|
Owen O'Malley
2011-07-26, 02:05
Allen Wittenauer
2011-07-28, 19:04
Giridharan Kesavan
2011-07-28, 20:56
Giridharan Kesavan
2011-07-29, 00:02
Aaron T. Myers
2011-07-29, 00:11
Arun C Murthy
2011-07-29, 00:26
Milind.Bhandarkar@...
2011-07-29, 00:29
Milind.Bhandarkar@...
2011-07-29, 00:33
Arun C Murthy
2011-07-29, 00:40
Eli Collins
2011-07-29, 01:40
Arun C Murthy
2011-07-29, 02:08
Aaron T. Myers
2011-07-29, 02:13
Arun C Murthy
2011-07-29, 04:54
Steve Loughran
2011-07-29, 11:01
Steve Loughran
2011-07-29, 11:04
Steve Loughran
2011-07-29, 13:51
Allen Wittenauer
2011-07-29, 15:59
Mahadev Konar
2011-07-29, 16:07
Suresh Srinivas
2011-07-29, 16:51
Matt Foley
2011-08-02, 10:00
Steve Loughran
2011-08-02, 11:22
Steve Loughran
2011-08-02, 11:28
Allen Wittenauer
2011-08-02, 18:08
Eli Collins
2011-08-02, 19:23
Allen Wittenauer
2011-08-02, 20:33
Steve Loughran
2011-08-03, 10:04
Steve Loughran
2011-08-03, 13:57
Eric Yang
2011-08-03, 16:35
Eli Collins
2011-08-03, 16:46
Matt Foley
2011-08-03, 21:14
Eli Collins
2011-08-03, 22:33
Koji Noguchi
2011-08-03, 22:58
Arun C Murthy
2011-08-03, 23:57
Yu Li
2011-08-08, 15:36
Owen O'Malley
2011-08-08, 16:26
Yu Li
2011-08-08, 17:03
|
-
[VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Owen O'Malley 2011-07-26, 02:05
I've created a release candidate for 0.20.204.0 that I would like to release.
It is available at: http://people.apache.org/~omalley/hadoop-0.20.204.0-rc0/ 0.20.204.0 has many fixes including disk fail in place and the new rpm and deb packages. Fail in place allows the DataNode and TaskTracker to continue after a hard drive fails. -- Owen
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Allen Wittenauer 2011-07-28, 19:04
On Jul 25, 2011, at 7:05 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: > I've created a release candidate for 0.20.204.0 that I would like to release. > > It is available at: http://people.apache.org/~omalley/hadoop-0.20.204.0-rc0/ > > 0.20.204.0 has many fixes including disk fail in place and the new rpm and deb packages. Fail in place allows the DataNode and TaskTracker to continue after a hard drive fails. Is it still failing to build according to Jenkins?
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Giridharan Kesavan 2011-07-28, 20:56
Myself and Eric Yang are looking into this.
-Giri On 7/28/11 12:04 PM, "Allen Wittenauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jul 25, 2011, at 7:05 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: > >> I've created a release candidate for 0.20.204.0 that I would like to release. >> >> It is available at: http://people.apache.org/~omalley/hadoop-0.20.204.0-rc0/ >> >> 0.20.204.0 has many fixes including disk fail in place and the new rpm and >> deb packages. Fail in place allows the DataNode and TaskTracker to continue >> after a hard drive fails. > > > Is it still failing to build according to Jenkins? >
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Giridharan Kesavan 2011-07-29, 00:02
This issue is fixed with Eric's patch for HADOOP-7356. Since Owen is out on
vacation Iam working on getting the release tarball. -Giri On 7/28/11 1:56 PM, "Giridharan Kesavan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Myself and Eric Yang are looking into this. > -Giri > > On 7/28/11 12:04 PM, "Allen Wittenauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> On Jul 25, 2011, at 7:05 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: >> >>> I've created a release candidate for 0.20.204.0 that I would like to >>> release. >>> >>> It is available at: http://people.apache.org/~omalley/hadoop-0.20.204.0-rc0/ >>> >>> 0.20.204.0 has many fixes including disk fail in place and the new rpm and >>> deb packages. Fail in place allows the DataNode and TaskTracker to continue >>> after a hard drive fails. >> >> >> Is it still failing to build according to Jenkins? >> >
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Aaron T. Myers 2011-07-29, 00:11
Shouldn't this vote be taking place on general@, instead of common-dev@? I'm
under the impression that that is where all votes are supposed to take place. Please correct me if I am wrong about that. -- Aaron T. Myers Software Engineer, Cloudera On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Giridharan Kesavan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > This issue is fixed with Eric's patch for HADOOP-7356. Since Owen is out on > vacation Iam working on getting the release tarball. > > -Giri > > > On 7/28/11 1:56 PM, "Giridharan Kesavan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Myself and Eric Yang are looking into this. > > -Giri > > > > On 7/28/11 12:04 PM, "Allen Wittenauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > >> > >> On Jul 25, 2011, at 7:05 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: > >> > >>> I've created a release candidate for 0.20.204.0 that I would like to > >>> release. > >>> > >>> It is available at: > http://people.apache.org/~omalley/hadoop-0.20.204.0-rc0/ > >>> > >>> 0.20.204.0 has many fixes including disk fail in place and the new rpm > and > >>> deb packages. Fail in place allows the DataNode and TaskTracker to > continue > >>> after a hard drive fails. > >> > >> > >> Is it still failing to build according to Jenkins? > >> > > > >
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Arun C Murthy 2011-07-29, 00:26
Nope. general@ is only for announcements.
