Re: Slack for Accumulo

IIRC anybody who has an @a.o address can send invites. On Mon, Dec 10, 2018, 4:36 PM Mike Walch wrote: > I am cool with an Accumulo channel on the-asf.slack.com. I was able to > join easily using my apache email address. How can users without an > apache.org email address join the 'the-asf' wo

Re: [DRAFT][ANNOUNCE] Apache Accumulo 2.0.0-alpha-1

I would not send to a@a.o On Mon, Oct 15, 2018, 12:35 PM Keith Turner wrote: > Sounds good. > On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 1:16 PM Christopher wrote: > > > > The Apache Accumulo project is pleased to announce the release of > > Apache Accumulo 2.0.0-alpha-1! This *alpha* release is a preview for > >

Re: [DRAFT] [REPORT] Apache Accumulo - July 2018

PM Josh Elser wrote: > > > +1 definitely. Especially since the organizers went through the proper > > TM approval steps. > > > > I'd suggest expanding that, in addition to no new committers/PMC > > members, to include an action item. e.g. Should we make a pass over >

Re: [DRAFT] [REPORT] Apache Accumulo - July 2018

Worth mentioning upcoming summit? On Sun, Jul 1, 2018, 3:54 PM Michael Wall wrote: > The Apache Accumulo PMC decided to draft its quarterly board > reports on the dev list. Here is a draft of our report which is due > by Wednesday, Jul 11, 1 week before the board meeting on > Wednesday, Jul 18.

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

https://accumulo.apache.org/downloads/ > [3]: https://checker.apache.org/dist/unsummed.html > > On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 11:13 PM Mike Drob wrote: > > > -0 > > > > please do not publish md5 sums > > please add missing sha256 sums > > >

Re: [VOTE] Apache Accumulo 1.9.0-rc1

-0 please do not publish md5 sums please add missing sha256 sums apache release policy: http://www.apache.org/dev/release-distribution#sigs-and-sums On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 11:37 AM, Mike Walch wrote: > +1 > > * Verified sha1 & md5 hashes matched > * Verified signatures > * Ran binary tarball

Re: Export control disclaimer in README

We need it for the crypto libraries used for encryption at rest stuff. If you want to remove the disclaimer then you have to tear out those pieces as well. Maybe this is not necessary any more with java 8 and changed default security policies? Would be good to check with Apache Legal before making

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove tracer service (not instrumentation)

Do we have a migration story ready to go for folks that are used to seeing traces on the monitor? On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 5:17 PM, Tony Kurc wrote: > I like this idea. > > On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 5:09 PM, Christopher wrote: > > > Devs, > > > > (This discussion is somewhat of a spinoff of our pr

Re: [DISCUSS] Switch to GitHub issues after trial

gt; > > > > > > > On 2018/03/02 01:10:16, Christopher wrote: > > > Is your concern significant enough to oppose the proposed action from > > Mike > > > Walch? > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 1, 2018, 19:56 Mike Drob wrote: > > > > > &g

Re: [DISCUSS] Switch to GitHub issues after trial

My only concern is of the sort that contributors will be expected to have different workflows based on what they are working on. On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 11:41 AM, Mike Walch wrote: > I would like to start up this discussion again. I don't think we have > reached consensus on moving the primary Ac

Re: [DISCUSS] Switch to GitHub issues after trial

ever, I think the > > > benefits are worth the switch. You can fight this trend but I think > it's > > > like fighting the move from Subversion to Git. > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 7:04 PM, Josh Elser wrote: > > > &g

Re: [DISCUSS] Switch to GitHub issues after trial

the move from Subversion to Git. > > On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 7:04 PM, Josh Elser wrote: > > > On 2/15/18 6:18 PM, Christopher wrote: > > > >> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 5:08 PM Josh Elser wrote: > >> > >> On 2/15/18 4:56 PM, Christopher wrote: > >

Re: [DISCUSS] Switch to GitHub issues after trial

On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 3:05 PM, Christopher wrote: > On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 2:55 PM Mike Drob wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 12:31 PM, Christopher > wrote: > > > > > While I think Spark's reasons might be interesting, I find it hard to > >

Re: [DISCUSS] Switch to GitHub issues after trial

Anyway, please please address my first two point, and at least consider the third. Not necessarily you, Christopher; open question to the proponents. Mike > On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 1:17 PM Mike Drob wrote: > > > Before switching to GitHub issues, I would like somebody to do an >

