This vote has passed with 5 +1 votes and no -1 votes. Work will begin on this soon :)
-ash On Mar 19 2020, at 8:53 pm, Maxime Beauchemin <maximebeauche...@gmail.com> wrote: > +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 >> >