AFAIK Votes are developer activities. Arun On Jul 28, 2011, at 5:11 PM, Aaron T. Myers wrote: > Shouldn't this vote be taking place on general@, instead of common-dev@? I'm > under the impression that that is where all votes are supposed to take > place. Please correct me if I am wrong about that. > > -- > Aaron T. Myers > Software Engineer, Cloudera > > > > On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Giridharan Kesavan > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> This issue is fixed with Eric's patch for HADOOP-7356. Since Owen is out on >> vacation Iam working on getting the release tarball. >> >> -Giri >> >> >> On 7/28/11 1:56 PM, "Giridharan Kesavan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Myself and Eric Yang are looking into this. >>> -Giri >>> >>> On 7/28/11 12:04 PM, "Allen Wittenauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Jul 25, 2011, at 7:05 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: >>>> >>>>> I've created a release candidate for 0.20.204.0 that I would like to >>>>> release. >>>>> >>>>> It is available at: >> http://people.apache.org/~omalley/hadoop-0.20.204.0-rc0/ >>>>> >>>>> 0.20.204.0 has many fixes including disk fail in place and the new rpm >> and >>>>> deb packages. Fail in place allows the DataNode and TaskTracker to >> continue >>>>> after a hard drive fails. >>>> >>>> >>>> Is it still failing to build according to Jenkins? >>>> >>> >> >>
-
RE: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Milind.Bhandarkar@... 2011-07-29, 00:29
I saw @jeric14's tweet about 0.20.204 vote last night, and was about to reply, because I could not see any vote on the general@ mailing list.
Yes, toy are right @atm, the vote should be on general@. - milind --- Milind Bhandarkar -----Original Message----- From: Aaron T. Myers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 5:12 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0 Shouldn't this vote be taking place on general@, instead of common-dev@? I'm under the impression that that is where all votes are supposed to take place. Please correct me if I am wrong about that. -- Aaron T. Myers Software Engineer, Cloudera On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Giridharan Kesavan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > This issue is fixed with Eric's patch for HADOOP-7356. Since Owen is out on > vacation Iam working on getting the release tarball. > > -Giri > > > On 7/28/11 1:56 PM, "Giridharan Kesavan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Myself and Eric Yang are looking into this. > > -Giri > > > > On 7/28/11 12:04 PM, "Allen Wittenauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > >> > >> On Jul 25, 2011, at 7:05 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: > >> > >>> I've created a release candidate for 0.20.204.0 that I would like to > >>> release. > >>> > >>> It is available at: > http://people.apache.org/~omalley/hadoop-0.20.204.0-rc0/ > >>> > >>> 0.20.204.0 has many fixes including disk fail in place and the new rpm > and > >>> deb packages. Fail in place allows the DataNode and TaskTracker to > continue > >>> after a hard drive fails. > >> > >> > >> Is it still failing to build according to Jenkins? > >> > > > >
-
RE: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Milind.Bhandarkar@... 2011-07-29, 00:33
Somehow I remember that the 0.20.203.0 vote was carried out on general@
Here is a message from the archive: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-general/201105.mbox/browser - milind --- Milind Bhandarkar -----Original Message----- From: Arun C Murthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 5:27 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0 Nope. general@ is only for announcements. AFAIK Votes are developer activities. Arun On Jul 28, 2011, at 5:11 PM, Aaron T. Myers wrote: > Shouldn't this vote be taking place on general@, instead of common-dev@? I'm > under the impression that that is where all votes are supposed to take > place. Please correct me if I am wrong about that. > > -- > Aaron T. Myers > Software Engineer, Cloudera > > > > On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Giridharan Kesavan > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> This issue is fixed with Eric's patch for HADOOP-7356. Since Owen is out on >> vacation Iam working on getting the release tarball. >> >> -Giri >> >> >> On 7/28/11 1:56 PM, "Giridharan Kesavan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Myself and Eric Yang are looking into this. >>> -Giri >>> >>> On 7/28/11 12:04 PM, "Allen Wittenauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Jul 25, 2011, at 7:05 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: >>>> >>>>> I've created a release candidate for 0.20.204.0 that I would like to >>>>> release. >>>>> >>>>> It is available at: >> http://people.apache.org/~omalley/hadoop-0.20.204.0-rc0/ >>>>> >>>>> 0.20.204.0 has many fixes including disk fail in place and the new rpm >> and >>>>> deb packages. Fail in place allows the DataNode and TaskTracker to >> continue >>>>> after a hard drive fails. >>>> >>>> >>>> Is it still failing to build according to Jenkins? >>>> >>> >> >>
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Arun C Murthy 2011-07-29, 00:40
In the past we've carried it out on common-dev:
http://hadoop-common.472056.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Hadoop-0-21-0-candidate-2-td1181981.html Arun On Jul 28, 2011, at 5:33 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Somehow I remember that the 0.20.203.0 vote was carried out on general@ > > Here is a message from the archive: > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-general/201105.mbox/browser > > - milind > > --- > Milind Bhandarkar > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Arun C Murthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 5:27 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0 > > Nope. general@ is only for announcements. > > AFAIK Votes are developer activities. > > Arun > > On Jul 28, 2011, at 5:11 PM, Aaron T. Myers wrote: > >> Shouldn't this vote be taking place on general@, instead of common-dev@? I'm >> under the impression that that is where all votes are supposed to take >> place. Please correct me if I am wrong about that. >> >> -- >> Aaron T. Myers >> Software Engineer, Cloudera >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Giridharan Kesavan >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >> >>> This issue is fixed with Eric's patch for HADOOP-7356. Since Owen is out on >>> vacation Iam working on getting the release tarball. >>> >>> -Giri >>> >>> >>> On 7/28/11 1:56 PM, "Giridharan Kesavan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> Myself and Eric Yang are looking into this. >>>> -Giri >>>> >>>> On 7/28/11 12:04 PM, "Allen Wittenauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Jul 25, 2011, at 7:05 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I've created a release candidate for 0.20.204.0 that I would like to >>>>>> release. >>>>>> >>>>>> It is available at: >>> http://people.apache.org/~omalley/hadoop-0.20.204.0-rc0/ >>>>>> >>>>>> 0.20.204.0 has many fixes including disk fail in place and the new rpm >>> and >>>>>> deb packages. Fail in place allows the DataNode and TaskTracker to >>> continue >>>>>> after a hard drive fails. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Is it still failing to build according to Jenkins? >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> > >
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Eli Collins 2011-07-29, 01:40
We've done both, even within a branch (0.20.0 was voted on core-dev@
