You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org by Konstantin Shvachko <sh...@gmail.com> on 2017/08/01 01:57:02 UTC
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 <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> release-policy
> > document relevant to binaries:
> > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools to
> > build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages MAY be
> > distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such cases, the
> > binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number as the source
> > release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that are the result of
> > compiling that version of the source code release and its dependencies."
> > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
>
> +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> that's fine.
>
> My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
>
> > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as you
> > guys requested.
> > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes from
> the
> > same build.
> > Hope this is satisfactory.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --Konstantin
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang <an...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the binary
> >> tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from prior
> releases.
> >>
> >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax the
> >> quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and distributed
> through
> >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven dependencies,
> >> which are binary artifacts.
> >>
> >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> compliance
> >>> with Apache release policy
> >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't use
> >>> Jenkins option for building.
> >>>
> >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> >>> >
> >>> > FYI:
> >>> >
> >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF release
> >>> > artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as any such
> >>> release is
> >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
RE: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)
Posted by Brahma Reddy Battula <br...@huawei.com>.
Hi Konstantin,
Thanks a lot again for your efforts.
+1 (non-binding)
-Built from the source on Suse-Linux with jdk_ 1.8.0_40
-Installed the HA cluster
-Verified basic shell commands
-Ran sample jobs
-Did the regression on IBR Feature, Balancer/mover,fsck
Downloaded the latest tarball, it contains the native and nodemanger can start (NM will not start without native). And install pseudo cluster and did basic verification.
IMHO, we should include natives in the tarball for user convenience (who doesn't have build tool can use for quick regression)
As we are separately giving hadoop-2.7.4-RC0-src.tar.gz, still we need to include /src in tarball..?
As Andrew mentioned, these two are regression to prior release.
--Brahma Reddy Battula
-----Original Message-----
From: Konstantin Shvachko [mailto:shv.hadoop@gmail.com]
Sent: 01 August 2017 09:57
To: Chris Douglas
Cc: Andrew Wang; Allen Wittenauer; common-dev@hadoop.apache.org; hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org; mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org; yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org
Subject: 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 <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> release-policy
> > document relevant to binaries:
> > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools
> > to build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages
> > MAY be distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such
> > cases, the binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number
> > as the source release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that
> > are the result of compiling that version of the source code release and its dependencies."
> > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
>
> +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> that's fine.
>
> My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
>
> > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as
> > you guys requested.
> > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes
> > from
> the
> > same build.
> > Hope this is satisfactory.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --Konstantin
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang
> > <an...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the
> >> binary tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from
> >> prior
> releases.
> >>
> >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax
> >> the quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and
> >> distributed
> through
> >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven
> >> dependencies, which are binary artifacts.
> >>
> >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> compliance
> >>> with Apache release policy
> >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't
> >>> use Jenkins option for building.
> >>>
> >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> >>> >
> >>> > FYI:
> >>> >
> >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF
> >>> > release artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as
> >>> > any such
> >>> release is
> >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
RE: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)
Posted by Brahma Reddy Battula <br...@huawei.com>.
Hi Konstantin,
Thanks a lot again for your efforts.
+1 (non-binding)
-Built from the source on Suse-Linux with jdk_ 1.8.0_40
-Installed the HA cluster
-Verified basic shell commands
-Ran sample jobs
-Did the regression on IBR Feature, Balancer/mover,fsck
Downloaded the latest tarball, it contains the native and nodemanger can start (NM will not start without native). And install pseudo cluster and did basic verification.
IMHO, we should include natives in the tarball for user convenience (who doesn't have build tool can use for quick regression)
As we are separately giving hadoop-2.7.4-RC0-src.tar.gz, still we need to include /src in tarball..?
As Andrew mentioned, these two are regression to prior release.
--Brahma Reddy Battula
-----Original Message-----
From: Konstantin Shvachko [mailto:shv.hadoop@gmail.com]
Sent: 01 August 2017 09:57
To: Chris Douglas
Cc: Andrew Wang; Allen Wittenauer; common-dev@hadoop.apache.org; hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org; mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org; yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org
Subject: 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 <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> release-policy
> > document relevant to binaries:
> > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools
> > to build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages
> > MAY be distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such
> > cases, the binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number
> > as the source release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that
> > are the result of compiling that version of the source code release and its dependencies."
> > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
>
> +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> that's fine.
>
> My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
>
> > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as
> > you guys requested.
> > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes
> > from
> the
> > same build.
> > Hope this is satisfactory.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --Konstantin
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang
> > <an...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the
> >> binary tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from
> >> prior
> releases.
> >>
> >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax
> >> the quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and
> >> distributed
> through
> >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven
> >> dependencies, which are binary artifacts.
> >>
> >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> compliance
> >>> with Apache release policy
> >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't
> >>> use Jenkins option for building.
> >>>
> >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> >>> >
> >>> > FYI:
> >>> >
> >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF
> >>> > release artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as
> >>> > any such
> >>> release is
> >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)
Posted by Zhe Zhang <zh...@apache.org>.
+1 (binding)
1. Downloaded src tar ball, verified m5dsum
2. Built from source on Linux RHEL6, Java 1_8_0_40
3. Tried some HDFS CLI methods with the above build, against two clusters,
one running 2.6.1 and another running 2.7.4 (server bin/conf built by an
internal Jenkins job, as Ye Zhou mentioned above). Both clusters are secure.
- ls
- mkdir
- copyFromLocal
- find (new feature in 2.7)
4. Tried some YARN CLI methods, on the above 2.7.4 cluster
- yarn logs (verified a sample application's logs)
- yarn cluster -lnl
Thanks for the great work Konstantin!
On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 5:00 PM Ye Zhou <zh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, Konstantin.
> Thanks for leading the release.
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> -Built from the source on mac with jdk_1.8.0_40
> -Built on internal Jenkins with jdk_1.8.0_40.
> -Deployed on a cluster with 121 nodes(Including RM, NM, NN, DN)
> -Basic shell commands
> -Distcp 3.7TB data to HDFS
> -Run GridMix test which submitted 15K MR jobs in 5 hours(trace generated
> from real production job trace)
>
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 6:57 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.hadoop@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > 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 <cd...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> > > <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> > > release-policy
> > > > document relevant to binaries:
> > > > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools
> to
> > > > build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages MAY
> be
> > > > distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such cases,
> the
> > > > binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number as the
> source
> > > > release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that are the result
> of
> > > > compiling that version of the source code release and its
> > dependencies."
> > > > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
> > >
> > > +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> > > rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> > > that's fine.
> > >
> > > My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> > > binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
> > >
> > > > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as
> > you
> > > > guys requested.
> > > > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes
> from
> > > the
> > > > same build.
> > > > Hope this is satisfactory.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > --Konstantin
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang <
> andrew.wang@cloudera.com
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the
> > binary
> > > >> tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from prior
> > > releases.
> > > >>
> > > >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax
> the
> > > >> quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and distributed
> > > through
> > > >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> > > >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven
> dependencies,
> > > >> which are binary artifacts.
> > > >>
> > > >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> > > compliance
> > > >>> with Apache release policy
> > > >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> > > >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't
> use
> > > >>> Jenkins option for building.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> > > >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> > > >>> > wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> > > >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> > > >>> > wrote:
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > FYI:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF
> > release
> > > >>> > artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as any such
> > > >>> release is
> > > >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Zhou, Ye **周晔*
>
--
Zhe Zhang
Apache Hadoop Committer
http://zhe-thoughts.github.io/about/ | @oldcap
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)
Posted by Zhe Zhang <zh...@apache.org>.
+1 (binding)
1. Downloaded src tar ball, verified m5dsum
2. Built from source on Linux RHEL6, Java 1_8_0_40
3. Tried some HDFS CLI methods with the above build, against two clusters,
one running 2.6.1 and another running 2.7.4 (server bin/conf built by an
internal Jenkins job, as Ye Zhou mentioned above). Both clusters are secure.
- ls
- mkdir
- copyFromLocal
- find (new feature in 2.7)
4. Tried some YARN CLI methods, on the above 2.7.4 cluster
- yarn logs (verified a sample application's logs)
- yarn cluster -lnl
Thanks for the great work Konstantin!
On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 5:00 PM Ye Zhou <zh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, Konstantin.
> Thanks for leading the release.
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> -Built from the source on mac with jdk_1.8.0_40
> -Built on internal Jenkins with jdk_1.8.0_40.
> -Deployed on a cluster with 121 nodes(Including RM, NM, NN, DN)
> -Basic shell commands
> -Distcp 3.7TB data to HDFS
> -Run GridMix test which submitted 15K MR jobs in 5 hours(trace generated
> from real production job trace)
>
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 6:57 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.hadoop@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > 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 <cd...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> > > <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> > > release-policy
> > > > document relevant to binaries:
> > > > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools
> to
> > > > build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages MAY
> be
> > > > distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such cases,
> the
> > > > binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number as the
> source
> > > > release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that are the result
> of
> > > > compiling that version of the source code release and its
> > dependencies."
> > > > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
> > >
> > > +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> > > rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> > > that's fine.
> > >
> > > My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> > > binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
> > >
> > > > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as
> > you
> > > > guys requested.
> > > > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes
> from
> > > the
> > > > same build.
> > > > Hope this is satisfactory.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > --Konstantin
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang <
> andrew.wang@cloudera.com
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the
> > binary
> > > >> tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from prior
> > > releases.
