Does Nexmark use SerializableCoder?
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 10:42 AM Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com> wrote: > I put the validation checklist spreadsheet is up at > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qk-N5vjXvbcEk68GjbkSZTR8AGqyNUM-oLFo_ZXBpJw/edit?ts=5a1c7310#gid=1663314475 > > Regarding the direct runner regression on query 10, this is understandable > given how mutation detection has been changed for serializable coders (and > should be tracked, probably fixed by avoiding SerializableCoder). It should > not affect other runners. Could you file a bug? > > Regarding waitUntilFinish, this is a bug but not a blocker--it's been > this way since teardown was introduced. There are many nice-to-haves that > one could merge from master to the release branch, but we've seen where > that trend leads. > > Regarding the backwards incompatible changes in restriction tracker, this > is (as I understand it) a change to the experimental SDF API. Eugene, do > you want to comment on this? > > > > On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 2:07 AM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I confirm that the new release fixes both problems reported previously: >> >> - python package name >> - nexmark query 10 mutability issue with the direct runner. >> >> One extra regression is that the the fix produced a way longer >> execution time on the query. >> Not sure if a blocker but worth tracking. >> >> Query 10 - Batch/Bounded >> Version Runtime(sec) Events(/sec) Results >> 2.3.0 3.6 27609.1 1 >> 2.4.0 30.8 3244.3 1 >> >> Query 10 - Streaming/Unbounded >> Version Runtime(sec) Events(/sec) Results >> 2.3.0 6.3 15873.0 1 >> 2.4.0 101.1 989.4 1 >> >> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 8:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau >> <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > -1: >> > a) still consider waitUntilFinish broken and a big blocker >> > b) restrictiontracker api changed and is not backward compatible >> > ( >> https://github.com/apache/beam/commit/e0034314ad196d2274cef9831ed63e090bf4d4c1#diff-098d7247eb1e9d9423bfa2ae2da38a9d >> ) >> > >> > with workarounds and fixes for these two issues the other parts work >> (spark, >> > flink, direct runner, java core) on my projects >> > >> > >> > >> > Romain Manni-Bucau >> > @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book >> > >> > 2018-03-08 6:26 GMT+01:00 Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com>: >> >> >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> >> >> Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version >> 2.4.0, >> >> as follows: >> >> [ ] +1, Approve the release >> >> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments) >> >> >> >> The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes: >> >> * JIRA release notes [1], >> >> * the official Apache source release to be deployed to dist.apache.org >> >> [2], >> >> which is signed with the key with fingerprint BDC9 89B0 1BD2 A463 6010 >> >> A1CA 8F15 5E09 610D 69FB [3], >> >> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4], >> >> * source code tag "v2.4.0-RC2" [5], >> >> * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API >> >> reference >> >> manual [6]. >> >> * Java artifacts were built with Maven 3.2.5 and OpenJDK 1.8.0_112. >> >> * Python artifact are deployed along with the source release to the >> >> dist.apache.org [2]. If I am able to figure out how to build the >> wheels, I >> >> will post them there as well. >> >> >> >> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority >> >> approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> - Robert >> >> >> >> [1] >> >> >> >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12342682&projectId=12319527 >> >> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.4.0/ >> >> [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/KEYS >> >> [4] >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1030/ >> >> [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.4.0-RC2 >> >> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/398 >> > >> > >> >
