I checked that word count quickstarts (except Dataflow) worked for RC2 to hopefully prevent an RC4.
On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 10:29 AM, Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com> wrote: > Thanks, Alan, for pointing this out. I see this now, and it looks like I > need to finish building the dataflow workers so they have something to > point to. I will do this and release an RC3 once that's ready. > > In the meantime, it'd be great if we could validate everything else about > this RC such that when this on-line, dataflow-only change is out we won't > have any further surprises. I see Luke went through the Java Quickstart > examples, thanks! > > > On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 3:48 PM Lukasz Cwik <lc...@google.com> wrote: > > > Yes, the release guide has a segment "Update release specific > configurations" that has a tidbit about this. > > > On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 3:45 PM, Alan Myrvold <amyrv...@google.com> > wrote: > > >> The dataflow java worker version wasn't updated on the branch as in past > releases ... should it be? > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3815 > > > >> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 1:40 PM Romain Manni-Bucau < > rmannibu...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >>> Can still be provided as a generic one (like the an offset or key based > one) but good enough for now, right, was just surprising to not see it when > checking the breakage. > > >>> Le 8 mars 2018 22:05, "Eugene Kirpichov" <kirpic...@google.com> a > écrit > : > > >>> All SDF-related method annotations in DoFn are marked @Experimental. I > guess that should apply to RestrictionTracker too, but I wouldn't be too > worried about that, since it only makes sense to use in the context of > those methods. > > >>> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 12:36 PM Romain Manni-Bucau < > rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>> Hmm, does sdf api misses some @Experimental then? > > >>>> To clarify: for waitUntilFinish I'm fine with the 2.4 as this but cant > +1 or +0 since none of my tests pass reliably in current state without a > retry strategy making the call useless. > > >>>> Le 8 mars 2018 21:02, "Reuven Lax" <re...@google.com> a écrit : > > >>>>> 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/e0034314ad196d2274cef9831ed63e > 090bf4d4c1#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 > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > >
