Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Hadoop, mail # dev - [VOTE] Hadoop-1.0.0 release candidate 2


Copy link to this message
-
Re: [VOTE] Hadoop-1.0.0 release candidate 3
Arpit Gupta 2011-12-21, 02:39
+1 (non binding)

Ran system tests on both secure and non secure hadoop (20 node clusters) and tests passed with expected results.

--
Arpit
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Dec 18, 2011, at 11:18 PM, Matt Foley wrote:

> Okay guys, obviously I can't add.  Something about a carry bit... :-)
> Let's try:
>    The vote will close at 12:30pm PST on Friday 23 Dec.
>
> Thank you.
> Regards,
> --Matt
>
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Tim Broberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Hmm, on what year does the 13th next fall on a Friday?
>>
>>   - Tim.
>>
>> On Dec 16, 2011, at 6:14 PM, "Konstantin Boudnik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:10PM, Matt Foley wrote:
>>>> Hello all,
>>>> I have posted a new release candidate for Hadoop 1.0.0 at
>>>>   http://people.apache.org/~mattf/hadoop-1.0.0-rc3/
>>>>
>>>> Please download, evaluate, and vote on this list.
>>>> The artifacts have also been posted to the maven repo.
>>>> The vote will close at 12:30pm PST on Friday 13 Dec.
>>>
>>> So, the vote has been closed for three days? Ok then ;)
>>>
>>>> There had been an issue raised regarding
>>>> HADOOP-7929<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-7929>.
>>>> This has been evaluated and the jira closed as invalid.  Thanks to
>> Andrew
>>>> and others involved for helping assure the quality of this release.
>>>>
>>>> As previously mentioned, use of JDK 1.6.0_26 or better is recommended
>> for
>>>> this release.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you,
>>>>
>>>>> --Matt (Release Manager for 1.0.0, formerly known as 0.20.205.1)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:32 AM, Matt Foley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>> I have a clean build of the below, that passes junit testing, and was
>>>>> about to post it, when I got email about the newly opened HADOOP-7929<
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-7929> "Port
>>>>> HADOOP-7070 to branch-1".  It appears this prevents secure HBase from
>>>>> working with secure Hadoop.  Since HBase support is a key element of
>> 1.0.0,
>>>>> and it seems this will be fixable fairly promptly, I am going to wait
>>>>> another day for 1.0.0-rc3.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for your patience,
>>>>> --Matt
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 6:17 PM, Matt Foley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In various emails and jiras, I have been asked to incorporate the
>>>>>> following additional patches in 1.0.0:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  - MAPREDUCE-3319 (Roman)
>>>>>>  - HADOOP-7903 (Arpit)
>>>>>>  - MAPREDUCE-3475 (Daryn)
>>>>>>  - HDFS-2589 (Daryn)
>>>>>>  - HADOOP jira about to be opened (Chris W.) for missing jackson
>>>>>>  dependency in hadoop pom.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have not heard of any other significant issues in this build.
>>>>>> I will re-spin the release candidate tomorrow.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> --Matt
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Matt Foley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>>>> I have posted a release candidate for Hadoop 1.0.0 at
>>>>>>>   http://people.apache.org/~mattf/hadoop-1.0.0-rc2/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please download, evaluate, and vote on this list.
>>>>>>> The artifacts will be posted to the maven repo shortly.
>>>>>>> The vote will close at noon PST on Thursday 15 Dec.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It may be of interest that it is important to use an appropriate
>> version
>>>>>>> of Java.
>>>>>>> I lost several days due to instabilities apparently in Oracle JDK
>>>>>>> 1.6.0_23, which
>>>>>>> caused about 30 junit test failures in contrib (streaming,
>> schedulers,
>>>>>>> and gridmix).
>>>>>>> Switching to JDK 1.6.0_26 made the problems go away.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The release artifacts in this hadoop-1.0.0-rc2 were build with
>>>>>>> JDK 1.6.0_26.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>>> --Matt (Release Manager for 1.0.0, formerly known as 0.20.205.1)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>> The information and any attached documents contained in this message
>> may be confidential and/or legally privileged.  The message is