[Discussion] Merge YARN-321 into Branch-2

2014-01-05 Thread Zhijie Shen
Hi folks, Majority of the functionality of Application History Server has been completed on branch YARN-321. AHS can now work end-to-end. ResourceManager records the historical information of the application, the application attempt and the container in terms of events via a history writer on a se

Re: [Discussion] Merge YARN-321 into Branch-2

2014-01-05 Thread lohit
+1 to merge into branch2 now. On Jan 5, 2014 6:22 PM, "Zhijie Shen" wrote: > Hi folks, > > Majority of the functionality of Application History Server has been > completed on branch YARN-321. AHS can now work end-to-end. ResourceManager > records the historical information of the application, the

Re: [Discussion] Merge YARN-321 into Branch-2

2014-01-06 Thread Sandy Ryza
Very excited for this feature and appreciative of all the work put into this. Reviewed the JIRA and my only two remaining concerns are about documentation and API stability. Regarding doc, while we don't necessarily need full documentation before merging, my feeling is that we should at least hav

Re: [Discussion] Merge YARN-321 into Branch-2

2014-01-06 Thread Alejandro Abdelnur
This is great news. A few things to consider before doing the merge: 1* The merge must be done in trunk first (then, ideally, from trunk into branch-2) 2* The last update of YARN-321 was done in NOV10, this was done from branch-2 (that seems a NIT as it should be against trunk) 3* IMO, until we do

Re: [Discussion] Merge YARN-321 into Branch-2

2014-01-06 Thread Zhijie Shen
Hi folks, Thanks for replying. Please see the response bellow. bq. 2* The last update of YARN-321 was done in NOV10, this was done from branch-2 (that seems a NIT as it should be against trunk) Basically it's a discussion thread. I'm already in the process of updating the branch. As I mentioned

Re: [Discussion] Merge YARN-321 into Branch-2

2014-01-06 Thread Sandy Ryza
"How about not doing this until security is ready and refactoring duplicate code is done?" That sounds fine. As long as they're marked stable by the time we include them in a release, whatever is easiest. -Sandy On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 8:21 PM, Zhijie Shen wrote: > Hi folks, > > Thanks for rep

Re: [Discussion] Merge YARN-321 into Branch-2

2014-01-07 Thread Alejandro Abdelnur
Zhijie, Sounds good. On the last part of my previous email, lets wait till YARN-321 is updated to latest trunk. > I would like to see #1 and #2 taken care before making a decision. > The reason for this is that if the source changes outside of the AHS > are too pervasive, then we may end up be