> > > >>
> > > >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax
> the
> > > >> quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and distributed
> > > through
> > > >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> > > >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven
> dependencies,
> > > >> which are binary artifacts.
> > > >>
> > > >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> > > compliance
> > > >>> with Apache release policy
> > > >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> > > >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't
> use
> > > >>> Jenkins option for building.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> > > >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> > > >>> > wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> > > >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> > > >>> > wrote:
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > FYI:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF
> > release
> > > >>> > artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as any such
> > > >>> release is
> > > >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Zhou, Ye **周晔*
>
--
Zhe Zhang
Apache Hadoop Committer
http://zhe-thoughts.github.io/about/ | @oldcap
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)
Posted by Zhe Zhang <zh...@apache.org>.
+1 (binding)
1. Downloaded src tar ball, verified m5dsum
2. Built from source on Linux RHEL6, Java 1_8_0_40
3. Tried some HDFS CLI methods with the above build, against two clusters,
one running 2.6.1 and another running 2.7.4 (server bin/conf built by an
internal Jenkins job, as Ye Zhou mentioned above). Both clusters are secure.
- ls
- mkdir
- copyFromLocal
- find (new feature in 2.7)
4. Tried some YARN CLI methods, on the above 2.7.4 cluster
- yarn logs (verified a sample application's logs)
- yarn cluster -lnl
Thanks for the great work Konstantin!
On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 5:00 PM Ye Zhou <zh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, Konstantin.
> Thanks for leading the release.
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> -Built from the source on mac with jdk_1.8.0_40
> -Built on internal Jenkins with jdk_1.8.0_40.
> -Deployed on a cluster with 121 nodes(Including RM, NM, NN, DN)
> -Basic shell commands
> -Distcp 3.7TB data to HDFS
> -Run GridMix test which submitted 15K MR jobs in 5 hours(trace generated
> from real production job trace)
>
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 6:57 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.hadoop@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > 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 <cd...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> > > <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> > > release-policy
> > > > document relevant to binaries:
> > > > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools
> to
> > > > build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages MAY
> be
> > > > distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such cases,
> the
> > > > binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number as the
> source
> > > > release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that are the result
> of
> > > > compiling that version of the source code release and its
> > dependencies."
> > > > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
> > >
> > > +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> > > rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> > > that's fine.
> > >
> > > My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> > > binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
> > >
> > > > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as
> > you
> > > > guys requested.
> > > > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes
> from
> > > the
> > > > same build.
> > > > Hope this is satisfactory.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > --Konstantin
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang <
> andrew.wang@cloudera.com
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the
> > binary
> > > >> tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from prior
> > > releases.
> > > >>
> > > >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax
> the
> > > >> quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and distributed
> > > through
> > > >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> > > >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven
> dependencies,
> > > >> which are binary artifacts.
> > > >>
> > > >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> > > compliance
> > > >>> with Apache release policy
> > > >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> > > >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't
> use
> > > >>> Jenkins option for building.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> > > >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> > > >>> > wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> > > >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> > > >>> > wrote:
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > FYI:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF
> > release
> > > >>> > artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as any such
> > > >>> release is
> > > >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Zhou, Ye **周晔*
>
--
Zhe Zhang
Apache Hadoop Committer
http://zhe-thoughts.github.io/about/ | @oldcap
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)
Posted by Zhe Zhang <zh...@apache.org>.
+1 (binding)
1. Downloaded src tar ball, verified m5dsum
2. Built from source on Linux RHEL6, Java 1_8_0_40
3. Tried some HDFS CLI methods with the above build, against two clusters,
one running 2.6.1 and another running 2.7.4 (server bin/conf built by an
internal Jenkins job, as Ye Zhou mentioned above). Both clusters are secure.
- ls
- mkdir
- copyFromLocal
- find (new feature in 2.7)
4. Tried some YARN CLI methods, on the above 2.7.4 cluster
- yarn logs (verified a sample application's logs)
- yarn cluster -lnl
Thanks for the great work Konstantin!
On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 5:00 PM Ye Zhou <zh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, Konstantin.
> Thanks for leading the release.
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> -Built from the source on mac with jdk_1.8.0_40
> -Built on internal Jenkins with jdk_1.8.0_40.
> -Deployed on a cluster with 121 nodes(Including RM, NM, NN, DN)
> -Basic shell commands
> -Distcp 3.7TB data to HDFS
> -Run GridMix test which submitted 15K MR jobs in 5 hours(trace generated
> from real production job trace)
>
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 6:57 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <shv.hadoop@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > 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 <cd...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> > > <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> > > release-policy
> > > > document relevant to binaries:
> > > > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools
> to
> > > > build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages MAY
> be
> > > > distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such cases,
> the
> > > > binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number as the
> source
> > > > release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that are the result
> of
> > > > compiling that version of the source code release and its
> > dependencies."
> > > > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
> > >
> > > +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> > > rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> > > that's fine.
> > >
> > > My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> > > binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
> > >
> > > > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as
> > you
> > > > guys requested.
> > > > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes
> from
> > > the
> > > > same build.
> > > > Hope this is satisfactory.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > --Konstantin
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang <
> andrew.wang@cloudera.com
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the
> > binary
> > > >> tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from prior
> > > releases.
> > > >>
> > > >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax
> the
> > > >> quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and distributed
> > > through
> > > >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> > > >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven
> dependencies,
> > > >> which are binary artifacts.
> > > >>
> > > >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> > > compliance
> > > >>> with Apache release policy
> > > >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> > > >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't
> use
> > > >>> Jenkins option for building.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> > > >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> > > >>> > wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> > > >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> > > >>> > wrote:
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > FYI:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF
> > release
> > > >>> > artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as any such
> > > >>> release is
> > > >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Zhou, Ye **周晔*
>
--
Zhe Zhang
Apache Hadoop Committer
http://zhe-thoughts.github.io/about/ | @oldcap
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)
Posted by Ye Zhou <zh...@gmail.com>.
Hi, Konstantin.
Thanks for leading the release.
+1 (non-binding)
-Built from the source on mac with jdk_1.8.0_40
-Built on internal Jenkins with jdk_1.8.0_40.
-Deployed on a cluster with 121 nodes(Including RM, NM, NN, DN)
-Basic shell commands
-Distcp 3.7TB data to HDFS
-Run GridMix test which submitted 15K MR jobs in 5 hours(trace generated
from real production job trace)
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 6:57 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <sh...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> 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 <cd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> > <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> > release-policy
> > > document relevant to binaries:
> > > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools to
> > > build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages MAY be
> > > distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such cases, the
> > > binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number as the source
> > > release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that are the result of
> > > compiling that version of the source code release and its
> dependencies."
> > > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
> >
> > +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> > rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> > that's fine.
> >
> > My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> > binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
> >
> > > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as
> you
> > > guys requested.
> > > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes from
> > the
> > > same build.
> > > Hope this is satisfactory.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > --Konstantin
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang <andrew.wang@cloudera.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the
> binary
> > >> tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from prior
> > releases.
> > >>
> > >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax the
> > >> quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and distributed
> > through
> > >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> > >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven dependencies,
> > >> which are binary artifacts.
> > >>
> > >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> > compliance
> > >>> with Apache release policy
> > >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> > >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't use
> > >>> Jenkins option for building.
> > >>>
> > >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> > >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> > >>> > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> >
> > >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> > >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> > >>> > wrote:
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> > >>> >
> > >>> > FYI:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF
> release
> > >>> > artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as any such
> > >>> release is
> > >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>
--
*Zhou, Ye **周晔*
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)
Posted by Ye Zhou <zh...@gmail.com>.
Hi, Konstantin.
Thanks for leading the release.
+1 (non-binding)
-Built from the source on mac with jdk_1.8.0_40
-Built on internal Jenkins with jdk_1.8.0_40.
-Deployed on a cluster with 121 nodes(Including RM, NM, NN, DN)
-Basic shell commands
-Distcp 3.7TB data to HDFS
-Run GridMix test which submitted 15K MR jobs in 5 hours(trace generated
from real production job trace)
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 6:57 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <sh...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> 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 <cd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> > <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> > release-policy
> > > document relevant to binaries:
> > > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools to
> > > build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages MAY be
> > > distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such cases, the
> > > binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number as the source
> > > release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that are the result of
> > > compiling that version of the source code release and its
> dependencies."
> > > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
> >
> > +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> > rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> > that's fine.
> >
> > My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> > binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
> >
> > > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as
> you
> > > guys requested.
> > > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes from
> > the
> > > same build.
> > > Hope this is satisfactory.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > --Konstantin
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang <andrew.wang@cloudera.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the
> binary
> > >> tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from prior
> > releases.
> > >>
> > >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax the
> > >> quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and distributed
> > through
> > >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> > >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven dependencies,
> > >> which are binary artifacts.
> > >>
> > >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> > compliance
> > >>> with Apache release policy
> > >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> > >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't use
> > >>> Jenkins option for building.
> > >>>
> > >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> > >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> > >>> > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> >
> > >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> > >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> > >>> > wrote:
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> > >>> >
> > >>> > FYI:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF
> release
> > >>> > artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as any such
> > >>> release is
> > >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>
--
*Zhou, Ye **周晔*
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)
Posted by Fnu Ajay Kumar <aj...@hortonworks.com>.
+1 (non-binding)
Thanks for preparing the 2.7.4-RC0 release.