and 0.20.2 on general@). The bylaws suggest general@ should be used, which seems to make sense since we're releasing common, hdfs and mr. I think either works as long as people know where to check. http://hadoop.apache.org/bylaws.html "Voting Decisions regarding the project are made by votes on the primary project development mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED])" On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Arun C Murthy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In the past we've carried it out on common-dev: > http://hadoop-common.472056.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Hadoop-0-21-0-candidate-2-td1181981.html > > Arun > > On Jul 28, 2011, at 5:33 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Somehow I remember that the 0.20.203.0 vote was carried out on general@ >> >> Here is a message from the archive: >> >> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-general/201105.mbox/browser >> >> - milind >> >> --- >> Milind Bhandarkar >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Arun C Murthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 5:27 PM >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0 >> >> Nope. general@ is only for announcements. >> >> AFAIK Votes are developer activities. >> >> Arun >> >> On Jul 28, 2011, at 5:11 PM, Aaron T. Myers wrote: >> >>> Shouldn't this vote be taking place on general@, instead of common-dev@? I'm >>> under the impression that that is where all votes are supposed to take >>> place. Please correct me if I am wrong about that. >>> >>> -- >>> Aaron T. Myers >>> Software Engineer, Cloudera >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Giridharan Kesavan >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >>> >>>> This issue is fixed with Eric's patch for HADOOP-7356. Since Owen is out on >>>> vacation Iam working on getting the release tarball. >>>> >>>> -Giri >>>> >>>> >>>> On 7/28/11 1:56 PM, "Giridharan Kesavan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Myself and Eric Yang are looking into this. >>>>> -Giri >>>>> >>>>> On 7/28/11 12:04 PM, "Allen Wittenauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Jul 25, 2011, at 7:05 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I've created a release candidate for 0.20.204.0 that I would like to >>>>>>> release. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is available at: >>>> http://people.apache.org/~omalley/hadoop-0.20.204.0-rc0/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 0.20.204.0 has many fixes including disk fail in place and the new rpm >>>> and >>>>>>> deb packages. Fail in place allows the DataNode and TaskTracker to >>>> continue >>>>>>> after a hard drive fails. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Is it still failing to build according to Jenkins? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> > >
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Arun C Murthy 2011-07-29, 02:08
Thanks for the link Eli.
On Jul 28, 2011, at 6:40 PM, Eli Collins wrote: > We've done both, even within a branch (0.20.0 was voted on core-dev@ > and 0.20.2 on general@). The bylaws suggest general@ should be used, > which seems to make sense since we're releasing common, hdfs and mr. I > think either works as long as people know where to check. > > http://hadoop.apache.org/bylaws.html > > "Voting > Decisions regarding the project are made by votes on the primary > project development mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED])" > IMO general@ isn't the primary 'development' mailing list - it's just an 'announcement' list. But, it doesn't really matter... do folks feel strongly we should restart the vote on general? Arun > > On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Arun C Murthy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> In the past we've carried it out on common-dev: >> http://hadoop-common.472056.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Hadoop-0-21-0-candidate-2-td1181981.html >> >> Arun >> >> On Jul 28, 2011, at 5:33 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Somehow I remember that the 0.20.203.0 vote was carried out on general@ >>> >>> Here is a message from the archive: >>> >>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-general/201105.mbox/browser >>> >>> - milind >>> >>> --- >>> Milind Bhandarkar >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Arun C Murthy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>> Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 5:27 PM >>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0 >>> >>> Nope. general@ is only for announcements. >>> >>> AFAIK Votes are developer activities. >>> >>> Arun >>> >>> On Jul 28, 2011, at 5:11 PM, Aaron T. Myers wrote: >>> >>>> Shouldn't this vote be taking place on general@, instead of common-dev@? I'm >>>> under the impression that that is where all votes are supposed to take >>>> place. Please correct me if I am wrong about that. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Aaron T. Myers >>>> Software Engineer, Cloudera >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Giridharan Kesavan >>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >>>> >>>>> This issue is fixed with Eric's patch for HADOOP-7356. Since Owen is out on >>>>> vacation Iam working on getting the release tarball. >>>>> >>>>> -Giri >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 7/28/11 1:56 PM, "Giridharan Kesavan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Myself and Eric Yang are looking into this. >>>>>> -Giri >>>>>> >>>>>> On 7/28/11 12:04 PM, "Allen Wittenauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jul 25, 2011, at 7:05 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I've created a release candidate for 0.20.204.0 that I would like to >>>>>>>> release. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It is available at: >>>>> http://people.apache.org/~omalley/hadoop-0.20.204.0-rc0/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 0.20.204.0 has many fixes including disk fail in place and the new rpm >>>>> and >>>>>>>> deb packages. Fail in place allows the DataNode and TaskTracker to >>>>> continue >>>>>>>> after a hard drive fails. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is it still failing to build according to Jenkins? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> >>
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Aaron T. Myers 2011-07-29, 02:13
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Arun C Murthy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But, it doesn't really matter... do folks feel strongly we should restart > the vote on general? > I don't think there's need to restart the vote. I only brought this up because I've heard from a few people that they didn't know a release vote was going on. Let's just send an email to general@ saying there's a vote going on on common-dev@, and from now on be sure to send votes to general@. As Eli already said, it doesn't matter which it is, as long as people know where to look. -- Aaron T. Myers Software Engineer, Cloudera
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Arun C Murthy 2011-07-29, 04:54
Done. Thanks.
On Jul 28, 2011, at 7:13 PM, Aaron T. Myers wrote: > On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Arun C Murthy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> But, it doesn't really matter... do folks feel strongly we should restart >> the vote on general? >> > > I don't think there's need to restart the vote. I only brought this up > because I've heard from a few people that they didn't know a release vote > was going on. Let's just send an email to general@ saying there's a vote > going on on common-dev@, and from now on be sure to send votes to general@. > As Eli already said, it doesn't matter which it is, as long as people know > where to look. > > -- > Aaron T. Myers > Software Engineer, Cloudera
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Steve Loughran 2011-07-29, 11:01
On 29/07/11 03:13, Aaron T. Myers wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Arun C Murthy<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> But, it doesn't really matter... do folks feel strongly we should restart >> the vote on general? >> > > I don't think there's need to restart the vote. I only brought this up > because I've heard from a few people that they didn't know a release vote > was going on. Let's just send an email to general@ saying there's a vote > going on on common-dev@, and from now on be sure to send votes to general@. > As Eli already said, it doesn't matter which it is, as long as people know > where to look. I'd like to rm the log4j.properties file; I'll apply the patch for this to the branch and build and test locally. Yes: test.