Re: [DISCUSS] Switch to GitHub issues after trial

Before switching to GitHub issues, I would like somebody to do an investigation into why Apache Spark isn't using them. They are heavy heavy heavy users of PRs, but don't use issues and I'd like to see if they've already done the leg-work on figuring this out. Not saying that we need to be like Sp

Re: Additional options for issue tracking

@josh - How do you feel about move from JIRA to GH Issues completely? On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 3:26 PM, Josh Elser wrote: > I believe I already stated -1 the last time this was brought up. > > Using two issue trackers is silly. > > > On 2/14/18 3:30 PM, Mike Walch wrote: > >> I want to enable Git

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving away from Thrift

Apache projects are highly discouraged from hostile forks of other ASF projects. I'm not sure if there's a written foundation policy for it or if it's simply a gentleman's agreement, but I've seen it come up in other places and it has never been pretty. Which alternatives are you considering, Chri

Re: Updated Accumulo People page

Can't we query for github id's via id.apache.org or some other infra service? On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Mike Walch wrote: > I made some updates to the Accumulo people page. > > https://accumulo.apache.org/people/ > > I removed the 'username' column for contributors and changed the column

Re: Re[2]: Assign myself to work ACCUMULO-2907

Done. You should be able to assign yourself now. On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 3:34 PM, J. Mark Owens wrote: > jmark99 > > > > -- Original Message -- > From: "Mike Drob" > To: "Accumulo Dev List" > Sent: 9/18/2017 4:33:10 PM > Subject: Re:

Re: Assign myself to work ACCUMULO-2907

What is your apache jira id? On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 3:29 PM, J. Mark Owens wrote: > Hi Mike, > > I have an Apache Jira account. But the Accumulo issues page is not > displaying the 'Assign to me" option underneath the 'Unassigned' area on > the right. Whereas on the Apache NiFi project page

Re: GitHub notifications

I'm not subscribed to notifications@ according to https://whimsy.apache.org/ committers/subscribe Can you double check that they're going there and not dev@ On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 6:26 PM, Christopher wrote: > notificati...@accumulo.apache.org > > On Tue, Sep 5, 2017, 18:

GitHub notifications

I'm getting a ton of new pull request notifications. Which list are they going to do that I can set my filters appropriately. Mike

Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox

What has changed about the state of Accumulo or GitBox since the last time we had this discussion? Not saying no here, curious as to why you think we should revisit though. On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 3:36 PM, Mike Walch wrote: > I think we should revisit the discussion of using Apache GitBox for >

Re: [DISCUSS] Hadoop 3 and our dependencies generally

There is a 3.0.0-alpha4 release currently available as a non-snapshot version. I'm not sure it comes with API stability guarantees at all, IIRC the Hadoop community is planning on providing that for their betas. Mike On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Christopher wrote: > +1 from me, too, but I'

Re: [DISCUSS] Periodic table exports

What's the risk that we are trying to address? Storing data locally won't help in case of a namenode failure. If you have a failure that's severe enough to actually kill blocks but not severe enough that your HDFS is still up, that's a pretty narrow window. How do you test that your backups are g

Re: Failing Jenkins?

java.io.IOException : Cannot run program "/usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64//bin/java" (in directory "/home/jenkins/jenkins-slave/workspace/Accumulo-Master"): error=2, No such file or directory On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 7:32 PM, Ch

Re: [DISCUSS] Question about 1.7 bugfix releases

Are there potentially destabilizing new features in 1.8 that are not present in 1.7.x? On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Christopher wrote: > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 12:39 PM Sean Busbey wrote: > > > Why do we consider 1.8.1 stable? > > > > > > > I would consider 1.8.1 stable (or, at least as stab

Re: [DISCUSS] Question about 1.7 bugfix releases

As a specific example of folks looking at 1.7.3 as stable and seeing 1.8.x as unstable, we have a current thread on the dev list - https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/6e83fc644437c41ace5847d1cd5622f8174f7e0f8dfd1a30a8fd7116@%3Cdev.accumulo.apache.org%3E Right or wrong, that's the way things are r

Re: [DISCUSS] Pull Request Guidelines

For what will be checked, maybe we ask nicely that somebody hook us in to Apache Yetus and get a "standard" suite of checks for free, complete with automated feedback. On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Dave Marion wrote: > I have used Hadoop's documentation on this subject for submitting patches.