- Built from source on Mac OS X 10.12.6 with Java 1.8.0_111
- Deployed to a pseudo cluster
- Passed the following sanity checks
- Basic dfs operations
- Wordcount
- DFSIO- read/write
Thanks,
Ajay
On 7/31/17, 6:57 PM, "Konstantin Shvachko" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
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 <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> release-policy
> > document relevant to binaries:
> > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools to
> > build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages MAY be
> > distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such cases, the
> > binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number as the source
> > release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that are the result of
> > compiling that version of the source code release and its dependencies."
> > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
>
> +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> that's fine.
>
> My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
>
> > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as you
> > guys requested.
> > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes from
> the
> > same build.
> > Hope this is satisfactory.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --Konstantin
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang <an...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the binary
> >> tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from prior
> releases.
> >>
> >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax the
> >> quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and distributed
> through
> >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven dependencies,
> >> which are binary artifacts.
> >>
> >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> compliance
> >>> with Apache release policy
> >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't use
> >>> Jenkins option for building.
> >>>
> >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> >>> >
> >>> > FYI:
> >>> >
> >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF release
> >>> > artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as any such
> >>> release is
> >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)
Posted by Eric Payne <er...@yahoo.com.INVALID>.
+1 (binding)
Tested the following:
- Application History Server
-- Apps can be observed from UI
-- App and container metadata can be retrieved via REST APIs
- RM UI
-- Can kill an app from the RM UI
- Apps run in different frameworks. Frameworks tested: MR and yarn shell
-- In yarn shell framework, containers are preserved across AM restart.
- Cross-queue preemption (Inter-queue):
-- Inter-queue preemption will preempt the correct number of containers from a p
reemptable queue.
-- Inter-queue preemption will not preempt from queues with preemption disabled.
- Labeled queues work as expected where apps assigned to a queue that has a spec
ific label will run only on labeled nodes.
________________________________
From: Konstantin Shvachko <sh...@gmail.com>
To: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
Cc: Andrew Wang <an...@cloudera.com>; Allen Wittenauer <aw...@effectivemachines.com>; "common-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <co...@hadoop.apache.org>; "hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <hd...@hadoop.apache.org>; "mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <ma...@hadoop.apache.org>; "yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <ya...@hadoop.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 8:57 PM
Subject: 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 <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> release-policy
> > document relevant to binaries:
> > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools to
> > build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages MAY be
> > distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such cases, the
> > binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number as the source
> > release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that are the result of
> > compiling that version of the source code release and its dependencies."
> > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
>
> +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> that's fine.
>
> My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
>
> > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as you
> > guys requested.
> > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes from
> the
> > same build.
> > Hope this is satisfactory.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --Konstantin
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang <an...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the binary
> >> tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from prior
> releases.
> >>
> >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax the
> >> quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and distributed
> through
> >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven dependencies,
> >> which are binary artifacts.
> >>
> >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> compliance
> >>> with Apache release policy
> >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't use
> >>> Jenkins option for building.
> >>>
> >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> >>> >
> >>> > FYI:
> >>> >
> >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF release
> >>> > artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as any such
> >>> release is
> >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: yarn-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: yarn-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)
Posted by Edwina Lu <ed...@linkedin.com>.
+1 (non-binding).
Thanks,
Edwina
On 7/31/17, 6:57 PM, "Konstantin Shvachko" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
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 <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> release-policy
> > document relevant to binaries:
> > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools to
> > build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages MAY be
> > distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such cases, the
> > binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number as the source
> > release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that are the result of
> > compiling that version of the source code release and its dependencies."
> > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
>
> +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> that's fine.
>
> My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
>
> > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as you
> > guys requested.
> > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes from
> the
> > same build.
> > Hope this is satisfactory.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --Konstantin
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang <an...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the binary
> >> tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from prior
> releases.
> >>
> >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax the
> >> quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and distributed
> through
> >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven dependencies,
> >> which are binary artifacts.
> >>
> >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> compliance
> >>> with Apache release policy
> >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't use
> >>> Jenkins option for building.
> >>>
> >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> >>> >
> >>> > FYI:
> >>> >
> >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF release
> >>> > artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as any such
> >>> release is
> >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)
Posted by Eric Payne <er...@yahoo.com.INVALID>.
+1 (binding)
Tested the following:
- Application History Server
-- Apps can be observed from UI
-- App and container metadata can be retrieved via REST APIs
- RM UI
-- Can kill an app from the RM UI
- Apps run in different frameworks. Frameworks tested: MR and yarn shell
-- In yarn shell framework, containers are preserved across AM restart.
- Cross-queue preemption (Inter-queue):
-- Inter-queue preemption will preempt the correct number of containers from a p
reemptable queue.
-- Inter-queue preemption will not preempt from queues with preemption disabled.
- Labeled queues work as expected where apps assigned to a queue that has a spec
ific label will run only on labeled nodes.
