I see that 1379 affects 1.4.3 and it looks like it’s being fixed for 1.6.0.
Was this by any chance fixed in 1.4.4 or somehow not apply?
Thanks,
Aaron
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 11:56 PM, Aaron Cordova aaroncord...@koverse.comwrote:
I see that 1379 affects 1.4.3 and it looks like it’s being fixed for 1.6.0.
Was this by any chance fixed in 1.4.4 or somehow not apply?
AFAICT, it only got fixed in master. I don't see anything in the related
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15245/
---
(Updated Nov. 6, 2013, 2:57 p.m.)
Review request for accumulo, Sean Busbey,
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-1379
- David 'Helpful Links' Medinets
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Sean Busbey bus...@cloudera.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 11:56 PM, Aaron Cordova aaroncord...@koverse.com
wrote:
I see that 1379 affects 1.4.3 and it looks like it’s
I'm with Sean, we should file new JIRAs to backport the fix.
-Joey
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Sean Busbey bus...@cloudera.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 11:56 PM, Aaron Cordova
aaroncord...@koverse.comwrote:
I see that 1379 affects 1.4.3 and it looks like it’s being fixed for
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15279/
---
Review request for accumulo.
Bugs: ACCUMULO-1556
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15279/#review28290
---
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15279/#review28296
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- John Vines
On Nov. 6, 2013, 7:02 p.m., Bill
On Nov. 6, 2013, 8 p.m., John Vines wrote:
Ship It!
Grr, misclicked and I don't seem to be able to delete it...
- John
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15279/#review28296
On Nov. 6, 2013, 8 p.m., John Vines wrote:
Ship It!
John Vines wrote:
Grr, misclicked and I don't seem to be able to delete it...
Seriously hating review board, ate the rest of my comment.
My issues are Busbey's issues. I don't think the thread safe ones are that high
priority, but
On Nov. 6, 2013, 2:49 p.m., Sean Busbey wrote:
src/server/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/server/util/Initialize.java,
lines 23-25
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15279/diff/1/?file=379597#file379597line23
please don't include formatting fixes unrelatd to the change.
The Eclipse
On Nov. 6, 2013, 2:49 p.m., Sean Busbey wrote:
src/server/src/test/java/org/apache/accumulo/server/util/InitializeTest.java,
line 31
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15279/diff/1/?file=379598#file379598line31
Include a note that this test class is not threadsafe.
The
On Nov. 6, 2013, 7:49 p.m., Sean Busbey wrote:
src/server/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/server/util/Initialize.java,
lines 23-25
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15279/diff/1/?file=379597#file379597line23
please don't include formatting fixes unrelatd to the change.
Bill
On Nov. 6, 2013, 8 p.m., John Vines wrote:
Ship It!
John Vines wrote:
Grr, misclicked and I don't seem to be able to delete it...
John Vines wrote:
Seriously hating review board, ate the rest of my comment.
My issues are Busbey's issues. I don't think the thread
On Nov. 6, 2013, 7:49 p.m., Sean Busbey wrote:
src/server/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/server/util/Initialize.java,
lines 23-25
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15279/diff/1/?file=379597#file379597line23
please don't include formatting fixes unrelatd to the change.
Bill
On Nov. 6, 2013, 2:49 p.m., Sean Busbey wrote:
src/server/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/server/util/Initialize.java,
lines 23-25
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15279/diff/1/?file=379597#file379597line23
please don't include formatting fixes unrelatd to the change.
Bill
On Nov. 6, 2013, 7:49 p.m., Sean Busbey wrote:
src/server/src/test/java/org/apache/accumulo/server/util/InitializeTest.java,
line 31
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15279/diff/1/?file=379598#file379598line31
Include a note that this test class is not threadsafe.
The
I recently posted a review for ACCUMULO-1009 (
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15245/), and I added the accumulo group as a
reviewer, but that email went to the old incubator list (as noted by
others). It doesn't look to me like it came through to the real dev
list...is there something special I
On Nov. 6, 2013, 2:49 p.m., Sean Busbey wrote:
src/server/src/test/java/org/apache/accumulo/server/util/InitializeTest.java,
line 31
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15279/diff/1/?file=379598#file379598line31
Include a note that this test class is not threadsafe.
The
a committer should file a INFRA ticket to fix the group to point at
dev@accumulo instead of the incubator list.
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Michael Berman mber...@sqrrl.com wrote:
I recently posted a review for ACCUMULO-1009 (
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15245/), and I added the accumulo
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15279/
---
(Updated Nov. 6, 2013, 3:47 p.m.)
Review request for accumulo.
Changes
That was the original I submitted while Berman was at Strata. I asked him
to resubmit to he could manage the patch.
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Billie Rinaldi billie.rina...@gmail.comwrote:
I received the review via the dev list with subject Re: Review Request
15245: ACCUMULO-1009 - add
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15279/#review28312
---
Ship it!
Hia guys,
Whats the recommended setting for HDFS durable sync CDH4.4 or how do I find
out?
Cloudera CDH 3u0-3u3 true
Cloudera CDH 3u4dfs.support.appendtrue
Cheers,
Miguel
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15279/#review28316
---
On Nov. 6, 2013, 4:12 p.m., kturner wrote:
src/server/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/server/util/Initialize.java,
line 168
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15279/diff/2/?file=379903#file379903line168
It would also be useful to include the value of
Property.INSTANCE_DFS_DIR in
The setting is the same as the one for Apache Hadoop 2.0.5-alpha and
2.2.0 (dfs.support.append), but it defaults to true in CDH4 anyway, so
you shouldn't have to change it.
If you have more CDH specific questions, you can use the CDH mailing
list or public forum. Ping me off-list if you need a
Does CDH default to that the config file or just the hardcoded default? If
it's the latter, it still needs to be put in because older versions had no
single place to look in to determine defaults so tservers will fail to
start if it cannot find one of those settings.
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 4:34
Thanks Joey, Ill try that tomorrow. and report logs/findings.
It's just the README that's incomplete.
I missed it in my update of
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-1637.
On 11/6/13, 4:39 PM, John Vines wrote:
Does CDH default to that the config file or just the hardcoded default? If
it's the latter, it still needs to be put in because
I’ll file a ticket. If Sean fixes it I’d happily review.
On Nov 6, 2013, at 4:49 PM, Christopher ctubb...@apache.org wrote:
+1 to to backport the bugfix.
To David 'Helpful Links' Medinets:
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/goto-bug-for-jira/ocjecccldncbghkfbplmopcgafnfffoc
--
Weird. I was seeing them go to dev@a.a.o.
But one of Bill Havanki's reviews that came directly to me is also going
to accumulo-dev@.i.a.o
On 11/6/13, 4:04 PM, Billie Rinaldi wrote:
The one I got today was from Michael Berman and contained the text created
new review created so I get
It's set in the hdfs-default.xml that comes in the
hadoop-hdfs-version.jar. So if the tserver picks it up by creating a
Configuration() object, it should see it.
-Joey
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 4:39 PM, John Vines vi...@apache.org wrote:
Does CDH default to that the config file or just the
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15279/#review28322
---
On Nov. 6, 2013, 5:08 p.m., kturner wrote:
src/server/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/server/util/Initialize.java,
line 162
https://reviews.apache.org/r/15279/diff/3/?file=380105#file380105line162
Accumulo uses a dir within a filesystem. It does not init an entire
I think it would be nice to separate what client API users need from the
the provided dependencies issue. It seems like whatever module client
projects depend on should itself only have dependencies on things that it
actually needs. If it doesn't need hadoop, then it shouldn't declare it as
a
The provided make sense for hadoop to pick up dependencies. To a less
extent, it makes sense for ZK.
However, as someone who is using accumulo for a project, I would love to
have a client library that is as sparse as possible to avoid having to deal
with resource conflicts.
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013
I'm a little lost here I think.
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Michael Berman mber...@sqrrl.com wrote:
As far as the provided question goes, it seems to me that the only reason
to mark a dep provided is if we think developers will *usually* want to
compile against different versions.
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Michael Berman mber...@sqrrl.com wrote:
I think it would be nice to separate what client API users need from the
the provided dependencies issue. It seems like whatever module client
projects depend on should itself only have dependencies on things that it
We support different versions of hadoop and we already need the HDFS
classpath for the conf files, so we might as well use the ones there
instead of bundling them up and potentially causing conflicts if something
strange happens in the hadoop client api.
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 6:46 PM,
This has nothing to do with packaging. It has to do with developer
workspaces and default dependency resolution using maven.
I'm not suggesting a change to packaging. The declaration of the scope
is independent of packaging.
--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
On Wed, Nov 6,
Those can go in 1.5.2.
--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 1:15 AM, Sean Busbey bus...@cloudera.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 11:03 PM, Josh Elser josh.el...@gmail.com wrote:
I've perused over the closed tickets a couple of times now. Nothing
Maybe I misunderstood Sean's suggestion. I thought he meant wait until
a little time after 1.6.0 release, in case post-release bugs arise. If
that's what he meant, I disagree. Those can go in 1.5.2.
However, if he meant wait until 1.6.0, so that bugs found in testing
1.6.0 can be fixed in 1.5.1
On Nov 6, 2013 6:04 PM, Joey Echeverria joey...@clouderagovt.com wrote:
...
If I depend on Accumulo in my maven project, then I shouldn't need to
depend on Hadoop unless the APIs I'm using leak that dependency or I
have an explicit dependency on Hadoop elsewhere.
We currently leak the Text
44 matches
Mail list logo
