Hello all, I'd like to request an extension of the voting period until Monday evening (US time, so later in other geographical regions). This is because we were only now able to publish Dataflow Workers, and have not had the chance to run release validation tests on them. The extension will allow us to validate and vote by Monday. Is this acceptable to the community?
Best -P. On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 6:20 AM Alexey Romanenko <aromanenko....@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you JB for your work! > > I tested running simple streaming (*KafkaIO*) and batch (*TextIO / HDFS*) > pipelines with SparkRunner on YARN cluster - it works fine. > > WBR, > Alexey > > > On 8 Jun 2018, at 10:00, Etienne Chauchot <echauc...@apache.org> wrote: > > I forgot to vote: > +1 (non binding). > What I tested: > - no functional or performance regression comparing to v2.4 > - dependencies in the poms are ok > > Etienne > Le vendredi 08 juin 2018 à 08:27 +0200, Romain Manni-Bucau a écrit : > > +1 (non-binding), mainstream usage is not broken by the pom changes and > runtime has no known regression compared to the 2.4.0 > > (side note: kudo to JB for this build tool change release, I know how it > can hurt ;)) > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/> | Github > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> > > > Le jeu. 7 juin 2018 à 16:17, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> a > écrit : > > Thanks for the details Etienne ! > > The good news is that the artifacts seem OK and the overall Nexmark > results are consistent with the 2.4.0 release ones. > > I'm starting a complete review using the beam-samples as well. > > Regards > JB > > On 07/06/2018 16:14, Etienne Chauchot wrote: > > Hi, > > I've just run the nexmark queries on v2.5.0-RC1 tag > > What we can notice: > > - query 3 (exercises CoGroupByKey, state and timer) shows different > > output with DR between batch and streaming and with the other runners => > > I compared with v2.4 there were still these differences but with > > different output size numbers > > > > - query 6 (exercises specialized combiner) shows different output > > between the runners => the correct output is 401. strange that in batch > > mode some runners output les Sellers. I compared with v2.4 same output > > > > - response time of query 7 (exercices Max transform, fanout and side > > input) is very slow on DR => I compared with v2.4 , comparable execution > > times > > > > I'm not comparing q10 because it is a write to GCS so it is very > specific. > > > > => Basically no regression comparing to v2.4 > > > > For the record here is the output (waiting for ongoing perfkit > integration): > > > > > > 1. DR batch > > > > Performance: > > > > > Conf Runtime(sec) (Baseline) Events(/sec) (Baseline) Results > (Baseline) > > > > > 0000 5,8 17283,1 100000 > > > > > 0001 3,2 31104,2 92000 > > > > > 0002 1,2 82918,7 351 > > > > > 0003 2,2 46210,7 458 > > > > > 0004 1,2 8503,4 40 > > > > > 0005 4,0 25220,7 12 > > > > > 0006 0,9 11148,3 401 > > > > > 0007 13,2 7580,9 1 > > > > > 0008 1,5 67340,1 6000 > > > > > 0009 0,7 14025,2 298 > > > > > 0010 12,8 7793,0 1 > > > > > 0011 2,4 42319,1 1919 > > > > > 0012 1,6 61462,8 1919 > > > ========================================================================================== > > > > 2. DR streaming > > > > Performance: > > > > > Conf Runtime(sec) (Baseline) Events(/sec) (Baseline) Results > (Baseline) > > > > > 0000 6,5 15285,8 100000 > > > > > 0001 3,7 27397,3 92000 > > > > > 0002 1,4 69108,5 351 > > > > > 0003 3,2 31181,8 447 > > > > > 0004 1,2 8361,2 40 > > > > > 0005 5,3 18903,6 12 > > > > > 0006 0,9 11111,1 401 > > > > > 0007 82,5 1212,2 1 > > > > > 0008 2,0 51072,5 6000 > > > > > 0009 0,8 12903,2 298 > > > > > 0010 49,5 2021,8 1 > > > > > 0011 3,9 25667,4 1919 > > > > > 