+1 (binding) - Downloaded and deployed the tar.gz and .zip binary distribution. - Verified MD5. - Built the source with JDK 1.8 - Ran a few sample topologies and observed the output. - Viewed the worker logs via log viewer and did some basic sanity on the metrics.
Thanks, Arun On 1/23/18, 10:40 PM, "Jungtaek Lim" <[email protected]> wrote: >Let's back to verify the release and vote. > >+1 (binding) > >> source > >- verify file (signature, MD5, SHA) >-- source, tar.gz : OK >-- source, zip : OK > >- extract file >-- source, tar.gz : OK >-- source, zip : OK > >- diff-ing extracted files between tar.gz and zip : OK > >- build source with JDK 7 >-- source, tar.gz : integration-test failed, others are OK > >- build source dist >-- source, tar.gz : OK > >- build binary dist >-- source, tar.gz : OK > >> binary > >- verify file (signature, MD5, SHA) >-- binary, tar.gz : OK >-- binary, zip : OK > >- extract file >-- binary, tar.gz : OK >-- binary, zip : OK > >- diff-ing extracted files between tar.gz and zip : OK > >- launch daemons : OK > >- run RollingTopWords (local) : OK > >- run RollingTopWords (remote) : OK > - activate / deactivate / rebalance / kill : OK > - logviewer (worker dir, daemon dir) : OK > - change log level : OK > - thread dump, heap dump, restart worker : OK > - log search : OK > >I don't see odd numbers while testing, but I don't have stage/production >level of cluster/use case, hence someone might be able to see the behavior >what Alexandre encountered. > >Thanks, >Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) > >2018년 1월 24일 (수) 오전 10:19, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]>님이 작성: > >> Alexandre, >> >> Please file an issue with screenshot and reproducible step (if only >> possible). It would be very appreciated if you could spend time to dive >> into the codebase and find the cause, and fix and submit a patch (only when >> you could get it). >> Open source community can't live without contributors. I think reporting >> issue itself is great contribution, but I feel we don't have enough code >> contributors who could help driving the community. >> >> Thanks, >> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) >> >> 2018년 1월 24일 (수) 오전 9:57, P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]>님이 작성: >> >>> Yes, that’s the same error I got, and I think we both just shaved the >>> same yak. ;) >>> >>> I imagine infra is enforcing TLS > 1.0 now. >>> >>> -Taylor >>> >>> > On Jan 23, 2018, at 7:46 PM, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > >>> > Stig, the script doesn't also work for me, but that's not because of >>> script >>> > or jira module error. >>> > I've encountered TLSV1_ALERT_PROTOCOL_VERSION error and my python2.7 is >>> > unfortunately coupled with OpenSSL 0.9.8zh which doesn't support >>> TLSv1.2. >>> > My python3.6 is coupled with OpenSSL 1.0.2l but the script is not >>> > compatible with python 3. Maybe I need to modify the script to be >>> > compatible with python3.6. >>> > >>> > cc. to Taylor, assuming that we are getting same error. >>> > >>> > - Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) >>> > >>> > 2018년 1월 24일 (수) 오전 8:21, Stig Rohde Døssing <[email protected]>님이 >>> 작성: >>> > >>> >> Taylor, >>> >> >>> >> The release notes script appears to work fine for me. There are a >>> couple of >>> >> issues with fix version 1.2.0 that are not resolved, which we should >>> fix. >>> >> Note that 2710 is the release 1.2.0 epic, we might want to not mark >>> that >>> >> with a fix version so it isn't included in the release notes. >>> >> >>> >> dev-tools/release_notes.py 1.2.0 >>> >> The release is not completed since unresolved issues or improperly >>> resolved >>> >> issues were found still tagged with this release as the fix version: >>> >> Unresolved issue: STORM-2904 None >>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2904 >>> >> Unresolved issue: STORM-2710 None >>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2710 >>> >> Unresolved issue: STORM-2153 None >>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2153 >>> >> >>> >> If I ignore the unresolved issues check, I get the expected release >>> notes >>> >> >>> >> dev-tools/release_notes.py 1.2.0 > release-1.2.0.html produces >>> >> https://pste.eu/p/ZvbF.html >>> >> >>> >> 2018-01-24 0:09 GMT+01:00 Alexandre Vermeerbergen < >>> >> [email protected]> >>> >> : >>> >> >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> >>> >>> I'm afraid I my vote in 1.2.0 RC1 is a -1: >>> >>> >>> >>> Indeed metrics displayed in Storm UI from 1.2.0 RC1 are obviously >>> wrong. >>> >>> >>> >>> See for example attached picture showing "Assigned Mem (MB)" for one >>> >>> of our topologies: >>> >>> - On the left hand side we have Storm 1.1.0 showing 2112 MB on each >>> >>> host, which sounds "normal" to us (in line with what we had with >>> >>> previous Storm 1.0.3 version) >>> >>> - On the right hand side we have Storm 1.2.0 RC1 showing 65 MB on >>> >>> each host, which sound completely wrong ! >>> >>> >>> >>> And I have similar concerns on the statistics on bolts, for example on >>> >>> a bolt of our topology in charge of writing logs into HBase, we have: >>> >>> >>> >>> With Storm 1.1.0, capacity (last 10 min): 0.090 ; Execute Latency >>> (ms): >>> >>> 0.029 >>> >>> With Storm 1.2.0, capacity (last 10 min): 438.956 ; Execute Latency >>> >>> (ms): 197.840 >>> >>> >>> >>> Am I the only one to find weird numbers in Storm UI 1.2.0 ? >>> >>> >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Alexandre Vermeerbergen >>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>
