flink-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andra Lungu <lungu.an...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Planning the 0.9 Release
Date Fri, 05 Jun 2015 14:08:53 GMT
I would. Vasia already used it in production at Telefonica :)

On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 3:51 PM, Stephan Ewen <sewen@apache.org> wrote:

> Fair enough about including the issues into 0.9.1
>
> Concerning Gelly, would you recommend people to use that in production
> today? If not, it would be nice to have some non-deprecated code where we
> are confident about that.
>
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Vasiliki Kalavri <
> vasilikikalavri@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > let me clarify:
> >
> > FLINK-1252 is missing a test for PageRank (which might not even be
> needed,
> > since the implementation is basically identical to the existing Spargel
> > one) and a test for MusicProfiles, which is basically using
> LabelProgation
> > (and we have a separate test for this).
> >
> > FLINK-1943 is about implementing a compiler and translation test for the
> > recently added Gather-Sum-Apply iteration.
> >
> > IMO, the second would be nice to have, but not a blocker.
> > I could work on it after my paper deadline, in a week. But since I see
> > you're eager to have the release today, we could include this is the
> first
> > bugfix of 0.9.
> >
> > -Vasia.
> >
> >
> > On 5 June 2015 at 13:59, Andra Lungu <lungu.andra@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > The Pregel-like, vertex-cenric part of Gelly is as stable as it will
> ever
> > > be.
> > > I vote for deprecating Spargel in this release, but keep in mind that
> > this
> > > is just an opinion :)
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Stephan Ewen <sewen@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Okay, I was not aware it is only two missing tests. That is not that
> > big
> > > a
> > > > deal.
> > > >
> > > > I am not very attached to the Spargel Stuff, I just want to make sure
> > we
> > > do
> > > > not deprecate something that works well for something that is still
> > work
> > > in
> > > > progress.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Andra Lungu <lungu.andra@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Stephan,
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't know if I have a saying in this, but I will give it a go
:)
> > > > >
> > > > > The two unsolved issues don't affect the functionality at all.
> > > > > Gelly can, at the moment, support anything Spargel could. There is
> a
> > > > guide
> > > > > in the documentation explaining how to migrate Spargel code to
> > Gelly. I
> > > > > don't see why Spargel should not be deprecated yet. Just because
of
> > > those
> > > > > missing tests?
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Stephan Ewen <sewen@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks Vasia!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We should clearly label Gelly as Work in Progress and at Beta
> > status,
> > > > > then
> > > > > > it should be okay. This is very fair, it is the first version,
> > people
> > > > > > understand that.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In that sense, let us not call Spargel deprecated in favor of
> Gelly
> > > > yet,
> > > > > > but do that for the next release when Gelly is ready.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Stephan
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Vasiliki Kalavri <
> > > > > > vasilikikalavri@gmail.com
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > regarding the 2 gelly issues, I'm sorry but I haven't had
time
> to
> > > > work
> > > > > on
> > > > > > > these.
> > > > > > > And most certainly I won't be able to work on these today
:S
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In any case, I wouldn't consider them blocker issues, so
if you
> > > > agree,
> > > > > > > please go ahead with the release candidate.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Vasia.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 5 June 2015 at 11:46, Robert Metzger <rmetzger@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'll address the remaining documentation issues today.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What about
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >    -
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >    Sync Streaming Java/Scala API
> > > > > > > >    - Consolidate names across batch/streaming (discussion)
> > > > > > > >    - Merge static code analysis
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > and the gelly TODOs
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >    -
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >    FLINK-1522 Add tests for the library methods and
examples
> > > > > > > >    - FLINK-1943 Add Gelly-GSA compiler and translation
tests
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > They seem both unresolved.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Other than that it seems we are good to go.
> > > > > > > > Maybe we can manage to get the first release candidate
out
> > today?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'm uncertain whether we should fork off the "release-0.9"
> > branch
> > > > as
> > > > > > part
> > > > > > > > of the RC creation or whether we should wait a bit
with that.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Forking it of would allow us to merge some of the
pull
> requests
> > > > > (storm
> > > > > > > > compat), but we would need to apply many patches to
two
> > branches.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Stephan Ewen <
> > sewen@apache.org>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Yes, Till, Max, Ufuk, and me have reached consensus
that we
> > > will
> > > > > > > postpone
> > > > > > > > > the batch scheduling to 0.10. It is a crucial
feature, but
> we
> > > > would
> > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > like to have it in a highly pre-mature version
in there.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > What came up a lot is that there are a good set
of
> additions
> > > that
> > > > > are
> > > > > > > > close
> > > > > > > > > to completion. We will probably bring up the
suggestion of
> a
> > > 0.10
> > > > > > > release
> > > > > > > > > very soon after the 0.9 release.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Ufuk Celebi
<
> uce@apache.org
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Ping.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 04 Jun 2015, at 14:11, Ufuk Celebi <uce@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Critical issues:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > - Skipped buffer (
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/Buffer-re-ordering-problem-td6009.html
> > > > > > > > > )
> > > > > > > > > > (I'm on it)
> > > > > > > > > > > - Execution graph deadlock (FLINK-2133)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I'm investigating the skipped buffer. I
vote to not block
> > the
> > > > > > release
> > > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > > this though if I can't reproduce it in the
next days.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > What about FLINK-2133?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Big open issue:
> > > > > > > > > > > - There has been consensus to merge
the static code
> > > analysis
> > > > PR
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > > release, which needs some further testing
(I'm on it)
> > > > > > > > > > > - Batch scheduling. I think Till and
Stephan are
> working
> > on
> > > > > this.
> > > > > > > Can
> > > > > > > > > > you guys give an estimate whether we will
be able to have
> > it
> > > in
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > release?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > @Till, Stephan: Will batch scheduling make
it into the
> > > release?
> > > > > :)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message