Hi dev,
User has recently run into the regression of 3.4.11 (ZOOKEEPER-2960
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2960>) (again?)
Are we good to cut 3.4.12 soon or still waiting for something to be
committed?
Andor
a turn as RM?
Patrick
On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 4:38 PM, Andor Molnar wrote:
> Hi dev,
>
> User has recently run into the regression of 3.4.11 (ZOOKEEPER-2960
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2960>) (again?)
> Are we good to cut 3.4.12 soon or still waiting
60
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2960>) (again?)
> > Are we good to cut 3.4.12 soon or still waiting for something to be
> > committed?
> >
> > Andor
> >
>
> > On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 4:38 PM, Andor Molnar wrote:
> >
> > > Hi dev,
> > >
> > > User has recently run into the regression of 3.4.11 (ZOOKEEPER-2960
> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2960>) (again?)
> > > Are we good to cut 3.4.12 soon or still waiting for something to be
> > > committed?
> > >
> > > Andor
> > >
>
Mar 1, 2018 at 4:38 PM, Andor Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi dev,
> > > >
> > > > User has recently run into the regression of 3.4.11 (ZOOKEEPER-2960
> > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2960>) (again?)
> > > > Are we good to cut 3.4.12 soon or still waiting for something to be
> > > > committed?
> > > >
> > > > Andor
> > > >
> >
Appreciate Abe for the initiative and efforts!
+1, for "3.4.12" releasing.
Please feel free to ping me if any help needed when making this release.
Regards,
Rakesh
On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 4:19 AM, Abraham Fine wrote:
> I am very much interested in taking a turn as a RM and I
+1 for cutting a 3.4.12 RC. Thanks for volunteering, Abe.
-Flavio
> On 8 Mar 2018, at 18:53, Rakesh Radhakrishnan wrote:
>
> Appreciate Abe for the initiative and efforts!
>
> +1, for "3.4.12" releasing.
>
> Please feel free to ping me if any help
The Apache ZooKeeper team is proud to announce Apache ZooKeeper version 3.4.12.
ZooKeeper is a high-performance coordination service for distributed
applications. It exposes common services - such as naming, configuration
management, synchronization, and group services - in a simple interface
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&version=12342040
*** Pl
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.
This candidate fixes an issue in the release notes of candidate 0.
The full release notes are available at:
https://issues.apache.org/jira
er logs, I see a few instances of network failures across
all three nodes.
I *have the logs* from each of the Zookeepers.
We are running 3.4.12.
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 org.apache.zookeeper.KeeperException.create(Kee
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 occasiona
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 alon
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 wrote
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 reporting is a Connectio
-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 comm
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 swap,
, 2018 at 1:05 PM, Abraham Fine wrote:
> 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/se
2018 at 1:05 PM, Abraham Fine wrote:
>
> > 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:
>
+1 for candidate 1
- verified signatures
- unit test passed on Mac and Ubuntu 16.04 (including c++)
- verified 3 node cluster
Andor
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 7:05 AM, Abraham Fine wrote:
> This is a bugfix release candidate for 3.4.12. It fixes 22 issues,
> including issues that
&g
+1
checked signatures
unit tests passed on Linux
+1. sig/xsum verified, RAT ran OK. I tested a few operational scenarios
which seemed fine. Ran the tests and they passed. LGTM.
Patrick
On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 10:05 PM, Abraham Fine wrote:
> This is a bugfix release candidate for 3.4.12. It fixes 22 issues,
> including issues that
&g
sig/xsum verified, RAT ran OK. I tested a few operational scenarios
> which seemed fine. Ran the tests and they passed. LGTM.
>
> Patrick
>
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 10:05 PM, Abraham Fine wrote:
>
> > This is a bugfix release candidate for 3.4.12. It fixes 22 issues
ted a few operational scenarios
> which seemed fine. Ran the tests and they passed. LGTM.
>
> Patrick
>
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 10:05 PM, Abraham Fine wrote:
>
> > This is a bugfix release candidate for 3.4.12. It fixes 22 issues,
> > including issues that
> > a
Can the vote be closed ?
It seems we have enough +1's
Thanks
Sorry for coming in at the last moment. I'm not sure when the next 3.4
release is scheduled, so just wanted to mention this bug,
which I believe is a blocker for either this or next release:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2959
Best,
Alex
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 9:09 AM, Ted Yu wr
I don't think it's a blocker.
The jira and PR has been open since last December and 3.4.11 has released
without it.
Although this bug is also important to fix, I believe it's more important
to release a fix for the regression we've found in 3.4.11 asap.
Abe, any thoughts?
Regards,
Andor
On Th
To clarify - in a deployment with observers this bug can potentially cause
data loss. A server could be elected leader based just on the support of
observers, even if this servers data is stale wrt other followers.
It is certainly a blocker, just not sure if for 3.4.11 or 3.4.12.
Alex
On Thu
inly a blocker, just not sure if for 3.4.11 or 3.4.12.
>
>
> Alex
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 10:29 AM Andor Molnar wrote:
>
> > I don't think it's a blocker.