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Steve Loughran 2011-07-29, 11:04
Incidentally, has anyone tested on Java7.
The Lucene team are unhappy: http://www.lucidimagination.com/search/document/1a0d3986e48a9348/warning_index_corruption_and_crashes_in_apache_lucene_core_apache_solr_with_java_7
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Steve Loughran 2011-07-29, 13:51
On 29/07/11 12:01, Steve Loughran wrote:
> On 29/07/11 03:13, Aaron T. Myers wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Arun C Murthy<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >>> But, it doesn't really matter... do folks feel strongly we should >>> restart >>> the vote on general? >>> >> >> I don't think there's need to restart the vote. I only brought this up >> because I've heard from a few people that they didn't know a release vote >> was going on. Let's just send an email to general@ saying there's a vote >> going on on common-dev@, and from now on be sure to send votes to >> general@. >> As Eli already said, it doesn't matter which it is, as long as people >> know >> where to look. > > > I'd like to rm the log4j.properties file; I'll apply the patch for this > to the branch and build and test locally. Yes: test. I've committed the HADOOP-7468 patch to build.xml to stop conf/log4.properties going into the JAR to trunk. There's a separate patch for the 0.20.204 release, which I'd argue for inclusion 1. It doesn't impact the server code 2. It breaks any app downstream that wants its own log4j. To be precise, it causes inconsistent behaviour depending on the classpath ordering. This change isn't going to impact any of the hadoop scripts -including client side ones- that have a the conf/ dir on the classpath. -Steve
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Allen Wittenauer 2011-07-29, 15:59
I can't believe we're holding a vote on a release that isn't passing the nightly build. If my vote was binding, I'd -1 it based upon that alone.
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Mahadev Konar 2011-07-29, 16:07
Allen,
I think Giri already sent out an email for that. Below is the response from him. There'll be a new rc candidate soon. Hope that helps. thanks mahadev ================================== This issue is fixed with Eric's patch for HADOOP-7356. Since Owen is out on vacation Iam working on getting the release tarball. -Giri On 7/28/11 1:56 PM, "Giridharan Kesavan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Myself and Eric Yang are looking into this. > -Giri > > On 7/28/11 12:04 PM, "Allen Wittenauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> On Jul 25, 2011, at 7:05 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: >> >>> I've created a release candidate for 0.20.204.0 that I would like to >>> release. >>> >>> It is available at: http://people.apache.org/~omalley/hadoop-0.20.204.0-rc0/ >>> >>> 0.20.204.0 has many fixes including disk fail in place and the new rpm and >>> deb packages. Fail in place allows the DataNode and TaskTracker to continue >>> after a hard drive fails. >> >> >> Is it still failing to build according to Jenkins? >> ============================= On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 8:59 AM, Allen Wittenauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I can't believe we're holding a vote on a release that isn't passing the nightly build. If my vote was binding, I'd -1 it based upon that alone.
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Suresh Srinivas 2011-07-29, 16:51
> I'd like to get HADOOP-7468 in, which deletes log4j.properties from the
JAR. Someone did a patch for it yesterday This bug is not marked as a blocker. In that case I think we should pick this up in 205 release that is going to out soon. On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 4:04 AM, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Incidentally, has anyone tested on Java7. > > The Lucene team are unhappy: > http://www.lucidimagination.**com/search/document/** > 1a0d3986e48a9348/warning_**index_corruption_and_crashes_** > in_apache_lucene_core_apache_**solr_with_java_7<http://www.lucidimagination.com/search/document/1a0d3986e48a9348/warning_index_corruption_and_crashes_in_apache_lucene_core_apache_solr_with_java_7> > I do not think this is blocker either. New release candidate will be out soon that fixes the Jenkins failures. Vote will resume on that RC. Regards, Suresh
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Matt Foley 2011-08-02, 10:00
Hi,
Four critical patches have been applied to 0.20-security-204, and release candidate 0.20.204-rc1 is now ready for evaluation. The signed release is available at http://people.apache.org/~mattf/hadoop-0.20.204-rc1/ A successful build and test under Jenkins may be examined at https://builds.apache.org/view/G-L/view/Hadoop/job/Hadoop-0.20.204-Build/24/ The four changes since rc0 are: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ r1152887 | mattf | 2011-08-01 11:32:12 -0700 (Mon, 01 Aug 2011) | 1 line HDFS-2218. Disable TestHdfsProxy.testHdfsProxyInterface in automated test suite for 0.20-security-204 release. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ r1152037 | gkesavan | 2011-07-28 23:39:42 +0000 (Thu, 28 Jul 2011) | 1 line HADOOP-7356. Fix bin scripts to support dev build environment ------------------------------------------------------------------------ r1150862 | ddas | 2011-07-25 19:32:59 +0000 (Mon, 25 Jul 2011) | 1 line Merge -r 1150859:1150860 from branch-0.20-security onto branch-0.20-security-204 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ r1150857 | ddas | 2011-07-25 19:28:14 +0000 (Mon, 25 Jul 2011) | 1 line MAPREDUCE-2621. Merge -r 1150527:1150528 from branch-0.20-security onto branch-0.20-security-204 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Although Owen is the RM for this release, he requested assistance in progressing the release while he is traveling. Please resume the 0.20.204 release vote today, using this rc1 candidate. Thank you, --Matt On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Suresh Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > .... > New release candidate will be out soon that fixes the Jenkins failures. > Vote > will resume on that RC. > > Regards, > Suresh >
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Steve Loughran 2011-08-02, 11:22
On 29/07/11 17:51, Suresh Srinivas wrote:
>> I'd like to get HADOOP-7468 in, which deletes log4j.properties from the > JAR. Someone did a patch for it yesterday I patched trunk but not the 20.20x branch > This bug is not marked as a blocker. In that case I think we should pick > this up in 205 release that is going to out soon.
