Looks like #1 is better - 1.2.1 would be at least as stable as 1.2.0 Cheers
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 7:39 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org> wrote: > Just so we’re all on the same page. ;-) > > There was https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5808 which was a > bug that we initially discovered in Flink 1.2 which was/is about missing > verification for the correctness of the combination of parallelism and > max-parallelism. Due to lacking test coverage this introduced two more bugs: > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6188: Some > setParallelism() methods can't cope with default parallelism > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6209: > StreamPlanEnvironment always has a parallelism of 1 > > IMHO, the options are: > 1) revert the changes made for FLINK-5808 on the release-1.2 branch and > live with the bug still being present > 2) put in more work to fix FLINK-5808 which requires fixing some problems > that have existed for a long time with how the parallelism is set in > streaming programs > > Best, > Aljoscha > > > On 31. Mar 2017, at 21:34, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > I don't know what is best to do, but I think releasing 1.2.1 with > > potentially more bugs than 1.2.0 is not a good option. > > I suspect a good workaround for FLINK-6188 > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6188> is setting the > > parallelism manually for operators that can't cope with the default -1 > > parallelism. > > > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 9:06 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > >> You mean reverting the changes around FLINK-5808 [1]? This is what > >> introduced the follow-up FLINK-6188 [2]. > >> > >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5808 > >> [2]https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6188 > >> > >> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017, at 19:10, Robert Metzger wrote: > >>> I think reverting FLINK-6188 for the 1.2 branch might be a good idea. > >>> FLINK-6188 introduced two new bugs, so undoing the FLINK-6188 fix will > >>> lead > >>> only to one known bug in 1.2.1, instead of an uncertain number of > issues. > >>> So 1.2.1 is not going to be worse than 1.2.0 > >>> > >>> The fix will hopefully make it into 1.2.2 then. > >>> > >>> Any other thoughts on this? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 6:46 PM, Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>>> I merged the fix for FLINK-6044 to the release-1.2 and release-1.1 > >> branch. > >>>> > >>>> 2017-03-31 15:02 GMT+02:00 Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com>: > >>>> > >>>>> We should also backport the fix for FLINK-6044 to Flink 1.2.1. > >>>>> > >>>>> I'll take care of that. > >>>>> > >>>>> 2017-03-30 18:50 GMT+02:00 Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>: > >>>>> > >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6188 turns out to be a > >> bit > >>>>>> more involved, see my comments on the PR: > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3616. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> As I said there, maybe we should revert the commits regarding > >>>>>> parallelism/max-parallelism changes and release and then fix it > >> later. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017, at 23:08, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > >>>>>>> I commented on FLINK-6214: I think it's working as intended, > >> although > >>>> we > >>>>>>> could fix the javadoc/doc. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017, at 17:35, Timo Walther wrote: > >>>>>>>> A user reported that all tumbling and slinding window assigners > >>>>>> contain > >>>>>>>> a pretty obvious bug about offsets. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6214 > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I think we should also fix this for 1.2.1. What do you think? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>>> Timo > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Am 29/03/17 um 11:30 schrieb Robert Metzger: > >>>>>>>>> Hi Haohui, > >>>>>>>>> I agree that we should fix the parallelism issue. Otherwise, > >> the > >>>>>> 1.2.1 > >>>>>>>>> release would introduce a new bug. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:59 PM, Haohui Mai < > >> ricet...@gmail.com> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> -1 (non-binding) > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> We recently found out that all jobs submitted via UI will > >> have a > >>>>>>>>>> parallelism of 1, potentially due to FLINK-5808. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Filed FLINK-6209 to track it. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> ~Haohui > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 2:59 AM Chesnay Schepler < > >>>>>> ches...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> If possible I would like to include FLINK-6183 & FLINK-6184 > >> as > >>>>>> well. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> They fix 2 metric-related issues that could arise when a > >> Task is > >>>>>>>>>>> cancelled very early. (like, right away) > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> FLINK-6183 fixes a memory leak where the TaskMetricGroup was > >>>>>> never closed > >>>>>>>>>>> FLINK-6184 fixes a NullPointerExceptions in the buffer > >> metrics > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> PR here: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3611 > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On 26.03.2017 12:35, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> I opened a PR for FLINK-6188: https://github.com/apache/ > >>>>>>>>>> flink/pull/3616 > >>>>>>>>>>> <https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3616> > >>>>>>>>>>>> This improves the previously very sparse test coverage for > >>>>>>>>>>> timestamp/watermark assigners and fixes the bug. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 25 Mar 2017, at 10:22, Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org> > >> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree with Aljoscha. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -1 because of FLINK-6188 > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Aljoscha Krettek < > >>>>>>>>>> aljos...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I filed this issue, which was observed by a user: > >>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6188 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that’s blocking for 1.2.1. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 24 Mar 2017, at 18:57, Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RC1 doesn't contain Stefan's backport for the > >> Asynchronous > >>>>>> snapshots > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for heap-based keyed state that has been merged. Should > >> we > >>>>>> create > >>>>>>>>>> RC2 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with that fix since the voting period only starts on > >> Monday? > >>>>>> I think > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it would only mean rerunning the scripts on your side, > >>>> right? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> – Ufuk > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Robert Metzger < > >>>>>>>>>> rmetz...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear Flink community, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please vote on releasing the following candidate as > >> Apache > >>>>>> Flink > >>>>>>>>>>> version 1.2 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .1. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The commit to be voted on: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *732e55bd* (* > >>>>>>>>>>> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/flink/commit/ > >> 732e55bd > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://git-wip-us.apache.org/ > >>>> repos/asf/flink/commit/732e55b > >>>>>> d>*) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Branch: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release-1.2.1-rc1 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The release artifacts to be voted on can be found at: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *http://people.apache.org/~rmetzger/flink-1.2.1-rc1/ > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://people.apache.org/~rmetzger/flink-1.2.1-rc1/>* > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The release artifacts are signed with the key with > >>>>>> fingerprint > >>>>>>>>>>> D9839159: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/flink/KEYS > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The staging repository for this release can be found > >> at: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/ > >> content/repositories/orgapache > >>>>>> flink-1116 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------ > >>>> ------------------------------ > >>>>>> - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The vote ends on Wednesday, March 29, 2017, 3pm CET. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Flink 1.2.1 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package, because ... > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >> > >