Re: [DISCUSS] Pull Request Guidelines

> 1. Adherence to code formatting rules (link to formatting rules) Can we let checkstyle handle this instead of humans worrying about it? On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 10:25 AM, Marc P. wrote: > Dave, > I don't agree that stylistic changes are something to ignore. There may > be cases where somethin

Re: Library for cryptographically securing data stored in Accumulo

Neat stuff, Scott. Before we dive in too deeply, how does this differ from the native encryption offered inside of Accumulo? Mike On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Ruoti, Scott - 0553 - MITLL < scott.ru...@ll.mit.edu> wrote: > All, > > > > Over the past several years, MIT Lincoln Laboratory has

Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox

way to convince me is probably to look up our JIRA downtime vs GH downtime for the past month or year. Mike D On Fri, May 5, 2017, 4:05 PM Mike Drob wrote: > >Requiring 2 accounts and unnecessary copy and pasting between > the sites are flaws in the process. > Of note, we don'

Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox

> > > > e.g. we missed issue $x in the 2.x.x. release notes because it had the > > > "releasenotes" GH label and not a "releasenotes" JIRA label (or vice > > > versa). I think a similar issue would come up with "fixVersion" and > > > &q

Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox

Changing the repo URL seems fairly disruptive to me, fwiw. Would need to send notice to the dev list with instructions how to update your git remotes probably. On Fri, May 5, 2017, 10:30 AM Christopher wrote: > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 10:50 AM Josh Elser wrote: > > > > > > > Christopher wrote: >

Re: [Release Test - No Vote] Accumulo 1.7.3-rc0

Yes, please add your signing key to the KEYS file. You will need to use svn for that. On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Ed Coleman wrote: > I've run through the release process using: > > ./assemble/build.sh --create-release-candidate > > The artifacts have been published and the branch pushed to

Re: [DISCUSS] Time to RELEASE 1.7.3?

release early release often On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Josh Elser wrote: > SGTM > > > Ed Coleman wrote: > >> With all of the work that Michael Wall has done towards releasing 1.8.1, >> 1.7.2 is also in good shape and I would like to start the release process >> for a 1.7.3, unless there are

Re: january 2017 board report draft

+1 On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Keith Turner wrote: > +1 > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 11:46 AM, Billie Rinaldi wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > The Apache Accumulo PMC has decided to start drafting its quarterly board > > reports on the dev list. Here is a draft of our report which is due on > >

Re: [DISCUSS] Would a visibility histogram on a table be harmful?

Hiding this behind the SystemPermission.SYSTEM permission might be sufficient. In a situation where Accumulo data is on an encrypted volume, or the rfiles themselves are encrypted, then a root user wouldn't be able to read the rfiles to generate the histograms. This matches my initial mental model

Re: [DISCUSS] Would a visibility histogram on a table be harmful?

I've always been under the impression that accumulo was not supposed to confirm the existence of data that a user did not have permission to read. On Tue, Oct 11, 2016, 2:20 PM Josh Elser wrote: > Today at Accumulo Summit, our own Russ Weeks gave a talk. One topic he > mentioned was the lack of

Re: BatchWriter Auth/Audit Question

s be the same in that > case. > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 4:37 PM Christopher wrote: > > > Correct. That code is not executed in the write path. It should only be > > executed for the APIs where a user (typically an admin) is explicitly > > checking another user's p

Re: BatchWriter Auth/Audit Question

..but as it is now, I'm always > > > authenticated and I'm causing more work for the server. Perhaps we let > > the > > > natural exception that's thrown stop the client ( if it's being a good > > > client ). I think the 25 per cent improvement

Re: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.8.0-rc2

Did this fix your count discrepancy? On Thu, Aug 18, 2016, 10:53 AM Michael Wall wrote: > Ok, the run-verify MR took over 5 hours. I think muchos needs some tweaks > in yarn settings. > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Josh Elser wrote: > > > Uhh, woah. That's a rather big discrepancy. Yes,

BatchWriter Auth/Audit Question

Devs, I was recently running a 1.7.2 cluster under a heavy write workload and noticed a _lot_ of audit messages showing up in the logs. After some digging, I found that one of the causes is the following call chain: TabletServerBatchWriter::sendMutationsToTabletServer calls TabletServer.ThriftCli

Re: Custom Java SecurityManager permissions

Oops, hit send too soon. I thought you were asking about the security policy that we used to ship with. All things considered, I'd probably axe these too, though. On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 9:41 PM, Mike Drob wrote: > +1 > > I do not believe the initial implementation was very

Re: Custom Java SecurityManager permissions

+1 I do not believe the initial implementation was very well tested in terms of security. IIRC we kept adding permissions until CI ran without errors on a very old version, so it is not guaranteed to run with modern versions of Accumulo, given that we evolve our usage regularly. On Mon, Aug 15, 2

Re: [DISCUSS] Time for a 1.8.0 release?

I had all of the tests passing at least once for 1.7.2, some had to be rerun however. On Wednesday, August 3, 2016, Christopher wrote: > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 5:47 PM Sean Busbey > wrote: > > > My understanding was that maintenance releases (aka double dot, e.g. > > 1.7.2) had relaxed criteria

Re: Board report draft July 2016

Wasn't there also talk of a 1.6.x release coming? On Tue, Jul 12, 2016, 2:08 PM wrote: > +1 LGTM. > > - Original Message - > > From: "Billie Rinaldi" > To: "Accumulo Dev List" > Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2016 12:48:51 PM > Subject: Board report draft July 2016 > > Hello Apache Accumulo c

Re: ClientConfiguration doesn't check classpath

> classpath, particularly in containerized execution environments where the > config file can't be provided via the filesystem. Regardless of what we do, > it should be intuitive and well-defined, though. > > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 5:42 PM Mike Drob wrote: > > >

ClientConfiguration doesn't check classpath

Devs, Is there a reason that ClientConfiguration looks in the user's home directory, and for environment variables ACCUMULO_CONF_DIR and ACCUMULO_HOME to find a configuration but can't be controlled via system properties or the classpath? I'm working on some unit tests and keep seeing 'WARN org.a

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Accumulo 1.7.2 Released

orget to fwd the corrected version to announce@a.o, please. >> >> Mike Drob wrote: >> >>> Whoops, meant to say that we are proud to announce the release of >>> Accumulo version 1.7.2! >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 10:47 AM, Mike Drob >>

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Accumulo 1.7.2 Released

Whoops, meant to say that we are proud to announce the release of Accumulo version 1.7.2! On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 10:47 AM, Mike Drob wrote: > The Accumulo team is proud to announce the release of Accumulo version > 1.7.1! > > This release contains over 30 bugfixes and improvement

[ANNOUNCE] Apache Accumulo 1.7.2 Released

The Accumulo team is proud to announce the release of Accumulo version 1.7.1! This release contains over 30 bugfixes and improvements over 1.7.1, and is backwards-compatible with 1.7.0 and 1.7.1. Existing users of 1.7.1 are encouraged to upgrade immediately. This version is now available in Maven

Re: Feedback for 1.7.2 release notes

Thanks. Changes made and notes pushed to the website. On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Michael Wall wrote: > Follow on to > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/962102c6c3745b759a2d94d59d40b7f213f2013bfdc7f9d6bc7ef48f@%3Cdev.accumulo.apache.org%3E > > Feedback for draft release notes at > http

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.2-rc2

> > On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Mike Drob wrote: > > > This vote passes with 5 +1. > > > > Maven repository has been promoted. > > Release tag has been pushed, but this is the wrong one. See INFRA-12153. > > Artifacts have been pushed to dist. >

[RESULT] [VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.2-rc2

and marked it as released. Draft release notes available at https://github.com/madrob/accumulo/blob/gh-pages/release_notes/1.7.2.md I'll wait for the tag to be fixed and release notes to be +1'd before I send out an [ANN] thread. Am I missing anything? On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 11:31 PM,

Re: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.2-rc2

> The good: > > > > * Can run with bin tarball out of the box. Simple write/read/update/read > > works in the shell. > > * `mvn verify -Psunny` passes on src tarball > > * xsums/sigs are fine. > > * Good on you using the long-form keyid > > * Verified no Th

Re: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.2-rc2

/read/update/read > works in the shell. > * `mvn verify -Psunny` passes on src tarball > * xsums/sigs are fine. > * Good on you using the long-form keyid > * Verified no Thrift changes (accounting for the !thrift) > * Verified no changes to public API code (to avoid running japi

[VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.2-rc2

Accumulo Developers, Please consider the following candidate for Accumulo 1.7.2. All content generated via assemble/build.sh --create-release-candidate -P '!thrift' Changes from 1.7.2-rc1 ACCUMULO-4346 correct LICENSE file for source to include text of reference ACCUMULO-4347 Crypto notific

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.2-rc1

ify$Counts > REFERENCED=18521922508 > UNREFERENCED=7993099 > > > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 3:28 PM, Mike Drob wrote: > > > Accumulo Developers, > > > > Please consider the following candidate for Accumulo 1.7.2. > > > > All content

Re: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.2-rc1

seems like we > should be consistent for things that are equally applicable in the > two). > > > > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Mike Drob wrote: > > Accumulo Developers, > > > > Please consider the following candid

Re: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.2-rc1

48C0C6EF362B9E > > Is this what you intended? > > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 3:28 PM Mike Drob wrote: > > > Accumulo Developers, > > > > Please consider the following candidate for Accumulo 1.7.2. > > > > All content generated via > >

Re: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.2-rc1

s for putting this together, Mike. > > What kind of testing have you done so far and how have the results looked? > > Mike Drob wrote: > >> Accumulo Developers, >> >> Please consider the following candidate for Accumulo 1.7.2. >> >> All content genera

[VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.2-rc1

Accumulo Developers, Please consider the following candidate for Accumulo 1.7.2. All content generated via assemble/build.sh --create-release-candidate -P '!thrift' Git Commit: a49291b8aa85b81650f2b79f80b400e10b594795 Branch: 1.7.2-rc1 If this vote passes, a gpg-signed tag will be c

Re: Bigger Jenkins

I've been trying to get the 1.7 ITs to pass on a Jenkins instance, but keep hitting various timeout limits. I'm currently running on an AWS m3.2xlarge can't get my run to complete within even 4 hours. Does anybody else have experience with this branch and know what reasonable upper and lower bounds

Re: Minimum supported Hadoop?

ncy > older than 2.6.1, how much can we really say 1.7.2 works on those older > versions? > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 11:50 PM Mike Drob wrote: > > > I would not feel comfortable bumping the min req Hadoop in 1.7.2 > > > > On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 6:39 PM Christopher

Re: Minimum supported Hadoop?

I would not feel comfortable bumping the min req Hadoop in 1.7.2 On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 6:39 PM Christopher wrote: > Perhaps. But the tests pass with 2.6.1, I think. Shouldn't be that much > different in terms of support, so I figured go with the minimum we can test > with. FWIW, this affects 1.

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 1.7.2

, ACCUMULO-4314, and ACCUMULO-2990 may be the only issues worth waiting on. Mike On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 11:43 PM, Keith Turner wrote: > i would like to get ACCUMULO-4314 in for 1.7.2. > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4314 > > On Wed, May 25, 2016 at

[DISCUSS] Release 1.7.2

Following up on the 1.8.0 release thread, maybe we should also get a 1.7.2 release going as well. I'll probably go through and move issues out to 1.7.3 either this week or next week. Does anybody have issues that they believe are blockers for 1.7.2? Mike

Re: [DISCUSS] Java 8 support (was Fwd: [jira] [Commented] (ACCUMULO-4177) TinyLFU-based BlockCache)

ypes/APIs was exactly the point -- > we got here from ACCUMULO-4177 which does exactly that. > > > Mike Drob wrote: > >> I agree with Shawn's implied statement -- why bother dropping Java 7 in >> any >> Accumulo 1.x if we can't actually make use of Jav

Re: [DISCUSS] Java 8 support (was Fwd: [jira] [Commented] (ACCUMULO-4177) TinyLFU-based BlockCache)

I agree with Shawn's implied statement -- why bother dropping Java 7 in any Accumulo 1.x if we can't actually make use of Java 8 features.until Accumulo 2.0 On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 1:29 PM, Christopher wrote: > Right, these are competing and mutually exclusive goals, so we need to > decide which

Re: [DISCUSS] Java 8 support (was Fwd: [jira] [Commented] (ACCUMULO-4177) TinyLFU-based BlockCache)

Wasn't 1.7.0 pre SemVer? On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 8:55 AM, Josh Elser wrote: > Thanks for the input, Sean. > > Playing devil's advocate: we didn't have a major version bump when we > dropped JDK6 support (in Accumulo-1.7.0). Oracle has EOL'ed java 7 back in > April 2015. Was the 6->7 upgrade diffe

Re: On the future of our commons-vfs2 dynamic classloading implementation

Have we asked them about making a release? On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 10:35 AM, Josh Elser wrote: > I was trying to test out Dylan's patch this weekend and was met with a > repeated failure of another VFS unit test due to the same race condition > we've been fighting against for years. > > A cursor

Re: [DISCUSS] What to do about encryption at rest?

