On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:00 PM, John Sichi <jsi...@facebook.com> wrote:
> At the Hive contributor meeting, we discussed this and came to the conclusion
> that the failures reported so far are ignorable based on the Hudson history
> (and in this case Ning's observation of JVM inconsistencies with respect to
> serialization format).
>
> We need one more +1 from a committer before we can release.
>
> JVS
>
> On Oct 25, 2010, at 12:54 PM, Ashish Thusoo wrote:
>
>> I got the following test failures on the release candidate...
>>
>> groupby2.q
>> groupby3.q
>> groupby4.q
>> groupby5.q
>> groupby6.q
>>
>> not sure if this is just in my env or if others have seen this...
>>
>> A sample of the diff is below and seems to be related to some plan ordering
>> or some change in plan. Is anyone else getting this?
>>
>> Ashish
>>
>> -------------------------
>> [junit] diff -b -I'\(\(<java version=".*"
>> class="java.beans.XMLDecoder">\)\|\(<string>.*/tmp/.*</string>\)\|\(<string>file:.*</string>\)\|\(<string>[0-9]\{10\}</string>\)\|\(<string>/.*/warehouse/.*</string>\)\)'
>>
>> /data/users/athusoo/tmp/hive-0.6.0/src/build/ql/test/logs/positive/groupby6.q.xml
>>
>> /data/users/athusoo/tmp/hive-0.6.0/src/ql/src/test/results/compiler/plan/groupby6.q.xml
>> [junit] 352,353c352
>> [junit] < <object class="java.lang.Enum"
>> method="valueOf">
>> [junit] <
>> <class>org.apache.hadoop.hive.ql.plan.GroupByDesc$Mode</class>
>> [junit] ---
>> [junit] > <object
>> class="org.apache.hadoop.hive.ql.plan.GroupByDesc$Mode" method="valueOf">
>> [junit] 878,879c877
>> [junit] < <object class="java.lang.Enum" method="valueOf">
>> [junit] <
>> <class>org.apache.hadoop.hive.ql.plan.GroupByDesc$Mode</class>
>> [junit] ---
>> [junit] > <object
>> class="org.apache.hadoop.hive.ql.plan.GroupByDesc$Mode" method="valueOf">
>>
>> --------------------------
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: John Sichi [jsi...@facebook.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 12:22 PM
>> To: <dev@hive.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] hive 0.6.0 release candidate 0
>>
>> Yeah, the scripts should only be needed in configurations where JDO is told
>> not to automatically update the schema. This is recommended for production
>> environments.
>>
>> For this particular release, taking a downtime while running the scripts is
>> a good idea due to the nature of the changes (e.g. altering the primary key
>> on COLS). That needn't be true in general for additive-only changes.
>>
>> JVS
>>
>> On Oct 21, 2010, at 12:14 PM, Edward Capriolo wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 6:38 PM, John Sichi <jsi...@facebook.com> wrote:
>>>> The tarballs are at
>>>>
>>>> http://people.apache.org/~jvs/hive-0.6.0-candidate-0
>>>>
>>>> Carl did some sanity testing on it already, but any additional testing you
>>>> can do before voting helps to ensure a quality release.
>>>>
>>>> JVS
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I am checking it out now. It seems like since i have used two trunk
>>> versions since hive the view related tables have already been created.
>>> I do not need the update script.
>>
>
>
I checked out. Created views, ran some queries on against them, tested
the new local mode, web interface looks good. +1 Great work everyone.
