+1 (binding)

Solid work!

On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 10:43 PM Jarek Potiuk <jarek.pot...@polidea.com>
wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 11:16 PM Kaxil Naik <kaxiln...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 10:06 PM Deng Xiaodong <xd.den...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (binding).
> > >
> > > Thanks for proceeding this AIP, Ash.
> > >
> > >
> > > XD
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 22:40 Ash Berlin-Taylor <a...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > This email calls for a vote on the design proposed in AIP-15, found
> here
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=103092651
> > > >
> > > > A few notes
> > > >
> > > > - The proposed architecture is to use an active/active architecture
> > > >   where each scheduler is fully capable
> > > > - Nothing in this proposal locks us in to this design long term, and
> if
> > > >   we find it doesn't work or scale we can change it.
> > > > - Lock contention doesn't worry me, as we (plan to) skip locked rows,
> > > >   meaning that when one scheduler has a DAG locked it will be skipped
> > > >   over by other schedulers
> > > >
> > > > This vote will last for 72 hours until 2020-03-20T21:40Z, and until
> at
> > > > least 3 votes have been cast.
> > > >
> > > > This is my +1 vote.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Ash
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
>
>
>
> --
>
> Jarek Potiuk
> Polidea | Principal Software Engineer
>
> M: +48 660 796 129
>

Reply via email to