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Steve Loughran 2011-08-02, 11:28
On 02/08/11 11:00, Matt Foley wrote:
> Hi, > Four critical patches have been applied to 0.20-security-204, and release > candidate 0.20.204-rc1 is now ready for evaluation. > The signed release is available at > http://people.apache.org/~mattf/hadoop-0.20.204-rc1/ > A successful build and test under Jenkins may be examined at > https://builds.apache.org/view/G-L/view/Hadoop/job/Hadoop-0.20.204-Build/24/ > I'm getting confused about release roadmaps right now Is there somewhere that lists the (proposed) timetable for the 0.20.204, 0.20.205, 0.22, 0.23 releases? It sounds like any non-critical problem in 20.204rc0 is intended to go into to the 0.20.205 release. Correct? If so is there a release manager or can I go ahead and patch in the normal RTC process?
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Allen Wittenauer 2011-08-02, 18:08
On Aug 2, 2011, at 4:28 AM, Steve Loughran wrote: > > I'm getting confused about release roadmaps right now branch-20 is the new trunk, given that features keep popping up in it rather than bug fixes.
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Eli Collins 2011-08-02, 19:23
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Allen Wittenauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Aug 2, 2011, at 4:28 AM, Steve Loughran wrote: >> >> I'm getting confused about release roadmaps right now > > branch-20 is the new trunk, given that features keep popping up in it rather than bug fixes. When we voted to adopt 203.rc0 we also voted to adopt the new 4 part version scheme which was intended to allow feature development on the 203.x series. See http://search-hadoop.com/m/iegPf7aDvh1 branch-20-security is not the new trunk, trunk and branches from trunk are where most of the action is happening. However it is disappointing to see some of the features being developed on branch-20-security, rather being developed first on trunk and then ported to branch-20-security. Thanks, Eli
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Allen Wittenauer 2011-08-02, 20:33
On Aug 2, 2011, at 12:23 PM, Eli Collins wrote: > > However it is disappointing > to see some of the features being developed on branch-20-security, > rather being developed first on trunk and then ported to > branch-20-security. ... which was exactly my point.
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Steve Loughran 2011-08-03, 10:04
On 02/08/11 21:33, Allen Wittenauer wrote:
> > On Aug 2, 2011, at 12:23 PM, Eli Collins wrote: >> >> However it is disappointing >> to see some of the features being developed on branch-20-security, >> rather being developed first on trunk and then ported to >> branch-20-security. > > ... which was exactly my point. > Yes, I think this is wrong Every feature should go into trunk then be backported to the branch, so that trunk is a proper superset of the branch
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Steve Loughran 2011-08-03, 13:57
On 02/08/11 20:23, Eli Collins wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Allen Wittenauer<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On Aug 2, 2011, at 4:28 AM, Steve Loughran wrote: >>> >>> I'm getting confused about release roadmaps right now >> >> branch-20 is the new trunk, given that features keep popping up in it rather than bug fixes. > > When we voted to adopt 203.rc0 we also voted to adopt the new 4 part > version scheme which was intended to allow feature development on the > 203.x series. See http://search-hadoop.com/m/iegPf7aDvh1 This makes things clearer. Now, if I were to propagate a change from trunk to the 0.20.20x branch by committing it to https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/hadoop/common/branches/branch-0.20-security-204/ , that's going to get into .204? Yet my proposal to do what was rejected, saying "hold for .205". Should someone create a .205 branch so that we can backport all non-critical patches for the 20.20x line into there, while the 0.20.204 becomes frozen for the release except for absolutely critical patches?
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Eric Yang 2011-08-03, 16:35
RPM packaging and Ganglia plugin for metrics v2 features committed to trunk before in branch-0.20-security. There is no rule that declares the new feature landed in trunk needs to materialized into a release then back port is allowed to happen. Those are the only two new minor features that were back ported from trunk to 0.20 security branch. No one is using branch-0.20-security as their new trunk. Hence, the 4 part version number should not apply.
Majority of users are not affected by the utility features introduced in 0.20.204. Change Log shows what is in this release. 0.20.204 is incremental improvement of existing 0.20.x release. regards, Eric On Aug 2, 2011, at 12:23 PM, Eli Collins wrote: > On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Allen Wittenauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On Aug 2, 2011, at 4:28 AM, Steve Loughran wrote: >>> >>> I'm getting confused about release roadmaps right now >> >> branch-20 is the new trunk, given that features keep popping up in it rather than bug fixes. > > When we voted to adopt 203.rc0 we also voted to adopt the new 4 part > version scheme which was intended to allow feature development on the > 203.x series. See http://search-hadoop.com/m/iegPf7aDvh1 > > branch-20-security is not the new trunk, trunk and branches from trunk > are where most of the action is happening. However it is disappointing > to see some of the features being developed on branch-20-security, > rather being developed first on trunk and then ported to > branch-20-security. > > Thanks, > Eli
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Eli Collins 2011-08-03, 16:46
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Eric Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> RPM packaging and Ganglia plugin for metrics v2 features committed to trunk before in branch-0.20-security. There is no rule that declares the new feature landed in trunk needs to materialized into a release then back port is allowed to happen. No one is suggesting that. We're saying features should be developed on trunk first, before being backported to a release branch. Yes, there is no current rule that says trunk needs to be a superset of branch-0.20, but it would help us not get stuck on a given release for too long. > Those are the only two new minor features that were back ported from trunk to 0.20 security branch. There are others, eg MR disk failure handling, MR security, etc. that are not in trunk but are in branch-0.20-security. > No one is using branch-0.20-security as their new trunk. > Hence, the 4 part version number should not apply. > If that's so then why use a 4 part version (0.20.204.0)? Thanks, Eli
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Matt Foley 2011-08-03, 21:14
>
> So, how are we doing with 0.20.204 content and trunk given the above > proposal? Very well, in fact. Matt, Suresh and I have done a detailed > analysis (separate email), please take a look. Here's the analysis of changes in 204 vs trunk. We believe that ALL the changes in 204 are either already in trunk or do not need to be in trunk. Here is the list of 204 items not already in trunk, and their categorization. Please, if anyone thinks we've missed something, bring it to my attention and if it isn't already in trunk we will get it into trunk as expeditiously as possible. Thanks, --Matt Not needed for trunk: HDFS-1758. Make Web UI JSP pages thread safe. (Tanping via suresh) (Not a problem in trunk) HDFS-2057. Wait time to terminate the threads causes unit tests to take longer time. (Bharath Mundlapudi via suresh) (Not a problem in trunk) HDFS-1878. TestHDFSServerPorts unit test failure - race condition in FSNamesystem.close() causes NullPointerException without serious consequence. (mattf) (not a problem in trunk) HDFS-1842. Handle editlog opcode conflict with 0.20.203 during upgrade, by throwing an error to indicate the editlog needs to be empty. (suresh) (Handled by HDFS-1824) HDFS-2218. Disable TestHdfsProxy.testHdfsProxyInterface in automated test suite for 0.20-security-204 release. (Matt Foley) (Not a problem in trunk) HDFS-2044. TestQueueProcessingStatistics failing automatic test due to timing issues. (mattf) (not a problem in trunk) HADOOP-7459. Remove jdk-1.6.0 dependency check from rpm. (omalley) (replaced by HDFS-2156) HADOOP-7398. Suppress warnings about use of HADOOP_HOME. (omalley) (not a problem in trunk) HADOOP-7369. Fix permissions in tarball for sbin/* and libexec/* (omalley) (not a problem in trunk) HADOOP-7373. Fix {start,stop}-{dfs,mapred} and hadoop-daemons.sh from trying to use the wrong bin directory. (omalley) (not a problem in trunk) HADOOP-7475. Fix hadoop-setup-single-node.sh to reflect new layout. (eyang via omalley) (not a problem in trunk) Back port from trunk: MAPREDUCE-2524. Port reduce failure reporting semantics from trunk, to fail faulty maps more aggressively. (Thomas Graves via cdouglas) MAPREDUCE-2479. Move distributed cache cleanup to a background task, backporting MAPREDUCE-1568. (Robert Joseph Evans via cdouglas) HDFS-2023. Backport of NPE for File.list and File.listFiles. Merged ports of HADOOP-7322, HDFS-1934, HADOOP-7342, and HDFS-2019. (Bharath Mundlapudi via mattf) HADOOP-7248. Update eclipse target to generate .classpath from ivy config. (Thomas Graves and Tom White via cdouglas) (from HADOOP-6407) HADOOP-7274. Fix typos in IOUtils. (Jonathan Eagles via cdouglas) (from HADOOP-7057) HADOOP-7277. Add generation of run configurations to eclipse target. (Jeffrey Naisbitt and Philip Zeyliger via cdouglas) (from HADOOP-5911) HADOOP-7364. TestMiniMRDFSCaching fails if test.build.dir is set to something other than build/test. (Thomas Graves via mahadev) (from MAPREDUCE-2575) Already in trunk for MRV2: MAPREDUCE-2558. Add queue-level metrics 0.20-security branch (test fixes) (Jeffrey Naisbitt via mahadev) MAPREDUCE-2418. Show job errors in JobHistory page. (Siddharth Seth via acmurthy) (Already in MR279) MAPREDUCE-2411. Force an exception when the queue has an invalid name or its ACLs are misconfigured. (Dick King via cdouglas) (Already in MR279) Waiting for MR279 merge: MAPREDUCE-2429. Validate JVM in TaskUmbilicalProtocol. (Siddharth Seth via acmurthy) MAPREDUCE-2447. Fix Child.java to set Task.jvmContext sooner to avoid corner cases in error handling. (Siddharth Seth via acmurthy) MapReduce v1 exceptions: MAPREDUCE-2415. Distribute the user task logs on to multiple disks. (Bharath Mundlapudi via omalley) MAPREDUCE-2413. TaskTracker should handle disk failures by reinitializing itself. (Ravi Gummadi and Jagane Sundar via omalley) MAPREDUCE-2621. TestCapacityScheduler fails with "Queue "q1" does not exist". (Sherry Chen via mahadev) MAPREDUCE-2535. Fix NPE in JobClient caused by retirement. (Robert Joseph Evans via cdouglas) MAPREDUCE-2555. Avoid sprious logging from completedtasks. (Thomas Graves via cdouglas) MAPREDUCE-2443. Fix TaskAspect for TaskUmbilicalProtocol.ping(..). (Siddharth Seth via szetszwo) On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Arun C Murthy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Eli Collins 2011-08-03, 22:33
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 2:14 PM, Matt Foley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> So, how are we doing with 0.20.204 content and trunk given the above >> proposal? Very well, in fact. Matt, Suresh and I have done a detailed >> analysis (separate email), please take a look. > > > Here's the analysis of changes in 204 vs trunk. We believe that ALL the > changes in 204 are either already in trunk or do not need to be in trunk. > Here is the list of 204 items not already in trunk, and their > categorization. > > Please, if anyone thinks we've missed something, bring it to my attention > and if it isn't already in trunk we will get it into trunk as expeditiously > as possible. > Thanks, > --Matt Looks good to me Matt. Thanks for doing the analysis. I think the regression wrt trunk are from the original cut of the branch and don't need to block the 204 release, ie the trunk first discussion is IMO an orthogonal thread. Thanks, Eli
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Koji Noguchi 2011-08-03, 22:58
Can we add
