You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@bigtop.apache.org by Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@apache.org> on 2013/04/01 05:11:26 UTC
Re: Apache Pig 0.11.1 release candidate
Hi Bill!
Thanks a million for chiming in!
On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Bill Graham <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the work you're doing to support Pig in BigTop. Starting with
> Pig 0.12, our release process will be simplified to not include rpm/deb
> packages, thanks to BigTop.
On a related note -- we're trying to work on a model where Bigtop
could be utilized as RC (and pre-RC) integration validation framework.
The gist of the idea is pretty simple -- we're planning to use the
last stable build of Bigtop (e.g. 0.6.0) and keep revving up one
single component (lets say Pig) following the trunk/branch development.
Hopefully that way all the integration problems could be uncovered
earlier in the game.
Drop us a note if you guys would be interested. This is, obviously,
a two way street -- Bigtop can provide the framework, but we
need your expertise in triaging problems as they arise.
> I've built Pig on a multiple RHEL versions so this issue might not be as
> broadly spanning as you describe. The RPMs for 0.11.0 and 0.11.1 were both
> built on rhel5 instances from ec2 (ami-2d8e4c44).
Here's the map of affected Linux platforms:
http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/view/Bigtop-trunk/job/Bigtop-trunk-Pig/
Feel free to see the build logs. Also, if you, interested, I can give
you karma to poke around Bigtop's Jenkins.
The AMIs are all stock AMIs produced either by the corresponding
Linux vendor (Fedora, OpenSUSE) or RightScale.
As such, it seems that chance of unsuspecting users running into
this issue with the build are pretty high.
> That said, if the Pig community feels strongly that we should cancel the
> release and re-issue a new one, I'm fine with shepherding that process.
It would be extremely appreciated if you guys could go through the trouble
of spinning up a new RC. This is, of course, your decision but we'd be willing
to help to the extent we can.
As Mark mentioned -- the risk of the respin is pretty small -- the affected
changes are all build files and they are localized to contrib. Of course,
any RC is quite a bit of work.
Thanks,
Roman.
Re: Apache Pig 0.11.1 release candidate
Posted by Mark Grover <gr...@gmail.com>.
Hi Bill and Dmitriy,
Thanks for responding. I appreciate the time you spent in looking into this.
I am fine with your suggestion of moving forward with 0.11.1 release. If
there is a 0.11.2, I would really appreciate if you could include the patch
on PIG-3262 in it.
Moving forward, let's work out how Apache Bigtop can work with Apache Pig
to find and help fix integration issues in time.
Also, FWIW, Bruno Mahé from Bigtop separately mentioned the following
workaround before the build:
export LC_ALL=en_US.UTF-8
I've posted the same on PIG-3262, in case anyone runs into the same issue.
Thanks, once again!
Mark
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 9:07 AM, Dmitriy Ryaboy <dv...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Roman and Mark,
> Joining Bill here in thanking you for BigTop and all the integration work
> you guys do.
>
> Since this issue came up so late (after the vote), and, while it does
> affect people trying to build an rpm, does not affect people just using Pig
> jars, etc, I'd move to release 0.11.1 and consider the changes for 0.11.2.
> I suspect we'll have a .2 release -- 0.12 has a lot of new stuff, so people
> will likely stay on 11 for a while waiting for 12 to stabilize, and we'll
> see more bugfix patches.
>
> Using BigTop to validate an RC automatically would be great, let us know
> what we can do to make that happen.
>
> Best,
> -D
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 8:11 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi Bill!
> >
> > Thanks a million for chiming in!
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Bill Graham <bi...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Thanks for the work you're doing to support Pig in BigTop. Starting
> with
> > > Pig 0.12, our release process will be simplified to not include rpm/deb
> > > packages, thanks to BigTop.
> >
> > On a related note -- we're trying to work on a model where Bigtop
> > could be utilized as RC (and pre-RC) integration validation framework.
> > The gist of the idea is pretty simple -- we're planning to use the
> > last stable build of Bigtop (e.g. 0.6.0) and keep revving up one
> > single component (lets say Pig) following the trunk/branch development.
> > Hopefully that way all the integration problems could be uncovered
> > earlier in the game.
> >
> > Drop us a note if you guys would be interested. This is, obviously,
> > a two way street -- Bigtop can provide the framework, but we
> > need your expertise in triaging problems as they arise.
> >
> > > I've built Pig on a multiple RHEL versions so this issue might not be
> as
> > > broadly spanning as you describe. The RPMs for 0.11.0 and 0.11.1 were
> > both
> > > built on rhel5 instances from ec2 (ami-2d8e4c44).
> >
> > Here's the map of affected Linux platforms:
> >
> >
> http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/view/Bigtop-trunk/job/Bigtop-trunk-Pig/
> >
> > Feel free to see the build logs. Also, if you, interested, I can give
> > you karma to poke around Bigtop's Jenkins.
> >
> > The AMIs are all stock AMIs produced either by the corresponding
> > Linux vendor (Fedora, OpenSUSE) or RightScale.
> >
> > As such, it seems that chance of unsuspecting users running into
> > this issue with the build are pretty high.
> >
> > > That said, if the Pig community feels strongly that we should cancel
> the
> > > release and re-issue a new one, I'm fine with shepherding that process.
> >
> > It would be extremely appreciated if you guys could go through the
> trouble
> > of spinning up a new RC. This is, of course, your decision but we'd be
> > willing
> > to help to the extent we can.
> >
> > As Mark mentioned -- the risk of the respin is pretty small -- the
> affected
> > changes are all build files and they are localized to contrib. Of course,
> > any RC is quite a bit of work.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Roman.
> >
>
Re: Apache Pig 0.11.1 release candidate
Posted by Mark Grover <gr...@gmail.com>.
Hi Bill and Dmitriy,
Thanks for responding. I appreciate the time you spent in looking into this.
I am fine with your suggestion of moving forward with 0.11.1 release. If
there is a 0.11.2, I would really appreciate if you could include the patch
on PIG-3262 in it.
Moving forward, let's work out how Apache Bigtop can work with Apache Pig
to find and help fix integration issues in time.
Also, FWIW, Bruno Mahé from Bigtop separately mentioned the following
workaround before the build:
export LC_ALL=en_US.UTF-8
I've posted the same on PIG-3262, in case anyone runs into the same issue.
Thanks, once again!
Mark
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 9:07 AM, Dmitriy Ryaboy <dv...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Roman and Mark,
> Joining Bill here in thanking you for BigTop and all the integration work
> you guys do.
>
> Since this issue came up so late (after the vote), and, while it does
> affect people trying to build an rpm, does not affect people just using Pig
> jars, etc, I'd move to release 0.11.1 and consider the changes for 0.11.2.
> I suspect we'll have a .2 release -- 0.12 has a lot of new stuff, so people
> will likely stay on 11 for a while waiting for 12 to stabilize, and we'll
> see more bugfix patches.
>
> Using BigTop to validate an RC automatically would be great, let us know
> what we can do to make that happen.
>
> Best,
> -D
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 8:11 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi Bill!
> >
> > Thanks a million for chiming in!
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Bill Graham <bi...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Thanks for the work you're doing to support Pig in BigTop. Starting
> with
> > > Pig 0.12, our release process will be simplified to not include rpm/deb
> > > packages, thanks to BigTop.
> >
> > On a related note -- we're trying to work on a model where Bigtop
> > could be utilized as RC (and pre-RC) integration validation framework.
> > The gist of the idea is pretty simple -- we're planning to use the
> > last stable build of Bigtop (e.g. 0.6.0) and keep revving up one
> > single component (lets say Pig) following the trunk/branch development.
> > Hopefully that way all the integration problems could be uncovered
> > earlier in the game.
> >
> > Drop us a note if you guys would be interested. This is, obviously,
> > a two way street -- Bigtop can provide the framework, but we
> > need your expertise in triaging problems as they arise.
> >
> > > I've built Pig on a multiple RHEL versions so this issue might not be
> as
> > > broadly spanning as you describe. The RPMs for 0.11.0 and 0.11.1 were
> > both
> > > built on rhel5 instances from ec2 (ami-2d8e4c44).
> >
> > Here's the map of affected Linux platforms:
> >
> >
> http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/view/Bigtop-trunk/job/Bigtop-trunk-Pig/
> >
> > Feel free to see the build logs. Also, if you, interested, I can give
> > you karma to poke around Bigtop's Jenkins.
> >
> > The AMIs are all stock AMIs produced either by the corresponding
> > Linux vendor (Fedora, OpenSUSE) or RightScale.
> >
> > As such, it seems that chance of unsuspecting users running into
> > this issue with the build are pretty high.
> >
> > > That said, if the Pig community feels strongly that we should cancel
> the
> > > release and re-issue a new one, I'm fine with shepherding that process.
> >
> > It would be extremely appreciated if you guys could go through the
> trouble
> > of spinning up a new RC. This is, of course, your decision but we'd be
> > willing
> > to help to the extent we can.
> >
> > As Mark mentioned -- the risk of the respin is pretty small -- the
> affected
> > changes are all build files and they are localized to contrib. Of course,
> > any RC is quite a bit of work.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Roman.
> >
>
Re: Apache Pig 0.11.1 release candidate
Posted by Dmitriy Ryaboy <dv...@gmail.com>.
Roman and Mark,
Joining Bill here in thanking you for BigTop and all the integration work
you guys do.
Since this issue came up so late (after the vote), and, while it does
affect people trying to build an rpm, does not affect people just using Pig
jars, etc, I'd move to release 0.11.1 and consider the changes for 0.11.2.
I suspect we'll have a .2 release -- 0.12 has a lot of new stuff, so people
will likely stay on 11 for a while waiting for 12 to stabilize, and we'll
see more bugfix patches.