0012 2,4 41067,8 1919 > > > ========================================================================================== > > > > 3. Flink batch > > Performance: > > > > > Conf Runtime(sec) (Baseline) Events(/sec) (Baseline) Results > (Baseline) > > > > > 0000 1,0 97656,3 100000 > > > > > 0001 0,7 141643,1 92000 > > > > > 0002 0,4 228310,5 351 > > > > > 0003 1,6 64020,5 580 > > > > > 0004 0,7 13831,3 40 > > > > > 0005 1,4 72939,5 12 > > > > > 0006 0,5 20491,8 103 > > > > > 0007 1,3 74239,0 1 > > > > > 0008 0,8 121506,7 6000 > > > > > 0009 0,6 17953,3 298 > > > > > 0010 1,3 74682,6 1 > > > > > 0011 1,1 92936,8 1919 > > > > > 0012 0,8 123001,2 1919 > > > ========================================================================================== > > > > 4. Flink streaming > > Performance: > > > > > Conf Runtime(sec) (Baseline) Events(/sec) (Baseline) Results > (Baseline) > > > > > 0000 5,4 18677,6 100000 > > > > > 0001 2,8 35511,4 92000 > > > > > 0002 1,8 54318,3 351 > > > > > 0003 2,4 41614,6 580 > > > > > 0004 1,0 10341,3 40 > > > > > 0005 3,4 29568,3 12 > > > > > 0006 0,7 13369,0 401 > > > > > 0007 2,8 36192,5 1 > > > > > 0008 1,8 54854,6 6000 > > > > > 0009 0,7 13369,0 298 > > > > > 0010 3,4 29841,8 2 > > > > > 0011 5,0 19932,2 1919 > > > > > 0012 2,6 38835,0 1919 > > > ========================================================================================== > > > > 5. Spark batch > > Performance: > > > > > Conf Runtime(sec) (Baseline) Events(/sec) (Baseline) Results > (Baseline) > > > > > 0000 1,5 65445,0 100000 > > > > > 0001 1,3 79491,3 92000 > > > > > 0002 0,9 112107,6 351 > > > > > 0003 2,0 48804,3 580 > > > > > 0004 1,2 8382,2 40 > > > > > 0005 2,0 50838,8 12 > > > > > 0006 1,0 9699,3 103 > > > > > 0007 2,3 43308,8 1 > > > > > 0008 2,1 46794,6 6000 > > > > > 0009 1,1 8976,7 298 > > > > > 0010 1,6 62111,8 1 > > > > > 0011 2,1 46598,3 1919 > > > > > 0012 2,3 43687,2 1919 > > > ========================================================================================== > > > > Le mercredi 06 juin 2018 à 10:50 +0200, Etienne Chauchot a écrit : > >> Thanks JB for all your work ! I believe doing the first gradle release > >> must have been hard. > >> I'll run Nexmark on the release and keep you posted. > >> > >> Best > >> Etienne > >> > >> > >> Le mercredi 06 juin 2018 à 10:44 +0200, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit : > >>> Hi everyone, > >>> > >>> Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the version > >>> 2.5.0, as follows: > >>> > >>> [ ] +1, Approve the release > >>> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments) > >>> > >>> NB: this is the first release using Gradle, so don't be too harsh ;) A > >>> PR about the release guide will follow thanks to this release. > >>> > >>> 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 C8282E76 [3], > >>> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4], > >>> * source code tag "v2.5.0-RC1" [5], > >>> * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API > >>> reference manual [6]. > >>> * Java artifacts were built with Gradle 4.7 (wrapper) and > OpenJDK/Oracle > >>> JDK 1.8.0_172 (Oracle Corporation 25.172-b11). > >>> * Python artifacts are deployed along with the source release to the > >>> dist.apache.org [2]. > >>> > >>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority > >>> approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> JB > >>> > >>> [1] > >>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12342847 > >>> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.5.0/ > >>> [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS > >>> [4] > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1041/ > >>> [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.5.0-RC1 > >>> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/463 > >>> > > > -- Got feedback? go/pabloem-feedback