________________________________
From: Konstantin Shvachko <sh...@gmail.com>
To: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
Cc: Andrew Wang <an...@cloudera.com>; Allen Wittenauer <aw...@effectivemachines.com>; "common-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <co...@hadoop.apache.org>; "hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <hd...@hadoop.apache.org>; "mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <ma...@hadoop.apache.org>; "yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <ya...@hadoop.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 8:57 PM
Subject: 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 <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> release-policy
> > document relevant to binaries:
> > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools to
> > build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages MAY be
> > distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such cases, the
> > binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number as the source
> > release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that are the result of
> > compiling that version of the source code release and its dependencies."
> > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
>
> +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> that's fine.
>
> My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
>
> > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as you
> > guys requested.
> > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes from
> the
> > same build.
> > Hope this is satisfactory.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --Konstantin
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang <an...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the binary
> >> tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from prior
> releases.
> >>
> >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax the
> >> quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and distributed
> through
> >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven dependencies,
> >> which are binary artifacts.
> >>
> >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> compliance
> >>> with Apache release policy
> >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't use
> >>> Jenkins option for building.
> >>>
> >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> >>> >
> >>> > FYI:
> >>> >
> >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF release
> >>> > artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as any such
> >>> release is
> >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org
RE: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)
Posted by Brahma Reddy Battula <br...@huawei.com>.
Hi Konstantin,
Thanks a lot again for your efforts.
+1 (non-binding)
-Built from the source on Suse-Linux with jdk_ 1.8.0_40
-Installed the HA cluster
-Verified basic shell commands
-Ran sample jobs
-Did the regression on IBR Feature, Balancer/mover,fsck
Downloaded the latest tarball, it contains the native and nodemanger can start (NM will not start without native). And install pseudo cluster and did basic verification.
IMHO, we should include natives in the tarball for user convenience (who doesn't have build tool can use for quick regression)
As we are separately giving hadoop-2.7.4-RC0-src.tar.gz, still we need to include /src in tarball..?
As Andrew mentioned, these two are regression to prior release.
--Brahma Reddy Battula
-----Original Message-----
From: Konstantin Shvachko [mailto:shv.hadoop@gmail.com]
Sent: 01 August 2017 09:57
To: Chris Douglas
Cc: Andrew Wang; Allen Wittenauer; common-dev@hadoop.apache.org; hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org; mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org; yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org
Subject: 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 <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> release-policy
> > document relevant to binaries:
> > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools
> > to build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages
> > MAY be distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such
> > cases, the binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number
> > as the source release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that
> > are the result of compiling that version of the source code release and its dependencies."
> > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
>
> +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> that's fine.
>
> My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
>
> > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as
> > you guys requested.
> > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes
> > from
> the
> > same build.
> > Hope this is satisfactory.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --Konstantin
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang
> > <an...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the
> >> binary tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from
> >> prior
> releases.
> >>
> >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax
> >> the quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and
> >> distributed
> through
> >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven
> >> dependencies, which are binary artifacts.
> >>
> >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> compliance
> >>> with Apache release policy
> >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't
> >>> use Jenkins option for building.
> >>>
> >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> >>> >
> >>> > FYI:
> >>> >
> >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF
> >>> > release artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as
> >>> > any such
> >>> release is
> >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)
Posted by Ye Zhou <zh...@gmail.com>.
Hi, Konstantin.
Thanks for leading the release.
+1 (non-binding)
-Built from the source on mac with jdk_1.8.0_40
-Built on internal Jenkins with jdk_1.8.0_40.
-Deployed on a cluster with 121 nodes(Including RM, NM, NN, DN)
-Basic shell commands
-Distcp 3.7TB data to HDFS
-Run GridMix test which submitted 15K MR jobs in 5 hours(trace generated
from real production job trace)
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 6:57 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <sh...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> 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 <cd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> > <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> > release-policy
> > > document relevant to binaries:
> > > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools to
> > > build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages MAY be
> > > distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such cases, the
> > > binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number as the source
> > > release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that are the result of
> > > compiling that version of the source code release and its
> dependencies."
> > > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
> >
> > +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> > rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> > that's fine.
> >
> > My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> > binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
> >
> > > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as
> you
> > > guys requested.
> > > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes from
> > the
> > > same build.
> > > Hope this is satisfactory.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > --Konstantin
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang <andrew.wang@cloudera.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the
> binary
> > >> tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from prior
> > releases.
> > >>
> > >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax the
> > >> quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and distributed
> > through
> > >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> > >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven dependencies,
> > >> which are binary artifacts.
> > >>
> > >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> > compliance
> > >>> with Apache release policy
> > >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> > >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't use
> > >>> Jenkins option for building.