* HADOOP-6942 Ability for having user's classes take precedence over the system classes for tasks' classpath It's pretty bad in a sense that it's not on trunk but 0.20.204 and CDH3 both have this *using different parameters*. Koji On 8/3/11 2:14 PM, "Matt Foley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> So, how are we doing with 0.20.204 content and trunk given the above >> proposal? Very well, in fact. Matt, Suresh and I have done a detailed >> analysis (separate email), please take a look. > > > Here's the analysis of changes in 204 vs trunk. We believe that ALL the > changes in 204 are either already in trunk or do not need to be in trunk. > Here is the list of 204 items not already in trunk, and their > categorization. > > Please, if anyone thinks we've missed something, bring it to my attention > and if it isn't already in trunk we will get it into trunk as expeditiously > as possible. > Thanks, > --Matt > > Not needed for trunk: > HDFS-1758. Make Web UI JSP pages thread safe. (Tanping via suresh) (Not a > problem in trunk) > HDFS-2057. Wait time to terminate the threads causes unit tests to take > longer time. (Bharath Mundlapudi via suresh) (Not a problem in trunk) > HDFS-1878. TestHDFSServerPorts unit test failure - race condition in > FSNamesystem.close() causes NullPointerException without serious > consequence. (mattf) (not a problem in trunk) > HDFS-1842. Handle editlog opcode conflict with 0.20.203 during upgrade, by > throwing an error to indicate the editlog needs to be empty. (suresh) > (Handled by HDFS-1824) > HDFS-2218. Disable TestHdfsProxy.testHdfsProxyInterface in automated test > suite for 0.20-security-204 release. (Matt Foley) (Not a problem in trunk) > HDFS-2044. TestQueueProcessingStatistics failing automatic test due to > timing issues. (mattf) (not a problem in trunk) > HADOOP-7459. Remove jdk-1.6.0 dependency check from rpm. (omalley) (replaced > by HDFS-2156) > HADOOP-7398. Suppress warnings about use of HADOOP_HOME. (omalley) (not a > problem in trunk) > HADOOP-7369. Fix permissions in tarball for sbin/* and libexec/* (omalley) > (not a problem in trunk) > HADOOP-7373. Fix {start,stop}-{dfs,mapred} and hadoop-daemons.sh from trying > to use the wrong bin directory. (omalley) (not a problem in trunk) > HADOOP-7475. Fix hadoop-setup-single-node.sh to reflect new layout. (eyang > via omalley) (not a problem in trunk) > > Back port from trunk: > MAPREDUCE-2524. Port reduce failure reporting semantics from trunk, to fail > faulty maps more aggressively. (Thomas Graves via cdouglas) > MAPREDUCE-2479. Move distributed cache cleanup to a background task, > backporting MAPREDUCE-1568. (Robert Joseph Evans via cdouglas) > HDFS-2023. Backport of NPE for File.list and File.listFiles. Merged ports > of HADOOP-7322, HDFS-1934, HADOOP-7342, and HDFS-2019. (Bharath Mundlapudi > via mattf) > HADOOP-7248. Update eclipse target to generate .classpath from ivy config. > (Thomas Graves and Tom White via cdouglas) (from HADOOP-6407) > HADOOP-7274. Fix typos in IOUtils. (Jonathan Eagles via cdouglas) (from > HADOOP-7057) > HADOOP-7277. Add generation of run configurations to eclipse target. > (Jeffrey Naisbitt and Philip Zeyliger via cdouglas) (from HADOOP-5911) > HADOOP-7364. TestMiniMRDFSCaching fails if test.build.dir is set to > something other than build/test. (Thomas Graves via mahadev) (from > MAPREDUCE-2575) > > Already in trunk for MRV2: > MAPREDUCE-2558. Add queue-level metrics 0.20-security branch (test fixes) > (Jeffrey Naisbitt via mahadev) > MAPREDUCE-2418. Show job errors in JobHistory page. (Siddharth Seth via > acmurthy) (Already in MR279) > MAPREDUCE-2411. Force an exception when the queue has an invalid name or its > ACLs are misconfigured. (Dick King via cdouglas) (Already in MR279) > > Waiting for MR279 merge: > MAPREDUCE-2429. Validate JVM in TaskUmbilicalProtocol. (Siddharth Seth via > acmurthy) > MAPREDUCE-2447. Fix Child.java to set Task.jvmContext sooner to avoid corner
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Arun C Murthy 2011-08-03, 23:57
On Aug 3, 2011, at 3:58 PM, Koji Noguchi wrote: > Can we add > * HADOOP-6942 Ability for having user's classes take precedence over the > system classes for tasks' classpath > Thanks Koji. HADOOP-6942 is in the 'MRv1 exceptions' category since MRv2 doesn't have this issue at all. > It's pretty bad in a sense that it's not on trunk but 0.20.204 and CDH3 both > have this *using different parameters*. This was originally part of the 0.20.203 release, but what/how Cloudera chooses to put in CDH3 is beyond the scope of this discussion... :) Arun > > Koji > > On 8/3/11 2:14 PM, "Matt Foley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> >>> So, how are we doing with 0.20.204 content and trunk given the above >>> proposal? Very well, in fact. Matt, Suresh and I have done a detailed >>> analysis (separate email), please take a look. >> >> >> Here's the analysis of changes in 204 vs trunk. We believe that ALL the >> changes in 204 are either already in trunk or do not need to be in trunk. >> Here is the list of 204 items not already in trunk, and their >> categorization. >> >> Please, if anyone thinks we've missed something, bring it to my attention >> and if it isn't already in trunk we will get it into trunk as expeditiously >> as possible. >> Thanks, >> --Matt >> >> Not needed for trunk: >> HDFS-1758. Make Web UI JSP pages thread safe. (Tanping via suresh) (Not a >> problem in trunk) >> HDFS-2057. Wait time to terminate the threads causes unit tests to take >> longer time. (Bharath Mundlapudi via suresh) (Not a problem in trunk) >> HDFS-1878. TestHDFSServerPorts unit test failure - race condition in >> FSNamesystem.close() causes NullPointerException without serious >> consequence. (mattf) (not a problem in trunk) >> HDFS-1842. Handle editlog opcode conflict with 0.20.203 during upgrade, by >> throwing an error to indicate the editlog needs to be empty. (suresh) >> (Handled by HDFS-1824) >> HDFS-2218. Disable TestHdfsProxy.testHdfsProxyInterface in automated test >> suite for 0.20-security-204 release. (Matt Foley) (Not a problem in trunk) >> HDFS-2044. TestQueueProcessingStatistics failing automatic test due to >> timing issues. (mattf) (not a problem in trunk) >> HADOOP-7459. Remove jdk-1.6.0 dependency check from rpm. (omalley) (replaced >> by HDFS-2156) >> HADOOP-7398. Suppress warnings about use of HADOOP_HOME. (omalley) (not a >> problem in trunk) >> HADOOP-7369. Fix permissions in tarball for sbin/* and libexec/* (omalley) >> (not a problem in trunk) >> HADOOP-7373. Fix {start,stop}-{dfs,mapred} and hadoop-daemons.sh from trying >> to use the wrong bin directory. (omalley) (not a problem in trunk) >> HADOOP-7475. Fix hadoop-setup-single-node.sh to reflect new layout. (eyang >> via omalley) (not a problem in trunk) >> >> Back port from trunk: >> MAPREDUCE-2524. Port reduce failure reporting semantics from trunk, to fail >> faulty maps more aggressively. (Thomas Graves via cdouglas) >> MAPREDUCE-2479. Move distributed cache cleanup to a background task, >> backporting MAPREDUCE-1568. (Robert Joseph Evans via cdouglas) >> HDFS-2023. Backport of NPE for File.list and File.listFiles. Merged ports >> of HADOOP-7322, HDFS-1934, HADOOP-7342, and HDFS-2019. (Bharath Mundlapudi >> via mattf) >> HADOOP-7248. Update eclipse target to generate .classpath from ivy config. >> (Thomas Graves and Tom White via cdouglas) (from HADOOP-6407) >> HADOOP-7274. Fix typos in IOUtils. (Jonathan Eagles via cdouglas) (from >> HADOOP-7057) >> HADOOP-7277. Add generation of run configurations to eclipse target. >> (Jeffrey Naisbitt and Philip Zeyliger via cdouglas) (from HADOOP-5911) >> HADOOP-7364. TestMiniMRDFSCaching fails if test.build.dir is set to >> something other than build/test. (Thomas Graves via mahadev) (from >> MAPREDUCE-2575) >> >> Already in trunk for MRV2: >> MAPREDUCE-2558. Add queue-level metrics 0.20-security branch (test fixes) >> (Jeffrey Naisbitt via mahadev) >> MAPREDUCE-2418. Show job errors in JobHistory page. (Siddharth Seth via
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Yu Li 2011-08-08, 15:36
Hi all,
I've just run unit test of 0.20.204 using SUN jdk1.6.0_21, on a 64bit RHEL machine, and find the following cases failed: [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.mapred.TestJobTrackerRestart FAILED (timeout) [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.mapred.TestJobTrackerRestartWithLostTracker FAILED [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.mapred.TestJobTrackerSafeMode FAILED [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.filecache.TestMRWithDistributedCache FAILED [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.filecache.TestTrackerDistributedCacheManager FAILED [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.mapred.TestMiniMRMapRedDebugScript FAILED [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.mapred.TestRecoveryManager FAILED [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.mapred.TestTaskTrackerLocalization FAILED [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.mapred.TestJobTrackerRestartWithCS FAILED (timeout) [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.mapred.TestRackAwareTaskPlacement FAILED I run each failed test case for 4 times, the above 9 cases failed for each round, while the last case succeeded twice and failed twice. I also tested 0.20.203 rc1 with the same testing environment some time earlier, and got almost the same result(with the failed cases attached below) [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.mapred.TestJobTrackerRestart FAILED [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.mapred.TestJobTrackerRestartWithLostTracker FAILED [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.mapred.TestJobTrackerSafeMode FAILED [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.filecache.TestMRWithDistributedCache FAILED [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.filecache.TestTrackerDistributedCacheManager FAILED [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.mapred.TestMiniMRMapRedDebugScript FAILED [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.mapred.TestRecoveryManager FAILED [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.mapred.TestTaskTrackerLocalization FAILED [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.hdfsproxy.TestHdfsProxy FAILED Could somebody have a look on these failed test cases? Or tell me if I set anything wrong in my environment? Many thanks. PS: I referred to http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HadoopJavaVersions about setting the testing environment. -- Best Regards, Li Yu On 2 August 2011 19:22, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 29/07/11 17:51, Suresh Srinivas wrote: > >> I'd like to get HADOOP-7468 in, which deletes log4j.properties from the >>> >> JAR. Someone did a patch for it yesterday >> > > I patched trunk but not the 20.20x branch > > This bug is not marked as a blocker. In that case I think we should pick >> this up in 205 release that is going to out soon. >> > > >
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Owen O'Malley 2011-08-08, 16:26
On Aug 8, 2011, at 8:36 AM, Yu Li wrote: > Hi all, > > I've just run unit test of 0.20.204 using SUN jdk1.6.0_21, on a 64bit RHEL > machine, and find the following cases failed: > > [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.mapred.TestJobTrackerRestart FAILED (timeout) I hit this one too. If you look at that test case, you'll see it has an @Ignore on it. For some unknown reason, when you use ant 1.8.2 junit does the wrong thing. Use ant 1.7.1 and the test cases will be properly ignored. -- Owen
-
Re: [VOTE] Release 0.20.204.0-rc0Yu Li 2011-08-08, 17:03
Thanks Owen, for the quick and helpful response!
By removing those test cases marked as "@Ignored", there're still 3 failed test cases for 0.20.203: [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.filecache.TestMRWithDistributedCache FAILED [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.filecache.TestTrackerDistributedCacheManager FAILED [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.hdfsproxy.TestHdfsProxy FAILED and 3 failed, 1 unstable cases for 0.20.204: [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.filecache.TestMRWithDistributedCache FAILED [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.filecache.TestTrackerDistributedCacheManager FAILED [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.mapred.TestJobTrackerRestartWithCS FAILED (timeout) [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.mapred.TestRackAwareTaskPlacement --> FAILED twice, SUCCEED twice Has anybody met with these case failures? Thanks. -- Best Regards, Li Yu On 9 August 2011 00:26, Owen O'Malley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Aug 8, 2011, at 8:36 AM, Yu Li wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I've just run unit test of 0.20.204 using SUN jdk1.6.0_21, on a 64bit > RHEL > > machine, and find the following cases failed: > > > > [junit] Test org.apache.hadoop.mapred.TestJobTrackerRestart FAILED > (timeout) > > I hit this one too. If you look at that test case, you'll see it has an > @Ignore on it. For some unknown reason, when you use ant 1.8.2 junit does > the wrong thing. Use ant 1.7.1 and the test cases will be properly ignored. > > -- Owen > > |