> Does anybody have a good diagram showing the architecture of HDFS encryption? Related: Can we collect the digram and design docs from the various implementation JIRAs and put them up on the Accumulo website? Every time that I've needed to reference them it's been a giant pain to go find them. Ma

Re: [DISCUSS] What to do about encryption at rest?

from anybody to expend effort on this code? Even if not, we can > still make JIRAs, but they'll probably just be ignored. So, the question > for me is: which JIRAs should we make? Are we going to pursue phasing out > the code, or pursue improving it? Those are very different JIRA text. >

Re: [DISCUSS] What to do about encryption at rest?

Can we file some JIRAs to build out a suite to test this and run the necessary tests? On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Christopher wrote: > My main concern using HDFS encryption vs. built-in Accumulo implementation > is possibly performance with respect to seeks. If we encrypt our indexed > bloc

Re: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.5.4-rc2

-0 I think we should fix ACCUMULO-4003. On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 12:55 PM, John Vines wrote: > +1, license and notify issues resolved (agreed that ACCUMULO-4003 isn't a > blocker) > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 1:40 PM Sean Busbey wrote: > > > +1 > > > > * checked sigs > > * checked hashs > > * ver

Re: Docs on verifying releases

Typo: "While a release of _and_ Apache project" On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Josh Elser wrote: > Given the recent spate of licensing blunders and a question by Ed Coleman, > I made some time earlier this week to write out obligations for verifying > releases on the website. > > http://accum

Re: [VOTE] Accumulo 1.5.4-rc1

-1. Having correct licences is more important than even having code that compiles (at release time). On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Sean Busbey wrote: > On Sep 10, 2015 2:07 PM, "Christopher" wrote: > > > > > > > However, I don't know where the "willful copyright infringement" comes > > from

VFS Classloader

What's the state of the VFS Classloader (and our usage of it)? I remember that we were waiting for 2.1 to release, which I think we are still waiting on, but I can't find the JIRAs for why exactly this is important. Any pointers? Mike

Re: Branch "1.5" returns

I see [DISCUSS] threads tending to discuss either big features, or the direction of the project. There are plenty of other threads on dev@ that look more like bug reports, architecture questions, or otherwise focused on implementation details. My two kopeks. On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Christo

Re: CMS failure question

+infrastructure On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Christopher wrote: > So... what do we do when CMS fails to complete a build? > I pushed the updated javadocs to svn, which triggered CMS staging > build... but that staging build failed > (http://ci.apache.org/builders/accumulo-site-staging/builds/

Re: Separation of timing/performance tests from normal Maven build

+1 annotate categories On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Josh Elser wrote: > Was talking with Eric off-list about a recent test he added. > > Over the past two major release lines (1.6 and 1.7), there's been a > significant level of effort put forth by multiple devs to get the > integration tests

Re: [DISCUSS] HDFS operation to support Accumulo locality

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Josh Elser wrote: > Sorry in advance if I derail this, but I'm not sure what it would take to > actually implement such an operation. The initial pushback might just be > "use the block locations and assign the tablet yourself", since that's > essentially what HB

Thrift as Public API?

Do we intend for our thrift RPC implementation to be consumable as public API? This question is inspired by recent "How to get the Accumulo statistic data" thread over on user@, where we point a user at the GetMasterStats class. How stable is that in theory? I understand that in practice it proba

Re: OpenSource Accumulo Tool Licensing Help

Hi Andrew, If you have specific questions, you might be better served by asking on legal-disc...@apache.org That said, I can try to give you the 10,000 foot view. Full disclaimer: IANAL. You can choose to apply the Apache Licence (AL) to your code without submitting it to the Apache Software Fou

Fwd: Accumulo-1.7 - Build # 1 - Failure

Looks like the version of checkstyle used on Accumulo 1.7 doesn't support Java 7? Are we sure that the job is running in a Java 7 JRE? -- Forwarded message -- From: Apache Jenkins Server Date: Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 11:52 AM Subject: Accumulo-1.7 - Build # 1 - Failure To: notificati

Re: Review Request 32986: ACCUMULO-3715 Decrease sampling percentage for tracing

<https://reviews.apache.org/r/32986/#comment128875> If this property name changes, should we provide some level of support for the old name? - Mike Drob On April 8, 2015, 7:41 p.m., Billie Rinaldi wrote: > > ---

Re: 1.7.0 timeline?

