I'll chime in as a user who would love to see 2.2.0 sooner than later, specifically for the file IO Eugene mentioned. We're using the AvroIO enhancements extensively, but I am hesitant to run from HEAD in master in production.
On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Eugene Kirpichov < kirpic...@google.com.invalid> wrote: > There are a lot of users including very large production customers who have > been asking specifically for the features that are in 2.2.0 (most of them > accumulated while 2.1.0 was being iterated on) - mostly I'm referring to > the vastly improved file IO - and they have been hesitant to use Beam at > HEAD in production. I think the slight unusualness of having a release > published soon after the previous release is a small price to pay for > helping those users :) > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017, 11:30 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > wrote: > > > As we released 2.1.0 couple of weeks ago, it could sound weird to the > > users to > > do a 2.2.0 so fast. If we have a blocking issue, we can do a 2.1.1 If > it's > > new > > features, why not having a release pace in October (2.2.0) ? > > > > Thoughts ? > > > > Regards > > JB > > > > On 08/31/2017 08:27 AM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote: > > > I'd suggest to do 2.2.0 as quickly as possible, and target 2.3.0 for > > > October. I don't see a reason to delay 2.2.0 until October: there's a > > huge > > > amount of features worth releasing between when 2.1.0 was cut and the > > > current HEAD. > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 10:18 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> With a 2.2.0 in October, I think we can try to move forward on > RedisIO. > > >> > > >> I'm now back from vacation and I will resume the work on this IO. > > >> > > >> Regards > > >> JB > > >> > > >> On 08/30/2017 11:27 PM, Eugene Kirpichov wrote: > > >>> RedisIO in 2.2.0 is very unlikely. There's still a lot of review > > >> remaining > > >>> last time I checked on the PR. > > >>> > > >>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 2:24 PM Vilhelm von Ehrenheim < > > >>> vonehrenh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Any chance to get the RedisIO in this release? > > >>>> [BEAM-1017] Add RedisIO #1687 > > >>>> > > >>>> Its not my PR but ll be happy to assist if there is anything I can > do > > to > > >>>> help. > > >>>> > > >>>> On 30 Aug 2017 22:46, "Daniel Ribeiro" > <danie...@squareup.com.invalid > > > > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> It would be great to get a bump on pubsub > > >>>>> <https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/master/pom.xml#L145> > > dependency. > > >> It > > >>>>> is > > >>>>> currently very outdated (v1-rev10-1.22.0, which was released over a > > >> year > > >>>>> ago > > >>>>> <http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/google/apis/google- > > >>>>> api-services-pubsub/v1-rev10-1.22.0/> > > >>>>> ). > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Eugene Kirpichov < > > >>>>> kirpic...@google.com.invalid> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> Thanks Ismael. I've marked these two issues for fix in 2.2.0. > > >>>> Definitely > > >>>>>> agree that at least the first one must be fixed. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Here's the current burndown list > > >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/BEAM/versions/12341044 - > we > > >>>>> should > > >>>>>> clean it up. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:20 PM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> The current master has accumulated a good amount of nice features > > >>>>>>> since 2.1.0 so a new release is welcomed. I have two JIRAs/PR > that > > I > > >>>>>>> think are important to check/solve before the cut: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> BEAM-2516 (this is a regression on the performance of Direct > runner > > >>>> on > > >>>>>>> Java). We had never really defined if a performance regression is > > >>>>>>> critical to be a blocker. I executed WordCount with the > > kinglear.txt > > >>>>>>> (170KB) file in version 2.1.0 vs the current 2.2.0-SNAPSHOT and I > > >>>>>>> found that the execution time passed from 5s to 126s. So maybe we > > >>>> need > > >>>>>>> to review this one before the release. I can understand if others > > >>>>>>> consider this a minor issue because the Direct runner is not > > supposed > > >>>>>>> to be used for production, but this performance regression can > > cause > > >>>> a > > >>>>>>> bad impression for a casual user starting with Beam. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> BEAM-2790 (fix reading from Amazon S3 via HadoopFileSystem). I > > think > > >>>>>>> this one is a nice to have. I am not sure that I can tackle it > for > > >>>> the > > >>>>>>> wednesday cut. I’m OOO until the beginning of next week, but > maybe > > >>>>>>> someone else can take a look. In the worst case this is not a > > release > > >>>>>>> blocker but definitely a really nice fix to include. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 8:49 PM, Eugene Kirpichov > > >>>>>>> <kirpic...@google.com.invalid> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> I'd like to get the following PRs into 2.2.0: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> #3765 <https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/3765> [BEAM-2753 > > >>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2753>] Fixes > > >>>> translation > > >>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>> WriteFiles side inputs (important bugfix for DynamicDestinations > > in > > >>>>>>> files) > > >>>>>>>> #3725 <https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/3725> [BEAM-2827 > > >>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2827>] Introduces > > >>>>>>>> AvroIO.watchForNewFiles (parity for AvroIO with TextIO in a few > > >>>>>> important > > >>>>>>>> features) > > >>>>>>>> #3759 <https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/3759> [BEAM-2828 > > >>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2828>] Moves Match > > >>>> into > > >>>>>>>> FileIO.match()/matchAll() (to prevent releasing current > > >>>>>>>> Match.filepatterns() into 2.2.0 and then having to keep it under > > >>>> that > > >>>>>>> name) > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:31 AM Mingmin Xu <mingm...@gmail.com > > > > >>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Glad to see that 2.2.0 is coming. Can we include SQL feature in > > >>>> next > > >>>>>>>>> release? We're in the final stage and expect to merge back to > > >>>> master > > >>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>> week. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Reuven Lax > > >>>>> <re...@google.com.invalid > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Now that Beam 2.1.0 has finally completed, I think we should > cut > > >>>>>> Beam > > >>>>>>>>> 2.2.0 > > >>>>>>>>>> soon. I volunteer to coordinate this release. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Are there any pending pull requests that people think should > be > > >>>>>> merged > > >>>>>>>>>> before we cut 2.2.0? If so, please let me know soon, as I > would > > >>>>> like > > >>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>> cut > > >>>>>>>>>> by Wednesday of next week. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Reuven > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>> ---- > > >>>>>>>>> Mingmin > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > >> jbono...@apache.org > > >> http://blog.nanthrax.net > > >> Talend - http://www.talend.com > > >> > > > > > > > -- > > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > jbono...@apache.org > > http://blog.nanthrax.net > > Talend - http://www.talend.com > > >