> > >>>
> > >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> > >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> > >>> > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> >
> > >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> > >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> > >>> > wrote:
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> > >>> >
> > >>> > FYI:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF
> release
> > >>> > artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as any such
> > >>> release is
> > >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>
--
*Zhou, Ye **周晔*
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)
Posted by Eric Payne <er...@yahoo.com.INVALID>.
+1 (binding)
Tested the following:
- Application History Server
-- Apps can be observed from UI
-- App and container metadata can be retrieved via REST APIs
- RM UI
-- Can kill an app from the RM UI
- Apps run in different frameworks. Frameworks tested: MR and yarn shell
-- In yarn shell framework, containers are preserved across AM restart.
- Cross-queue preemption (Inter-queue):
-- Inter-queue preemption will preempt the correct number of containers from a p
reemptable queue.
-- Inter-queue preemption will not preempt from queues with preemption disabled.
- Labeled queues work as expected where apps assigned to a queue that has a spec
ific label will run only on labeled nodes.
________________________________
From: Konstantin Shvachko <sh...@gmail.com>
To: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
Cc: Andrew Wang <an...@cloudera.com>; Allen Wittenauer <aw...@effectivemachines.com>; "common-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <co...@hadoop.apache.org>; "hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <hd...@hadoop.apache.org>; "mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <ma...@hadoop.apache.org>; "yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <ya...@hadoop.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 8:57 PM
Subject: 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 <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> release-policy
> > document relevant to binaries:
> > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools to
> > build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages MAY be
> > distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such cases, the
> > binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number as the source
> > release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that are the result of
> > compiling that version of the source code release and its dependencies."
> > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
>
> +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> that's fine.
>
> My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
>
> > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as you
> > guys requested.
> > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes from
> the
> > same build.
> > Hope this is satisfactory.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --Konstantin
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang <an...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the binary
> >> tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from prior
> releases.
> >>
> >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax the
> >> quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and distributed
> through
> >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven dependencies,
> >> which are binary artifacts.
> >>
> >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> compliance
> >>> with Apache release policy
> >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't use
> >>> Jenkins option for building.
> >>>
> >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> >>> >
> >>> > FYI:
> >>> >
> >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF release
> >>> > artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as any such
> >>> release is
> >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)
Posted by Ye Zhou <zh...@gmail.com>.
Hi, Konstantin.
Thanks for leading the release.
+1 (non-binding)
-Built from the source on mac with jdk_1.8.0_40
-Built on internal Jenkins with jdk_1.8.0_40.
-Deployed on a cluster with 121 nodes(Including RM, NM, NN, DN)
-Basic shell commands
-Distcp 3.7TB data to HDFS
-Run GridMix test which submitted 15K MR jobs in 5 hours(trace generated
from real production job trace)
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 6:57 PM, Konstantin Shvachko <sh...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> 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 <cd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> > <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> > release-policy
> > > document relevant to binaries:
> > > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools to
> > > build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages MAY be
> > > distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such cases, the
> > > binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number as the source
> > > release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that are the result of
> > > compiling that version of the source code release and its
> dependencies."
> > > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
> >
> > +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> > rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> > that's fine.
> >
> > My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> > binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
> >
> > > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as
> you
> > > guys requested.
> > > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes from
> > the
> > > same build.
> > > Hope this is satisfactory.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > --Konstantin
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang <andrew.wang@cloudera.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the
> binary
> > >> tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from prior
> > releases.
> > >>
> > >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax the
> > >> quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and distributed
> > through
> > >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> > >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven dependencies,
> > >> which are binary artifacts.
> > >>
> > >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> > compliance
> > >>> with Apache release policy
> > >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> > >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't use
> > >>> Jenkins option for building.
> > >>>
> > >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> > >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> > >>> > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> >
> > >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> > >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> > >>> > wrote:
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> > >>> >
> > >>> > FYI:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF
> release
> > >>> > artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as any such
> > >>> release is
> > >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>
--
*Zhou, Ye **周晔*
RE: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)
Posted by Brahma Reddy Battula <br...@huawei.com>.
Hi Konstantin,
Thanks a lot again for your efforts.
+1 (non-binding)
-Built from the source on Suse-Linux with jdk_ 1.8.0_40
-Installed the HA cluster
-Verified basic shell commands
-Ran sample jobs
-Did the regression on IBR Feature, Balancer/mover,fsck
Downloaded the latest tarball, it contains the native and nodemanger can start (NM will not start without native). And install pseudo cluster and did basic verification.
IMHO, we should include natives in the tarball for user convenience (who doesn't have build tool can use for quick regression)
As we are separately giving hadoop-2.7.4-RC0-src.tar.gz, still we need to include /src in tarball..?
As Andrew mentioned, these two are regression to prior release.
--Brahma Reddy Battula
-----Original Message-----
From: Konstantin Shvachko [mailto:shv.hadoop@gmail.com]
Sent: 01 August 2017 09:57
To: Chris Douglas
Cc: Andrew Wang; Allen Wittenauer; common-dev@hadoop.apache.org; hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org; mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org; yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org
Subject: 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 <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> release-policy
> > document relevant to binaries:
> > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools
> > to build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages
> > MAY be distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such
> > cases, the binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number
> > as the source release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that
> > are the result of compiling that version of the source code release and its dependencies."
> > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
>
> +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> that's fine.
>
> My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
>
> > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as
> > you guys requested.
> > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes
> > from
> the
> > same build.
> > Hope this is satisfactory.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --Konstantin
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang
> > <an...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the
> >> binary tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from
> >> prior
> releases.
> >>
> >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax
> >> the quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and
> >> distributed
> through
> >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven
> >> dependencies, which are binary artifacts.
> >>
> >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> compliance
> >>> with Apache release policy
> >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't
> >>> use Jenkins option for building.
> >>>
> >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> >>> >
> >>> > FYI:
> >>> >
> >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF
> >>> > release artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as
> >>> > any such
> >>> release is
> >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)
Posted by Fnu Ajay Kumar <aj...@hortonworks.com>.
+1 (non-binding)
Thanks for preparing the 2.7.4-RC0 release.
- Built from source on Mac OS X 10.12.6 with Java 1.8.0_111
- Deployed to a pseudo cluster
- Passed the following sanity checks
- Basic dfs operations
- Wordcount
- DFSIO- read/write
Thanks,
Ajay
On 7/31/17, 6:57 PM, "Konstantin Shvachko" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
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 <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> release-policy
> > document relevant to binaries:
> > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools to
> > build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages MAY be
> > distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such cases, the
> > binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number as the source
> > release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that are the result of
> > compiling that version of the source code release and its dependencies."
> > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
>
> +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> that's fine.
>
> My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
>
> > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as you
> > guys requested.
> > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes from
> the
> > same build.
> > Hope this is satisfactory.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --Konstantin
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang <an...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the binary
> >> tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from prior
> releases.
> >>
> >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax the
> >> quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and distributed
> through
> >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven dependencies,
> >> which are binary artifacts.
> >>
> >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> compliance
> >>> with Apache release policy
> >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't use
> >>> Jenkins option for building.
> >>>
> >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> >>> >
> >>> > FYI:
> >>> >
> >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF release
> >>> > artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as any such
> >>> release is
> >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 2.7.4 (RC0)
Posted by Eric Payne <er...@yahoo.com.INVALID>.
+1 (binding)
Tested the following:
- Application History Server
-- Apps can be observed from UI
-- App and container metadata can be retrieved via REST APIs
- RM UI
-- Can kill an app from the RM UI
- Apps run in different frameworks. Frameworks tested: MR and yarn shell
-- In yarn shell framework, containers are preserved across AM restart.
- Cross-queue preemption (Inter-queue):
-- Inter-queue preemption will preempt the correct number of containers from a p
reemptable queue.
-- Inter-queue preemption will not preempt from queues with preemption disabled.
- Labeled queues work as expected where apps assigned to a queue that has a spec
ific label will run only on labeled nodes.
________________________________
From: Konstantin Shvachko <sh...@gmail.com>
To: Chris Douglas <cd...@apache.org>
Cc: Andrew Wang <an...@cloudera.com>; Allen Wittenauer <aw...@effectivemachines.com>; "common-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <co...@hadoop.apache.org>; "hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <hd...@hadoop.apache.org>; "mapreduce-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <ma...@hadoop.apache.org>; "yarn-dev@hadoop.apache.org" <ya...@hadoop.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 8:57 PM
Subject: 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 <cd...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko
> <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited
> release-policy
> > document relevant to binaries:
> > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools to
> > build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages MAY be
> > distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such cases, the
> > binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number as the source
> > release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that are the result of
> > compiling that version of the source code release and its dependencies."
> > I don't think my binary package violates any of these.
>
> +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to
> rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one,
> that's fine.
>
> My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with
> binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C
>
> > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as you
> > guys requested.
> > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes from
> the
> > same build.
> > Hope this is satisfactory.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --Konstantin
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang <an...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the binary
> >> tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from prior
> releases.
> >>
> >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax the
> >> quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and distributed
> through
> >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release
> >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven dependencies,
> >> which are binary artifacts.
> >>
> >> http://www.apache.org/legal/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.hadoop@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in
> compliance
> >>> with Apache release policy
> >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
> >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't use
> >>> Jenkins option for building.
> >>>
> >>> A side note. This particular build is broken 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 <
> >>> aw@effectivemachines.com
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko <
> >>> shv.hadoop@gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR
> >>> >
> >>> > FYI:
> >>> >
> >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF release
> >>> > artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as any such
> >>> release is
> >>> > in violation of ASF policy.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: mapreduce-dev-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: mapreduce-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org