC default port reverted to 8020

Hi All, I wanted to bring to your attention that HDFS-12990 has been committed to trunk and branch 3.0.1. This change reverts the Namenode RPC port to the familiar 8020, making it same as Apache Hadoop 2.x series. In Hadoop 3.0.0 release, the default port is 9820. If you have deployed Hadoop

Re: [DISCUSS] Alpha Release of Ozone

omes from that. Thanks Anu On 8/8/18, 1:19 PM, "Allen Wittenauer" wrote: > On Aug 8, 2018, at 12:56 PM, Anu Engineer wrote: > >> Has anyone verified that a Hadoop release doesn't have _any_ of the extra ozone bits that are sprinkled outside the m

Re: [DISCUSS] Alpha Release of Ozone

+1, It will allow many users to get a first look at Ozone/HDDS. Thanks Anu On 8/6/18, 10:34 AM, "Elek, Marton" wrote: Hi All, I would like to discuss creating an Alpha release for Ozone. The core functionality of Ozone is complete but there are two missing features;

Re: Merge branch commit in trunk by mistake

I ran “git revert -c c163d1797ade0f47d35b4a44381b8ef1dfec5b60 -m 1” that will remove all changes from Giovanni’s branch (There are 3 YARN commits). I am presuming that he can recommit the dropped changes directly into trunk. I do not know off a better way than to lose changes from his branch.

Re: [DISCUSS]: securing ASF Hadoop releases out of the box

+1, on the Non-Routable Idea. We like it so much that we added it to the Ozone roadmap. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-231 If there is consensus on bringing this to Hadoop in general, we can build this feature in common. --Anu On 7/5/18, 1:09 PM, "Sean Busbey" wrote: I

Re: Merge branch commit in trunk by mistake

Based on conversations with Giovanni and Subru, I have pushed a revert for this merge. Thanks Anu On 7/5/18, 12:55 PM, "Giovanni Matteo Fumarola" wrote: + common-dev and hdfs-dev as fyi. Thanks Subru and Sean for the answer. On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 12:14 PM, Subru

Re: [VOTE] reset/force push to clean up inadvertent merge commit pushed to trunk

Hi All, [ Thanks to Arpit for working offline and verifying that branch is indeed good.] I want to summarize what I know of this issue and also solicit other points of view. We reverted the commit(c163d1797) from the branch, as soon as we noticed it. That is, we have made no other commits

Re: [VOTE] reset/force push to clean up inadvertent merge commit pushed to trunk

July 6, 2018 at 10:59 AM > To: Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli > Cc: Anu Engineer , Arpit Agarwal < > aagar...@hortonworks.com>, "su...@apache.org" , " > yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org" , " > hdfs-...@hadoop.apache.org" , &qu

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

Hi Owen, >> 1. It is hard to tell what has changed. git rebase -i tells me the >> branch has 722 commits. The rebase failed with a conflict. It would really >> help if you rebased to current trunk. Thanks for the comments. I have merged trunk to HDFS-7240 branch. Hopefully, this makes it

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.8.5 (RC0)

I believe that you need to regenerate the site using ‘hugo’ command (hugo is a site builder). Then commit and push the generated files. Thanks Anu On 9/22/18, 9:56 AM, "俊平堵" wrote: Martin, thanks for your reply. It works now, but after git changes - I haven’t seen Apache Hadoop

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop Ozone 0.2.1-alpha (RC0)

Hi Marton, +1 (binding) 1. Verified the Signature 2. Verified the Checksums - MD5 and Sha* 3. Build from Sources. 4. Ran all RPC and REST commands against the cluster via Robot. 5. Tested the OzoneFS functionality Thank you very much for creating the first release of Ozone. --Anu On 9/19/18,

Re: [DISCUSS] Move to gitbox

+1 --Anu On 12/10/18, 6:38 PM, "Vinayakumar B" wrote: +1 -Vinay On Mon, 10 Dec 2018, 1:22 pm Elek, Marton > Thanks Akira, > > +1 (non-binding) > > I think it's better to do it now at a planned date. > > If I understood well the only bigger

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop Ozone 0.3.0-alpha (RC1)

+1. (Binding) Thanks for getting this release done. Verified the signatures and S3 Gateway. --Anu On 11/16/18, 5:15 AM, "Shashikant Banerjee" wrote: +1 (non-binding). - Verified signatures - Verified checksums - Checked LICENSE/NOTICE files - Built from

Re: [DISCUSS] A unified and open Hadoop community sync up schedule?

For Ozone, we have started using the Wiki itself as the agenda and after the meeting is over, we convert it into the meeting notes. Here is an example, the project owner can edit and maintain it, it is like 10 mins work - and allows anyone to add stuff into the agenda too.

Re: VOTE: Hadoop Ozone 0.4.0-alpha RC2

+1 (Binding) -- Built from sources. -- Ran smoke tests and verified them. --Anu On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 8:05 PM Xiaoyu Yao wrote: > +1 Binding. Thanks all who contributed to the release. > > + Download sources and verify signature. > + Build from source and ran docker-based ad-hot security

Re: VOTE: Hadoop Ozone 0.4.0-alpha RC1

+1 (Binding) -- Verified the checksums. -- Built from sources. -- Sniff tested the functionality. --Anu On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 4:09 PM Ajay Kumar wrote: > Hi all, > > We have created the second release candidate (RC1) for Apache Hadoop Ozone > 0.4.0-alpha. > > This release contains security

Re: [DISCUSS] ARM/aarch64 support for Hadoop

+1, for the branch idea. Just FYI, Your biggest problem is proving that Hadoop and the downstream projects work correctly after you upgrade core components like Protobuf. So while branching and working on a branch is easy, merging back after you upgrade some of these core components is insanely

Re: [DISCUSS] ARM/aarch64 support for Hadoop

support for > >> different > >> >> architectures. > >> >> > >> >> +1, for the branch idea. > >> >> Good Luck!!! > >> >> > >> >> -Ayush > >> >> > >> >> > On 03-Se

Re: [DISCUSS] Separate Hadoop Core trunk and Hadoop Ozone trunk source tree

+1 —Anu > On Sep 17, 2019, at 2:49 AM, Elek, Marton wrote: > > > > TLDR; I propose to move Ozone related code out from Hadoop trunk and store it > in a separated *Hadoop* git repository apache/hadoop-ozone.git > > > > > When Ozone was adopted as a new Hadoop subproject it was proposed[1]

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove Ozone and Submarine from Hadoop repo

@Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli Do we need a separate vote thread for this? there are already JIRAs in place for ozone code removal and I gather it is same for Submarine. Would it be possible to treat this thread as consensus and act upon the JIRA itself? Thanks Anu On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 6:58 PM

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove Ozone and Submarine from Hadoop repo

+1 for Ozone. We are in our own repo now. It would be good to remove this code from Hadoop, otherwise it will confuse new contributors. I would like to add a git tag tro Hadoop, so that people have the ability to sync back and see the code evolution. --Anu On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 4:03 PM

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop Ozone 0.4.1-alpha

+1, Binding. Verified the KEYS Built from sources and ran tests: - General Ozone command line tests - Applications like MR and YARN. --Anu On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 10:25 AM Xiaoyu Yao wrote: > +1 binding. Verified > * Verify the signature. > * Build from source. > * Deploy docker

Re: [DISCUSS] Feature branch for HDFS-14978 In-place Erasure Coding Conversion

+1 > On Jan 23, 2020, at 2:51 PM, Jitendra Pandey > wrote: > > +1 for the feature branch. > >> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 1:34 PM Wei-Chiu Chuang >> wrote: >> >> Hi we are working on a feature to improve Erasure Coding, and I would like >> to seek your opinion on creating a feature branch

Re: [DISCUSS] making Ozone a separate Apache project

+1 —Anu > On May 13, 2020, at 12:53 AM, Elek, Marton wrote: > >  > > I would like to start a discussion to make a separate Apache project for Ozone > > > > ### HISTORY [1] > > * Apache Hadoop Ozone development started on a feature branch of Hadoop > repository (HDFS-7240) > > * In the