Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.12 candidate 0

We should consider not using md5 for the next RC as per the ASF policy: https://www.apache.org/dev/release-distribution.html#sigs-and-sums -Flavio > On 26 Mar 2018, at 21:37, Abraham Fine wrote: > > Thank you everyone for your votes to far. Due to the issues that

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.12 candidate 0

Thank you everyone for your votes to far. Due to the issues that Michael Han pointed out I will cancel this RC and release a new one with the correct release notes. Expect the new RC very soon. Thanks, Abe On Mon, Mar 26, 2018, at 12:29, Patrick Hunt wrote: > +1 - sig/xsum verify, RAT looks

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.12 candidate 0

+1 - sig/xsum verify, RAT looks ok, was able to build/test successfully under jdk7/mac. Tested out a few deployment combinations and it seemed ok. Manually verified swapping data and datalogdir resulted in the server not coming up and human readable error in the logs. Patrick On Thu, Mar 22,

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.12 candidate 0

Hi Abe, Thanks for putting this important release together. +1 I've run the following tests: - verified signatures, - all unit tests passed on Mac (java only) and Ubuntu 16.04 (java & c++ successful), - tested standalone and 3-node cluster, - verified the fix & validation of datadir/logdir

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.12 candidate 0

-1 because release note is not correct. ZOOKEEPER-2948 and ZOOKEEPER-2806 should be included in release notes and corresponding JIRA needs update. Other than this, rc0 looks good. - verified xsum/sig - go through release notes. - verified cluster with different sizes. - verified with few 4lw

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.12 candidate 0

I just ran the test suite again - there was no test failure. So +1 from my side. On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 9:54 AM, Abraham Fine wrote: > Do they always fail when run with the rest of the test suite or is it > inconsistent? > > The reason I ask is that the failure you are

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.12 candidate 0

Do they always fail when run with the rest of the test suite or is it inconsistent? The reason I ask is that the failure you are reporting is a ConnectionLoss and testSessionTimeout has a history of being flaky (generally on ZooKeeper 3.5 though). On Fri, Mar 23, 2018, at 09:45, Ted Yu

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.12 candidate 0

Here is OS: Linux h.com 3.10.0-327.28.3.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Thu Aug 18 19:05:49 UTC 2016 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux java version "1.8.0_161" Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_161-b12) Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.161-b12, mixed mode) The tests don't fail when run

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.12 candidate 0

Hi Ted- Thanks for running the test cases on the RC. I am not able to reproduce the failures. Would you mind telling us a little bit more about the environment you are running the tests in (operating system, jvm)? In addition, to the failures occur every time you run the tests or just

Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.12 candidate 0

Hi, I ran test suite for the RC. Testcase: testSessionTimeout took 22.686 sec Caused an ERROR KeeperErrorCode = ConnectionLoss for /stest org.apache.zookeeper.KeeperException$ConnectionLossException: KeeperErrorCode = ConnectionLoss for /stest at

[VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.12 candidate 0

This is a bugfix release candidate for 3.4.12. It fixes 22 issues, including issues that affect incorrect handling of the dataDir and the dataLogDir. The full release notes is available at: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310801=12342040 *** Please