Re: Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

On Jun 24, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Andrew Wang wrote: > Since Hadoop apps can and do depend on the Hadoop classpath, the classpath > is effectively part of our API. I'm sure there are user apps out there that > will break if we make incompatible changes to the classpath. I haven't read > up on the MR

Re: Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

Alejandro, On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur wrote: > After reading this thread and thinking a bit about it, I think it should be > OK such move up to JDK7 in Hadoop 2 for the following reasons: > > * Existing Hadoop 2 releases and related projects are running > on JDK7 in p

Re: Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

+1, though I think 2.5 may be premature if we want to send a warning note "last ever". That's an issue for followon "when in branch 2". Guava and protobuf.jar are two things we have to leave alone, with the first being unfortunate, but their attitude to updates is pretty dramatic. The latter? We a

Re: Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

After reading this thread and thinking a bit about it, I think it should be OK such move up to JDK7 in Hadoop 2 for the following reasons: * Existing Hadoop 2 releases and related projects are running on JDK7 in production. * Commercial vendors of Hadoop have already done lot of work to ensure

Re: Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

Hi all, On dependencies, we've bumped library versions when we think it's safe and the APIs in the new version are compatible. Or, it's not leaked to the app classpath (e.g the JUnit version bump). I think the JIRAs Arun mentioned fall into one of those categories. Steve can do a better job explai

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 Vinod On Jun 24, 2014, at 1:53 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > Folks, > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change > release votes from 7 days to 5. > > I've attached the change to by-laws I'm proposing. > > Please vote, the vote will the usual period of 7 days.

Re: Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

Tx for the new thread Andrew, hopefully it can attract more eyes. Here's what I am behind - a modified proposal C. - Overall I wouldn't think about EOL of JDK7 and/or JDK8 specifically given how long it has taken for JDK6 life-cycle to end. We should try to focus on JDK7 only for now. - As we

Re: Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

That classpath policy was explicitly added because we can't lock down our dependencies for security/bug fix reasons, and also because if we do update something explicitly, their transitive dependencies can change -beyond our control. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-9555 is an example

[jira] [Reopened] (HDFS-6527) Edit log corruption due to defered INode removal

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-6527?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Jing Zhao reopened HDFS-6527: - Reopen the jira and wait for [~kihwal] to comment. > Edit log corruption due to defered INode removal > -

[jira] [Created] (HDFS-6601) Issues in finalizing rolling upgrade when there is a layout version change

Kihwal Lee created HDFS-6601: Summary: Issues in finalizing rolling upgrade when there is a layout version change Key: HDFS-6601 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-6601 Project: Hadoop HDFS

[jira] [Created] (HDFS-6600) fsck -move fails in secured clusters.

Chris Nauroth created HDFS-6600: --- Summary: fsck -move fails in secured clusters. Key: HDFS-6600 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-6600 Project: Hadoop HDFS Issue Type: Bug

Re: Moving to JDK7, JDK8 and new major releases

Andrew, Thanks for starting this thread. I'll edit the wiki to provide more context around rolling-upgrades etc. which, as I pointed out in the original thread, are key IMHO. On Jun 24, 2014, at 11:17 AM, Andrew Wang wrote: > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/MovingToJdk7and8 > > I think based

Re: "SIMPLE authentication is not enabled" error for secured hdfs read

Hi David, UserGroupInformation.createRemoteUser does not attach credentials to the returned ugi. I expect the server side is rejecting the connection due to lack of credentials. This is actually by design. The UserGroupInformation.createRemoteUser method is primarily intended for use on the ser

[jira] [Created] (HDFS-6599) 2.4 addBlock is 10 to 20 times slower compared to 0.23

Kihwal Lee created HDFS-6599: Summary: 2.4 addBlock is 10 to 20 times slower compared to 0.23 Key: HDFS-6599 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-6599 Project: Hadoop HDFS Issue Type:

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Chris Douglas wrote: > +1 -C > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Arun C Murthy > wrote: > > Folks, > > > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change > release votes from 7 days to 5. > > > > I've attached the change to by-la

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 -C On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > Folks, > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change > release votes from 7 days to 5. > > I've attached the change to by-laws I'm proposing. > > Please vote, the vote will the usual period of 7 days.