> > The jira and PR has been open since last December and 3.4.11 has released
> > without it.
> >
ected leader based just on the support of
> > observers, even if this servers data is stale wrt other followers.
> >
> > It is certainly a blocker, just not sure if for 3.4.11 or 3.4.12.
> >
> >
> > Alex
> > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 10:29 AM Andor Molnar wrote:
te?
> >
> > Andor
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 7:35 PM, Alexander Shraer
> > wrote:
> >
> > > To clarify - in a deployment with observers this bug can potentially
> > cause
> > > data loss. A server could be elected leader bas
> To clarify - in a deployment with observers this bug can potentially
> > > cause
> > > > data loss. A server could be elected leader based just on the support
> > of
> > > > observers, even if this servers data is stale wrt other followers.
> &g
2018 at 1:05 PM, Abraham Fine wrote:
>>
>>> 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
on accurate?
> > > >
> > > > Andor
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 7:35 PM, Alexander Shraer
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > To clarify - in a deployment with observers this bug ca
, but this looks like a rare edge
>> case
>> > to
>> > > > me. Participants must finish the leader election successfully and
>> right
>> > > > after enough followers should fail to send epoch to the leader, so
>> > > > observers can
e edge
>>> case
>>> > to
>>> > > > me. Participants must finish the leader election successfully and
>>> right
>>> > > > after enough followers should fail to send epoch to the leader, so
>>> > > > obser
Hi,
The PR for ZK-2959 already has +1.
Can the PR be merged ?
Thanks
>
> >>> > > Alex
> >>> > >
> >>> > > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 11:44 AM, Andor Molnar
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > > Maybe I'm missing something here, but this looks like a rare edge
> >&
ader before participant's messages do.
> > >>> > > Whether its rare depends on the number of observers and
> > >>> participants. For
> > >>> > > example with very few participants and many observers
> > >>> > > your chan
hra...@gmail.com>
> > > >>> > wrote:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > > Yes sort of, FLE is finished, then enough observer's messages
> > reach
> > > >>> the
> > > >&g
Hey folks. I've been on vacation. My 0.02 - given the release candidate is
well underway, has sufficient votes/time to finalize, this is not a
regression in 3.4.12 and it's not yet committed I would think we
finalize/push 3.4.12 then quickly followup with a 3.4.13 that addresses
this.
18 at 2:26 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote:
> Hey folks. I've been on vacation. My 0.02 - given the release candidate is
> well underway, has sufficient votes/time to finalize, this is not a
> regression in 3.4.12 and it's not yet committed I would think we
> finalize/push 3.4.12 t
way, has sufficient votes/time to finalize, this
>> is not a>> regression in 3.4.12 and it's not yet committed I would think we
>> finalize/push 3.4.12 then quickly followup with a 3.4.13 that
>> addresses>> this. Alex could be the RM given his interest/advo
Hi,
If I understand correctly, zookeeper users can expect maven artifacts for
3.4.12 to be posted soon.
Thanks
I don't see 3.4.12 artifact under
https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.zookeeper/zookeeper
Abraham:
Can you clarify ?
Thanks
On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 9:35 AM, Ted Yu wrote:
> Hi,
> If I understand correctly, zookeeper users can expect maven artifacts for
> 3.4.12 to
I'm waiting for one more additional vote on the release. When that is done it
will be available.
On Wed, Apr 18, 2018, at 12:38, Ted Yu wrote:
> I don't see 3.4.12 artifact under
> https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.zookeeper/zookeeper
>
> Abraham:
> Can
that is done
> it will be available.
>
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018, at 12:38, Ted Yu wrote:
> > I don't see 3.4.12 artifact under
> > https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.zookeeper/zookeeper
> >
> > Abraham:
> > Can you clarify ?
> >
> &g
t; > it will be available.
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018, at 12:38, Ted Yu wrote:
> > > I don't see 3.4.12 artifact under
> > > https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.zookeeper/zookeeper
> > >
> > > Abraham:
> > > Can you
RAT ran OK. I tested a few operational scenarios
>> which seemed fine. Ran the tests and they passed. LGTM.
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 10:05 PM, Abraham Fine wrote:
>>
>>> This is a bugfix release candidate for 3.4.12. It fixes 22 issu
;> +1. sig/xsum verified, RAT ran OK. I tested a few operational scenarios
> >> which seemed fine. Ran the tests and they passed. LGTM.
> >>
> >> Patrick
> >>
> >> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 10:05 PM, Abraham Fine wrote:
> >>
> >>>
k failures
> across all three nodes.
>
>
>
>
>
> I **have the logs** from each of the Zookeepers.
>
> We are running 3.4.12.
>
>
>
>
>
Hi team,
I compiled zookeeper 3.4.12 c client on solaris 11 machine and trying to test
it through cli.sh. Here is the sample code that I changed in cli.c. Whenever I
run the ./cli_mt file it always throws below error
2018-08-08 09:49:44,437:18000(0x2):ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@1670
53 matches
Mail list logo