Conference Driven Development! On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 5:14 PM, Josh Elser wrote: > Alright, I'll try to triage the remaining 1.7.0 tickets so we can get > testing by 4/13 at the latest. > > Possible perk: we even get it out by Accumulo Summit? > > > Christopher wrote: > >> The sooner, the better

Re: [DISCUSS] Not Deploying Monitor as a WAR

to. > > The default would still be launching a standalone webserver as is done > presently via Jetty. > > +1 > Some more inline: > > Mike Drob wrote: > >> Hey Accumulators, >> >> I was thinking about this, and couldn't find the appropriate JIRA, s

[DISCUSS] Not Deploying Monitor as a WAR

Hey Accumulators, I was thinking about this, and couldn't find the appropriate JIRA, so I'm brining it up on the mailing list. I think I'm opposed to packaging the monitor as a WAR and trusting users to figure out how to make that work. - We'll have to develop community knowledge on several tech

Re: More jenkins results

If it goes to notifications@ that is inherently a noisy list and I'm not worried about Josh taking a week off and a nightly build failing and sending an email. Christopher, would a set of keys held in escrow cover your concerns? Josh, thanks for doing this and keeping it running on your own dime.

Re: More jenkins results

I think it's valuable to see the failure notifications even without being able to make changes. I know that I generally ignore the ASF Jenkins at this point because it is (was?) too underpowered. On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Christopher wrote: > That might only be valuable if we could log o

Re: One instance, multiple Accumulo versions?

Dylan, In the 1.6 README there is a line in the Upgrading section: - Note that operations in any state will prevent an upgrade. It is safe to delete operations with status SUCCESSFUL. For others, you should restart your 1.5 cluster and allow them to finish. Looks like this never

Re: Number of tests over 1.6 branch

Hooray for more testing! Also, why did we have failures on 1.6.2? On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 8:43 AM, David Medinets wrote: > +1. Y'all are continuing to create fine software. > > On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 11:47 PM, Josh Elser wrote: > > Corey and I were chatting earlier this week and we wondered a

Re: Review Request 30382: ACCUMULO-3514 Use auto service for start

sible. Fine to do in follow on work. - Mike Drob On Jan. 30, 2015, 10:06 p.m., Christopher Tubbs wrote: > > --- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.a

Re: Review Request 30382: ACCUMULO-3514 Use auto service for start

nit: empty javadoc test/src/test/java/org/apache/accumulo/start/KeywordStartIT.java <https://reviews.apache.org/r/30382/#comment115598> Include a test for duplicate keywords? - Mike Drob On Jan. 30, 2015, 8:46 p.m., Chris

Re: Review Request 30382: ACCUMULO-3514 Use auto service for start

> On Jan. 30, 2015, 8:57 p.m., Mike Drob wrote: > > test/src/test/java/org/apache/accumulo/start/KeywordStartIT.java, line 61 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/30382/diff/3/?file=842151#file842151line61> > > > > nit: empty javadoc > > Christopher Tub

Re: Review Request 30382: ACCUMULO-3514 Use auto service for start

dMap? Or not actually bother returning a sorted map. - Mike Drob On Jan. 30, 2015, 10:06 p.m., Christopher Tubbs wrote: > > --- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:

Re: Review Request 30382: ACCUMULO-3514 Use auto service for start

java/org/apache/accumulo/start/spi/KeywordExecutable.java <https://reviews.apache.org/r/30382/#comment115348> Is this import just for the docs? - Mike Drob On Jan. 28, 2015, 10:39 p.m., Christopher Tubbs wrote: > > --- &g

Re: Review Request 30252: ACCUMULO-3531 update japi-compliance-check configs.

tps://reviews.apache.org/r/30252/#comment114375> This file is missing a license header and triggers the rat plugin. - Mike Drob On Jan. 25, 2015, 9:38 a.m., Sean Busbey wrote: > > --- > This is an automatically generated e-mail.

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >