Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Hadoop >> mail # dev >> [ANNOUNCE] Intend to build a 0.20.205.1 candidate next Friday 11 Nov.


Copy link to this message
-
Re: [ANNOUNCE] Intend to build a 0.20.205.1 candidate next Friday 11 Nov.
Hi Roman,
Do you have a proposed patch?  If so I would be happy to include it.

Thanks,
--Matt

On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi Matt,
>
> quick question: any reason we are ignoring multifilewc from hadoop
> examples?
>   https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-3319
>
> would be nice to fix it for 1.0 of Hadoop. Or at least disable.
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Matt Foley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I really want this in 0.20.205.1, which will be Hadoop 1.0.0, because of
> > its importance for
> > good support of HBase.
> >
> > Jitendra, please merge it to branch-0.20-security-205.
> >
> > --Matt (wearing my Apache release manager hat)
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Suresh Srinivas <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> >
> >> +1 for Jitendra's proposal.
> >>
> >> Additionally, most of the core of the code that this patch is based on
> has
> >> been tested and deployed in clusters at TrendMicro and Facebook.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Jitendra Pandey
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> >>
> >> > The trunk, 206 patches for HDFS-2246 have been committed. I think it
> >> makes
> >> > sense to commit it to 205.1 as well for following reasons (most of it
> has
> >> > already been mentioned)
> >> > a) We intended this patch for 205, but couldn't finish in time. Now
> that
> >> > 205.1 branch is still not cut, we could get this in.
> >> > b) This is not a very risky change. Most of it is new code and will be
> >> > disabled by default the feature will be disabled.
> >> > c) The performance benefits are very good, as reported by Todd on the
> >> jira.
> >> > Hbase installations will significantly benefit from it.
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Todd Lipcon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Todd Lipcon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote:
> >> > > > On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 1:29 AM, Matt Foley <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> Also, I believe in the HDFS-2246 Jira, Todd requested extra time
> to
> >> > > review,
> >> > > >> due to commitments at Hadoop World.  Todd, would Monday be
> >> sufficient
> >> > > extra
> >> > > >> time, so as not to slow down the anticipated release schedule too
> >> > much?
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Yes, I will probably have time to review it by Monday. But the
> >> > > > review-time concern is separate from the concern about which
> version
> >> > > > this should go into.
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Reviewing this now... though I still think it shoudl target
> 0.20.206,
> >> > > not 0.20.205.1.
> >> > >
> >> > > -Todd
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:31 PM, Eli Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>> Hey guys,
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> HDFS-2246 is not a fix, it's a non-trivial performance
> >> optimization.
> >> > > >>> The roadmap page is pretty clear..  "Point releases are made to
> fix
> >> > > >>> critical bugs. They do not introduce new features or make other
> >> > > >>> improvements other than fixing bugs".
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> I'm not opposed to the change, I'm just pointing out that we
> agreed
> >> > to
> >> > > >>> develop trunk first, and we agreed to follow the release
> policies
> >> for
> >> > > >>> the sustaining branch. I don't see why we can't honor those
> >> > > >>> agreements, ie why not post a patch for trunk first and then
> >> backport
> >> > > >>> it to 206? Reasonable?
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> Thanks,
> >> > > >>> Eli
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 9:58 PM, Suresh Srinivas <
> >> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > > >>> wrote:
> >> > > >>> > Eli,
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > As Jitendra indicated in the jira, this was originally
> supposed
> >> to
> >> > be
> >> > > >>> part
> >> > > >>> > of 0.205. Due to time crunc, we could not get this done in
> 0.205.
> >> > > This
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB