accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Josh Elser <els...@apache.org>
Subject [RESULT] [VOTE] Accumulo 1.7.1-rc2
Date Thu, 25 Feb 2016 23:49:39 GMT
(re-sending with [RESULT] in subject)

Christopher wrote:
> Vote passed with +6, -0
> Please double check the release notes and contribute any fixes/updates as
> you have time, as I try to wrap up the rest of the release tasks.
>
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 4:41 PM Christopher<ctubbsii@apache.org>  wrote:
>
>> For what it's worth, I updated ACCUMULO-4150 to reflect the fact that I
>> finally got the tests to pass with a newer version of Hadoop, so I'm
>> satisfied now. :) That was really bugging me. My +1 stands.
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:34 PM Christopher<ctubbsii@apache.org>  wrote:
>>
>>> Oh, yes, apologies if I gave that impression. I'm sure we'll figure this
>>> out, and if it is a problem in Accumulo's Kerberos feature (and not
>>> something stupid on my end), I'm sure we're committed to fixing it quickly
>>> and having it in the next bugfix release.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:31 PM Josh Elser<josh.elser@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks. I've been doing a bit with the Kerberos stuff (in real
>>>> environments) and what is in 1.7.1 seems pretty solid to me. I just
>>>> wanted to make sure people didn't avoid it, thinking that it was not
>>>> stable.
>>>>
>>>> Christopher wrote:
>>>>> Yeah, that's fine. I'll just reserve judgement for now, and defer to
>>>>> others, since I don't have time to set up a separate Kerberos
>>>> environment.
>>>>> As far as I can tell, the feature works fine, up to a point. I'm just
>>>> not
>>>>> sure what to make of this particular test. As you said, though, it's
>>>> quite
>>>>> possibly just MiniKDC instabilities.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:10 PM Josh Elser<josh.elser@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Welcome to why people say "Kerberos is hard".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think I said in chat, but increasing the timeout factor is not
going
>>>>>> to make that test pass if it can't pass the first time. The MiniKDC
>>>> the
>>>>>> tests use are not representative of a real KDC. I'd ask that you
>>>> deploy
>>>>>> Accumulo with Kerberos before passing judgement on the feature as
a
>>>> whole.
>>>>>> I still have your IT logs -- I didn't get a chance to look at them
>>>>>> yesterday. I'll try to do so today.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Christopher wrote:
>>>>>>> I had a lot of difficulty getting the Kerberos ITs to pass without
>>>> timing
>>>>>>> out. I was never able to get the KerberosRenewalIT to pass, even
>>>> after
>>>>>>> re-running several times (still trying), and even with a timeout
>>>> factor
>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> 20. I do not have a strong confidence in the quality of the Kerberos
>>>>>>> features as is, so it's not a critical feature for me, so I'll
defer
>>>> to
>>>>>>> others tests for that.
>

Mime
View raw message