Using BigTop to validate an RC automatically would be great, let us know
what we can do to make that happen.
Best,
-D
On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 8:11 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Bill!
>
> Thanks a million for chiming in!
>
> On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Bill Graham <bi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Thanks for the work you're doing to support Pig in BigTop. Starting with
> > Pig 0.12, our release process will be simplified to not include rpm/deb
> > packages, thanks to BigTop.
>
> On a related note -- we're trying to work on a model where Bigtop
> could be utilized as RC (and pre-RC) integration validation framework.
> The gist of the idea is pretty simple -- we're planning to use the
> last stable build of Bigtop (e.g. 0.6.0) and keep revving up one
> single component (lets say Pig) following the trunk/branch development.
> Hopefully that way all the integration problems could be uncovered
> earlier in the game.
>
> Drop us a note if you guys would be interested. This is, obviously,
> a two way street -- Bigtop can provide the framework, but we
> need your expertise in triaging problems as they arise.
>
> > I've built Pig on a multiple RHEL versions so this issue might not be as
> > broadly spanning as you describe. The RPMs for 0.11.0 and 0.11.1 were
> both
> > built on rhel5 instances from ec2 (ami-2d8e4c44).
>
> Here's the map of affected Linux platforms:
>
> http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/view/Bigtop-trunk/job/Bigtop-trunk-Pig/
>
> Feel free to see the build logs. Also, if you, interested, I can give
> you karma to poke around Bigtop's Jenkins.
>
> The AMIs are all stock AMIs produced either by the corresponding
> Linux vendor (Fedora, OpenSUSE) or RightScale.
>
> As such, it seems that chance of unsuspecting users running into
> this issue with the build are pretty high.
>
> > That said, if the Pig community feels strongly that we should cancel the
> > release and re-issue a new one, I'm fine with shepherding that process.
>
> It would be extremely appreciated if you guys could go through the trouble
> of spinning up a new RC. This is, of course, your decision but we'd be
> willing
> to help to the extent we can.
>
> As Mark mentioned -- the risk of the respin is pretty small -- the affected
> changes are all build files and they are localized to contrib. Of course,
> any RC is quite a bit of work.
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>
Re: Apache Pig 0.11.1 release candidate
Posted by Dmitriy Ryaboy <dv...@gmail.com>.
Roman and Mark,
Joining Bill here in thanking you for BigTop and all the integration work
you guys do.
Since this issue came up so late (after the vote), and, while it does
affect people trying to build an rpm, does not affect people just using Pig
jars, etc, I'd move to release 0.11.1 and consider the changes for 0.11.2.
I suspect we'll have a .2 release -- 0.12 has a lot of new stuff, so people
will likely stay on 11 for a while waiting for 12 to stabilize, and we'll
see more bugfix patches.
Using BigTop to validate an RC automatically would be great, let us know
what we can do to make that happen.
Best,
-D
On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 8:11 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Bill!
>
> Thanks a million for chiming in!
>
> On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Bill Graham <bi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Thanks for the work you're doing to support Pig in BigTop. Starting with
> > Pig 0.12, our release process will be simplified to not include rpm/deb
> > packages, thanks to BigTop.
>
> On a related note -- we're trying to work on a model where Bigtop
> could be utilized as RC (and pre-RC) integration validation framework.
> The gist of the idea is pretty simple -- we're planning to use the
> last stable build of Bigtop (e.g. 0.6.0) and keep revving up one
> single component (lets say Pig) following the trunk/branch development.
> Hopefully that way all the integration problems could be uncovered
> earlier in the game.
>
> Drop us a note if you guys would be interested. This is, obviously,
> a two way street -- Bigtop can provide the framework, but we
> need your expertise in triaging problems as they arise.
>
> > I've built Pig on a multiple RHEL versions so this issue might not be as
> > broadly spanning as you describe. The RPMs for 0.11.0 and 0.11.1 were
> both
> > built on rhel5 instances from ec2 (ami-2d8e4c44).
>
> Here's the map of affected Linux platforms:
>
> http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/view/Bigtop-trunk/job/Bigtop-trunk-Pig/
>
> Feel free to see the build logs. Also, if you, interested, I can give
> you karma to poke around Bigtop's Jenkins.
>
> The AMIs are all stock AMIs produced either by the corresponding
> Linux vendor (Fedora, OpenSUSE) or RightScale.
>
> As such, it seems that chance of unsuspecting users running into
> this issue with the build are pretty high.
>
> > That said, if the Pig community feels strongly that we should cancel the
> > release and re-issue a new one, I'm fine with shepherding that process.
>
> It would be extremely appreciated if you guys could go through the trouble
> of spinning up a new RC. This is, of course, your decision but we'd be
> willing
> to help to the extent we can.
>
> As Mark mentioned -- the risk of the respin is pretty small -- the affected
> changes are all build files and they are localized to contrib. Of course,
> any RC is quite a bit of work.
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>