-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
+1
Built and deployed clusters on Amazon. Ran a basic test suite.
Thanks Arun
On 06/25/14 17:11, Akira AJISAKA wrote:
> Thanks Arun for another RC!
>
> I'm +1 (non-binding) for RC2. HDFS-6527 should be reverted because the
issue is only in 2.5 and
Thanks Arun for another RC!
I'm +1 (non-binding) for RC2. HDFS-6527 should be reverted because the
issue is only in 2.5 and trunk. In addition, I hope HDFS-6591 to be merged.
Other than that, RC1 is good to me. I tested RC1 with distributed
cluster on CentOS 6.3:
- Successful build from src
Gera Shegalov created MAPREDUCE-5941:
Summary: JobCounter's should be organized in groups for map and
reduce
Key: MAPREDUCE-5941
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-5941
Project
I understood the plan for avoiding JDK7-specific features in our code, and
your suggestion to add an extra Jenkins job is a great way to guard against
that. The thing I haven't seen discussed yet is how downstream projects
will continue to consume our built artifacts. If a downstream project
upgr
+1 (non-binding) for 2.5 to be the last release to ensure JDK6.
>>> My higher-level goal though is to avoid going through this same pain
>>> again when JDK7 goes EOL. I'd like to do a JDK8-based release
>>> before then for this reason. This is why I suggested skipping an
>>> intermediate 2.x+JDK7
Chris,
Compiling with jdk7 and doing javac -target 1.6 is not sufficient, you are
still using jdk7 libraries and you could use new APIs, thus breaking jdk6
both at compile and runtime.
you need to compile with jdk6 to ensure you are not running into that
scenario. that is why i was suggesting the
+1 (binding)
Kihwal
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.
I'm also +1 for getting us to JDK7 within the 2.x line after reading the
proposals and catching up on the discussion in this thread.
Has anyone yet considered how to coordinate this change with downstream
projects? Would we request downstream projects to upgrade to JDK7 first
before we make the m
+1 (non-binding)
Stood up a pseudo-dist cluster and ran a few MR jobs.
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Jason Lowe
wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> - Verified signatures and digests
> - Deployed binary tarball to a single-node cluster and ran some MR example
> jobs
> - Built from source, deployed to
+1
-giri
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Arpit Agarwal
wrote:
> +1 Arpit
>
>
> 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
+1 Arpit
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 da
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
I agree with Alejandro. Changing minimum JDKs is not an incompatible change
and is fine in the 2 branch. (Although I think
See https://builds.apache.org/job/Hadoop-Mapreduce-trunk/1812/
###
## LAST 60 LINES OF THE CONSOLE
###
[...truncated 35162 lines...]
[INFO] Reactor Summary:
[INFO]
[INF
+1 (binding)
- Verified signatures and digests
- Deployed binary tarball to a single-node cluster and ran some MR
example jobs
- Built from source, deployed to a single-node cluster and ran some MR
example jobs
Jason
On 06/19/2014 10:14 AM, Thomas Graves wrote:
Hey Everyone,
There have bee
14 matches
Mail list logo
