Yes, there'll be an RC4, still waiting for the fix of one issue.
Yuval Itzchakov 于2018年8月6日周一 下午6:10写道：
> Are there any plans to create an RC4? There's an important Kafka Source
> leak
> fix I've merged back to the 2.3 branch.
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from:
Are there any plans to create an RC4? There's an important Kafka Source leak
fix I've merged back to the 2.3 branch.
--
Sent from: http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/
-
To unsubscribe e-mail:
Another two correctness bug fixes were merged to 2.3 today:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-24934
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-24957
On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 1:19 PM Xiao Li wrote:
> Sounds good to me. Thanks! Today, we merged another correctness fix
>
Sounds good to me. Thanks! Today, we merged another correctness fix
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/21772.
Xiao
2018-07-29 18:31 GMT-07:00 Saisai Shao :
> Sure, I will do a next RC. I'm still waiting for a CVE fix, if this can be
> done in this two days, I will also include that one.
>
>
Sure, I will do a next RC. I'm still waiting for a CVE fix, if this can be
done in this two days, I will also include that one.
Xiao Li 于2018年7月28日周六 上午12:05写道：
> The following blocker/important fixes have been merged to Spark 2.3 branch:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-24927
>
The following blocker/important fixes have been merged to Spark 2.3 branch:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-24927
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-24867
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-24891
*Saisai*, could you start the next RC?
Thanks,
Xiao
2018-07-20
fyi, I merged in a couple jira that were critical (and I thought would be good
to include in the next release) that if we spin another RC will get included,
we should update the jira SPARK-24755 and SPARK-24677, if anyone disagrees we
could back those out but I think they would be good to
Sure, I can wait for this and create another RC then.
Thanks,
Saisai
Xiao Li 于2018年7月20日周五 上午9:11写道：
> Yes. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-24867 is the one I
> created. The PR has been created. Since this is not rare, let us merge it
> to 2.3.2?
>
> Reynold' PR is to get rid of
Yes. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-24867 is the one I
created. The PR has been created. Since this is not rare, let us merge it
to 2.3.2?
Reynold' PR is to get rid of AnalysisBarrier. That is better than multiple
patches we added for AnalysisBarrier after 2.3.0 release. We can
I see, thanks Reynold.
Reynold Xin 于2018年7月20日周五 上午8:46写道：
> Looking at the list of pull requests it looks like this is the ticket:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-24867
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 5:25 PM Reynold Xin wrote:
>
>> I don't think my ticket should block this
Looking at the list of pull requests it looks like this is the ticket:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-24867
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 5:25 PM Reynold Xin wrote:
> I don't think my ticket should block this release. It's a big general
> refactoring.
>
> Xiao do you have a ticket for
I don't think my ticket should block this release. It's a big general
refactoring.
Xiao do you have a ticket for the bug you found?
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 5:24 PM Saisai Shao wrote:
> Hi Xiao,
>
> Are you referring to this JIRA (
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-24865)?
>
> Xiao
Hi Xiao,
Are you referring to this JIRA (
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-24865)?
Xiao Li 于2018年7月20日周五 上午2:41写道：
> dfWithUDF.cache()
> dfWithUDF.write.saveAsTable("t")
> dfWithUDF.write.saveAsTable("t1")
>
>
> Cached data is not being used. It causes a big performance regression.
dfWithUDF.cache()
dfWithUDF.write.saveAsTable("t")
dfWithUDF.write.saveAsTable("t1")
Cached data is not being used. It causes a big performance regression.
2018-07-19 11:32 GMT-07:00 Sean Owen :
> What regression are you referring to here? A -1 vote really needs a
> rationale.
>
> On Thu,
What regression are you referring to here? A -1 vote really needs a
rationale.
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 1:27 PM Xiao Li wrote:
> I would first vote -1.
>
> I might find another regression caused by the analysis barrier. Will keep
> you posted.
>
>
I would first vote -1.
I might find another regression caused by the analysis barrier. Will keep
you posted.
Xiao
2018-07-18 18:05 GMT-07:00 Takeshi Yamamuro :
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> I run tests on a EC2 m4.2xlarge instance;
> [ec2-user]$ java -version
> openjdk version "1.8.0_171"
> OpenJDK
+1 (non-binding)
I run tests on a EC2 m4.2xlarge instance;
[ec2-user]$ java -version
openjdk version "1.8.0_171"
OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_171-b10)
OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.171-b10, mixed mode)
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 5:29 AM Ryan Blue wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On
+1 (non-binding)
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:38 AM Denny Lee wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 23:04 John Zhuge wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 8:04 PM Saisai Shao
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I will put my +1 on this RC.
>>>
>>> For the test failure fix, I
+1 (non-binding)
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 23:04 John Zhuge wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 8:04 PM Saisai Shao
> wrote:
>
>> I will put my +1 on this RC.
>>
>> For the test failure fix, I will include it if there's another RC.
>>
>> Sean Owen 于2018年7月16日周一 下午10:47写道：
>>
>
+1 (non-binding)
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 8:04 PM Saisai Shao wrote:
> I will put my +1 on this RC.
>
> For the test failure fix, I will include it if there's another RC.
>
> Sean Owen 于2018年7月16日周一 下午10:47写道：
>
>> OK, hm, will try to get to the bottom of it. But if others can build this
>>
I will put my +1 on this RC.
For the test failure fix, I will include it if there's another RC.
Sean Owen 于2018年7月16日周一 下午10:47写道：
> OK, hm, will try to get to the bottom of it. But if others can build this
> module successfully, I give a +1 . The test failure is inevitable here and
> should
OK, hm, will try to get to the bottom of it. But if others can build this
module successfully, I give a +1 . The test failure is inevitable here and
should not block release.
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 9:39 PM Saisai Shao wrote:
> Hi Sean,
>
> I just did a clean build with mvn/sbt on 2.3.2, I
Hi Sean,
I just did a clean build with mvn/sbt on 2.3.2, I didn't meet the errors
you pasted here. I'm not sure how it happens.
Sean Owen 于2018年7月16日周一 上午6:30写道：
> Looks good to me, with the following caveats.
>
> First see the discussion on
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-24813
Looks good to me, with the following caveats.
First see the discussion on
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-24813 ; the
flaky HiveExternalCatalogVersionsSuite will probably fail all the time
right now. That's not a regression and is a test-only issue, so don't think
it must block the
+1. The Spark 2.3 regressions I'm aware of are all fixed.
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 4:09 PM Saisai Shao wrote:
> Please vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache Spark version
> 2.3.2.
>
> The vote is open until July 20 PST and passes if a majority +1 PMC votes
> are cast, with a
Please vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache Spark version
2.3.2.
The vote is open until July 20 PST and passes if a majority +1 PMC votes
are cast, with a minimum of 3 +1 votes.
[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Spark 2.3.2
[ ] -1 Do not release this package because ...
To
26 matches
Mail list logo
