.
It seems like adding a way to get back the appID would be a reasonable
addition to the launcher.
- Patrick
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Marcelo Vanzin van...@cloudera.com wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Kevin Markey kevin.mar...@oracle.com
wrote
it not for added latency.
Not sure if added latency a function of 1.0 vs 1.1 or 1.0 vs 1.1.1
changes, as we've never tested with 1.1.0. But thought I'd share the
results. (This is somewhat disappointing.)
Kevin Markey
On 11/17/2014 11:42 AM, Debasish Das wrote:
Andrew,
I put up 1.1.1 branch and I
+1
Built -Pyarn -Phadoop-2.3 -Dhadoop.version=2.3.0
Ran current version of one of my applications on 1-node pseudocluster
(sorry, unable to test on full cluster).
yarn-cluster mode
Ran regression tests.
Thanks
Kevin
On 05/28/2014 09:55 PM, Krishna Sankar wrote:
+1
Pulled built on MacOS X,
.
best,
Colin
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Kevin Markey kevin.mar...@oracle.comwrote:
0
Abstaining because I'm not sure if my failures are due to Spark,
configuration, or other factors...
Compiled and deployed RC10 for YARN, Hadoop 2.3
per Spark 1.0.0 Yarn
documentation. No problems
user error.
The FS closed exception only effects the cleanup of the staging
directory, not the final success or failure. I've not yet tested the
effect of changing my application's initialization, use, or closing of
FileSystem.
Thanks again.
Kevin
On 05/22/2014 01:32 AM, Kevin Markey wrote
,
Colin
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Marcelo Vanzin van...@cloudera.com
wrote:
Hi Kevin,
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Kevin Markey kevin.mar...@oracle.com
wrote:
The FS closed exception only effects the cleanup of the staging
directory,
not the final success or failure. I've not yet
before Yarn would report the running program as RUNNING,
it only reported this application as ACCEPTED. It appeared to run two
containers when the first instance never reported that it was RUNNING.
I will post a separate note to the USER list about the specifics.
Thanks
Kevin Markey
On 05
ASM exclusions from other
libraries, recompiling and redeploying. But I'd incur the wrath of the
rest of my team doing that, especially after a full day of tracking down
yet another (totally unrelated) library conflict.
Thanks for this maintenance release.
Kevin Markey
On 03/31/2014 12:32 PM
1051 is essential!
I'm not sure about the others, but anything that adds stability to
Spark/Yarn would be helpful.
Kevin Markey
On 03/20/2014 01:12 PM, Tom Graves wrote:
I'll pull [SPARK-1053] Should not require SPARK_YARN_APP_JAR when running on
YARN - JIRA and [SPARK-1051] On Yarn
6 weeks away!
(For those not following 782, according to Jira comments, the SBT build
shades it, but it is the Maven build that ends up in Maven Central.)
Thanks
Kevin Markey
On 03/19/2014 06:07 PM, Tathagata Das wrote:
Hello everyone,
Since the release of Spark 0.9, we have received
10 matches
Mail list logo
