On Sat, 4 Mar 2023 at 01:47, Erik Krogen <xkro...@apache.org> wrote: > 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. >
thanks. > > In the meantime, I tested for RC2 that a local cluster of NN + standby + > observer + QJM works as expected for some basic HDFS commands. > OK. Could you have a go with a (locally built) patch release > > 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 >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >
