Thanks Steve. I see now that the branch cut was way back in October so I definitely understand your frustration here!
This made me realize that HDFS-16832 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-16832>, which resolves a very similar issue as the aforementioned HDFS-16923, is also missing from the RC. I erroneously marked it with a fix version of 3.3.5 -- it was before the initial 3.3.5 RC was made and I didn't notice the branch was cut. My apologies for that. I've pushed both HDFS-16832 and HDFS-16932 to branch-3.3.5, so they are ready if/when an RC3 is cut. In the meantime, I tested for RC2 that a local cluster of NN + standby + observer + QJM works as expected for some basic HDFS commands. On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 2:52 AM Steve Loughran <ste...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote: > shipping broken hdfs isn't something we'd want to do, but if we can be > confident that all other issues can be addressed in RC3 then I'd be happy. > > On Fri, 3 Mar 2023 at 05:09, Ayush Saxena <ayush...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I will highlight that I am completely fed up with doing this release and > >> really want to get it out the way -for which I depend on support from as > >> many other developers as possible. > > > > > > hmm, I can feel the pain. I tried to find if there is any config or any > > workaround which can dodge this HDFS issue, but unfortunately couldn't > find > > any. If someone does a getListing with needLocation and the file doesn't > > exist at Observer he is gonna get a NPE rather than a FNF, It isn't just > > the exception, AFAIK Observer reads have some logic around handling FNF > > specifically, that it attempts Active NN or something like that in such > > cases, So, that will be broken as well for this use case. > > > > Now, there is no denying the fact there is an issue on the HDFS side, and > > it has already been too much work on your side, so you can argue that it > > might not be a very frequent use case or so. It's your call. > > > > Just sharing, no intentions of saying you should do that, But as an RM > > "nobody" can force you for a new iteration of a RC, it is gonna be your > > call and discretion. As far as I know a release can not be vetoed by > > "anybody" as per the apache by laws.( > > https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval). Even > > our bylaws say that product release requires a Lazy Majority not a > > Consensus Approval. > > > > So, you have a way out. You guys are 2 already and 1 I will give you a > > pass, in case you are really in a state: ''Get me out of this mess" > state, > > my basic validations on x86 & Aarch64 both are passing as of now, > couldn't > > reach the end for any of the RC's > > > > -Ayush > > > > On Fri, 3 Mar 2023 at 08:41, Viraj Jasani <vjas...@apache.org> wrote: > > > >> While this RC is not going to be final, I just wanted to share the > results > >> of the testing I have done so far with RC1 and RC2. > >> > >> * Signature: ok > >> * Checksum : ok > >> * Rat check (1.8.0_341): ok > >> - mvn clean apache-rat:check > >> * Built from source (1.8.0_341): ok > >> - mvn clean install -DskipTests > >> * Built tar from source (1.8.0_341): ok > >> - mvn clean package -Pdist -DskipTests -Dtar -Dmaven.javadoc.skip=true > >> > >> * Built images using the tarball, installed and started all of Hdfs, JHS > >> and Yarn components > >> * Ran Hbase (latest 2.5) tests against Hdfs, ran RowCounter Mapreduce > job > >> * Hdfs CRUD tests > >> * MapReduce wordcount job > >> > >> * Ran S3A tests with scale profile against us-west-2: > >> mvn clean verify -Dparallel-tests -DtestsThreadCount=8 -Dscale > >> > >> ITestS3AConcurrentOps#testParallelRename is timing out after ~960s. This > >> is > >> consistently failing, looks like a recent regression. > >> I was also able to repro on trunk, will create Jira. > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 9:59 AM Steve Loughran > >> <ste...@cloudera.com.invalid> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > Mukund and I have put together a release candidate (RC2) for Hadoop > >> 3.3.5. > >> > > >> > We need anyone who can to verify the source and binary artifacts, > >> > including those JARs staged on maven, the site documentation and the > >> arm64 > >> > tar file. > >> > > >> > The RC is available at: > >> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hadoop/hadoop-3.3.5-RC2/ > >> > > >> > The git tag is release-3.3.5-RC2, commit 72f8c2a4888 > >> > > >> > The maven artifacts are staged at > >> > > >> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachehadoop-1369/ > >> > > >> > You can find my public key at: > >> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/hadoop/common/KEYS > >> > > >> > Change log > >> > > >> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hadoop/hadoop-3.3.5-RC2/CHANGELOG.md > >> > > >> > Release notes > >> > > >> > > >> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/hadoop/hadoop-3.3.5-RC2/RELEASENOTES.md > >> > > >> > This is off branch-3.3 and is the first big release since 3.3.2. > >> > > >> > As to what changed since the RC1 attempt last week > >> > > >> > > >> > 1. Version fixup in JIRA (credit due to Takanobu Asanuma there) > >> > 2. HADOOP-18470. Remove HDFS RBF text in the 3.3.5 index.md file > >> > 3. Revert "HADOOP-18590. Publish SBOM artifacts (#5281)" (creating > >> build > >> > issues in maven 3.9.0) > >> > 4. HADOOP-18641. Cloud connector dependency and LICENSE fixup. > >> (#5429) > >> > > >> > > >> > Note, because the arm64 binaries are built separately on a different > >> > platform and JVM, their jar files may not match those of the x86 > >> > release -and therefore the maven artifacts. I don't think this is > >> > an issue (the ASF actually releases source tarballs, the binaries are > >> > there for help only, though with the maven repo that's a bit blurred). > >> > > >> > The only way to be consistent would actually untar the x86.tar.gz, > >> > overwrite its binaries with the arm stuff, retar, sign and push out > >> > for the vote. Even automating that would be risky. > >> > > >> > Please try the release and vote. The vote will run for 5 days. > >> > > >> > Steve and Mukund > >> > > >> > > >