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 (binding) Chris Nauroth Hortonworks http://hortonworks.com/ On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Jakob Homan wrote: > +1 (binding) > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Zhijie Shen > wrote: > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:26 AM, Aaron T. Myers > wrote: > > > >

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 (binding) On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Zhijie Shen wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:26 AM, Aaron T. Myers wrote: > > > +1 (binding) > > > > -- > > Aaron T. Myers > > Software Engineer, Cloudera > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Arun C Murthy > > wro

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 (non-binding) (2014/06/24 10:33), Zhijie Shen wrote: +1 (non-binding) On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:26 AM, Aaron T. Myers wrote: +1 (binding) -- Aaron T. Myers Software Engineer, Cloudera On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: Folks, As discussed, I'd like to call a v

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 (non-binding) On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:26 AM, Aaron T. Myers wrote: > +1 (binding) > > -- > Aaron T. Myers > Software Engineer, Cloudera > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Arun C Murthy > wrote: > > > Folks, > > > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to chan

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 (binding) -- Aaron T. Myers Software Engineer, Cloudera On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > Folks, > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change > release votes from 7 days to 5. > > I've attached the change to by-laws I'm proposing. > >

[jira] [Created] (HDFS-6598) fix a typo in message issued from explorer.js

Yongjun Zhang created HDFS-6598: --- Summary: fix a typo in message issued from explorer.js Key: HDFS-6598 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-6598 Project: Hadoop HDFS Issue Type: Bu

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1(non-binding) On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:55 AM, Hitesh Shah wrote: > +1 (binding) > > — Hitesh > > On Jun 24, 2014, at 1:53 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > >> Folks, >> >> As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change >> release votes from 7 days to 5. >> >> I've attached

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 (binding) On 24 June 2014 01:53, Arun C Murthy wrote: > Folks, > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change > release votes from 7 days to 5. > > I've attached the change to by-laws I'm proposing. > > Please vote, the vote will the usual period of 7 days. >

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 (binding) — Hitesh On Jun 24, 2014, at 1:53 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > Folks, > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change > release votes from 7 days to 5. > > I've attached the change to by-laws I'm proposing. > > Please vote, the vote will the usual pe

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 (non-binding) On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 8:54 AM, Jason Lowe wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Jason > > > On 06/24/2014 03:53 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > >> Folks, >> >> As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change >> release votes from 7 days to 5. >> >> I've attached th

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 (binding) Jason On 06/24/2014 03:53 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: Folks, As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change release votes from 7 days to 5. I've attached the change to by-laws I'm proposing. Please vote, the vote will the usual period of 7 days. tha

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hadoop 0.23.11

+1 (non-binding) Deployed in a two node cluster and ran few M/R Jobs, everything works fine. On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 8:44 PM, Thomas Graves < tgra...@yahoo-inc.com.invalid> wrote: > Hey Everyone, > > There have been various bug fixes that have went into > branch-0.23 since the 0.23.10 releas

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 Thanks Devaraj K On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > Folks, > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change > release votes from 7 days to 5. > > I've attached the change to by-laws I'm proposing. > > Please vote, the vote will the usual pe

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 6:42 AM, Thomas Graves < tgra...@yahoo-inc.com.invalid> wrote: > +1 > > Tom > > On 6/24/14, 3:53 AM, "Arun C Murthy" wrote: > > >Folks, > > > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change > >release votes from 7 days to 5. > > > > I've atta

Jenkins build is back to normal : Hadoop-Hdfs-trunk #1784

See

Re: [VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

+1 Tom On 6/24/14, 3:53 AM, "Arun C Murthy" wrote: >Folks, > > As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change >release votes from 7 days to 5. > > I've attached the change to by-laws I'm proposing. > > Please vote, the vote will the usual period of 7 days. > >thanks, >A

[jira] [Created] (HDFS-6597) New option for namenode upgrade

Danilo Vunjak created HDFS-6597: --- Summary: New option for namenode upgrade Key: HDFS-6597 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-6597 Project: Hadoop HDFS Issue Type: Improvement

[VOTE] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

Folks, As discussed, I'd like to call a vote on changing our by-laws to change release votes from 7 days to 5. I've attached the change to by-laws I'm proposing. Please vote, the vote will the usual period of 7 days. thanks, Arun [main]$ svn diff Index: author/src/documentation/conte

RE: [DISCUSS] Change by-laws on release votes: 5 days instead of 7

Thanks Arun. +1 Regards, Uma -Original Message- From: Arun C. Murthy [mailto:a...@hortonworks.com] Sent: Saturday, June 21, 2014 11:07 PM To: hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org Cc: common-...@hadoop.apache.org; yarn-...@hadoop.apache.org; mapreduce-...@hadoop.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS