flink-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Flavio Pompermaier <pomperma...@okkam.it>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Flink 1.2.1 (RC1)
Date Tue, 04 Apr 2017 10:10:12 GMT
Would it be possible to merge also the PR to fix FLINK-6103 (
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3598)....?

On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Chesnay Schepler <chesnay@apache.org>
wrote:

> We can merge the metric changes; I'll rebase the branch and merge them
> within the next hours.
>
> On 04.04.2017 11:57, Robert Metzger wrote:
>
>> Thank you for opening a PR for this.
>>
>> Chesnay, do you need more reviews for the metrics changes / backports?
>>
>> Are there any other release blockers for 1.2.1, or are we good to go?
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 6:48 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljoscha@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I created a PR for the revert: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3664
>>>
>>> On 3. Apr 2017, at 18:32, Stephan Ewen <sewen@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +1 for options (1), but also invest the time to fix it properly for
>>>> 1.2.2
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Kostas Kloudas <
>>>>
>>> k.kloudas@data-artisans.com>
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +1 for 1
>>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 3, 2017, at 5:52 PM, Till Rohrmann <trohrmann@apache.org>
>>>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 for option 1)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 5:48 PM, Fabian Hueske <fhueske@gmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 to option 1)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2017-04-03 16:57 GMT+02:00 Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Looks like #1 is better - 1.2.1 would be at least as stable as
1.2.0
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 7:39 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> aljoscha@apache.org>
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just so we’re all on the same page. ;-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There was https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5808
which
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> was
>>>
>>>> a
>>>>>
>>>>>> bug that we initially discovered in Flink 1.2 which was/is about
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> missing
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> verification for the correctness of the combination of parallelism
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and
>>>
>>>> max-parallelism. Due to lacking test coverage this introduced two
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> more
>>>
>>>> bugs:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6188: Some
>>>>>>>>> setParallelism() methods can't cope with default parallelism
>>>>>>>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6209:
>>>>>>>>> StreamPlanEnvironment always has a parallelism of 1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> IMHO, the options are:
>>>>>>>>> 1) revert the changes made for FLINK-5808 on the release-1.2
branch
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> live with the bug still being present
>>>>>>>>> 2) put in more work to fix FLINK-5808 which requires
fixing some
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> problems
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> that have existed for a long time with how the parallelism
is set
>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>> streaming programs
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>> Aljoscha
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 31. Mar 2017, at 21:34, Robert Metzger <rmetzger@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't know what is best to do, but I think releasing 1.2.1
with
>>>>>>>>>> potentially more bugs than 1.2.0 is not a good option.
>>>>>>>>>> I suspect a good workaround for FLINK-6188
>>>>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6188>
is setting the
>>>>>>>>>> parallelism manually for operators that can't cope
with the
>>>>>>>>>> default
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> parallelism.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 9:06 PM, Aljoscha Krettek
<
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> aljoscha@apache.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You mean reverting the changes around FLINK-5808
[1]? This is what
>>>>>>>>>>> introduced the follow-up FLINK-6188 [2].
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5808
>>>>>>>>>>> [2]https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6188
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017, at 19:10, Robert Metzger
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think reverting FLINK-6188 for the 1.2
branch might be a good
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> idea.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> FLINK-6188 introduced two new bugs, so undoing the FLINK-6188
fix
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> lead
>>>>>>>>>>>> only to one known bug in 1.2.1, instead of
an uncertain number
>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> issues.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So 1.2.1 is not going to be worse than 1.2.0
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The fix will hopefully make it into 1.2.2
then.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Any other thoughts on this?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 6:46 PM, Fabian Hueske
<
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> fhueske@gmail.com>
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I merged the fix for FLINK-6044 to the release-1.2
and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> release-1.1
>>>
>>>> branch.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-31 15:02 GMT+02:00 Fabian Hueske
<fhueske@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> We should also backport the fix for FLINK-6044
to Flink 1.2.1.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll take care of that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-30 18:50 GMT+02:00 Aljoscha
Krettek <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> aljoscha@apache.org
>>>
>>>> :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6188 turns
out to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> bit
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> more involved, see my comments on the PR:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3616.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As I said there, maybe we should
revert the commits regarding
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parallelism/max-parallelism changes
and release and then fix
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>
>>>> later.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017, at 23:08, Aljoscha
Krettek wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I commented on FLINK-6214:
I think it's working as intended,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> although
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could fix the javadoc/doc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017, at
17:35, Timo Walther wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A user reported that
all tumbling and slinding window
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assigners
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> contain
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a pretty obvious bug about
offsets.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6214
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should also
fix this for 1.2.1. What do you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think?
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Timo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am 29/03/17 um 11:30
schrieb Robert Metzger:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Haohui,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree that we should
fix the parallelism issue.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Otherwise,
>>>
>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.2.1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release would introduce a
new bug.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017
at 11:59 PM, Haohui Mai <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ricetons@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -1 (non-binding)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We recently found
out that all jobs submitted via UI will
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have a
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> parallelism of 1, potentially due to FLINK-5808.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Filed FLINK-6209
to track it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ~Haohui
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 27,
2017 at 2:59 AM Chesnay Schepler <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chesnay@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If possible I
would like to include FLINK-6183 &
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FLINK-6184
>>>
>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> well.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They fix 2 metric-related
issues that could arise when a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Task is
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> cancelled very early. (like, right away)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FLINK-6183
fixes a memory leak where the TaskMetricGroup
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> never closed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FLINK-6184 fixes a NullPointerExceptions
in the buffer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> metrics
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> PR here: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3611
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 26.03.2017
12:35, Aljoscha Krettek wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I opened
a PR for FLINK-6188:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/
>>>
>>>> flink/pull/3616
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3616>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This
improves the previously very sparse test coverage
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>
>>>> timestamp/watermark assigners and fixes the bug.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 25
Mar 2017, at 10:22, Ufuk Celebi <uce@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree with Aljoscha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -1
because of FLINK-6188
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On
Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aljoscha@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I filed
this issue, which was observed by a user:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6188
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think
that’s blocking for 1.2.1.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 24 Mar 2017, at 18:57, Ufuk Celebi <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
uce@apache.org>
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RC1 doesn't contain Stefan's backport
for the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Asynchronous
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> snapshots
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for heap-based keyed state
that has been merged.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Should
>>>
>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> create
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RC2
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with that
fix since the voting period only starts on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Monday?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it would only mean rerunning
the scripts on your
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
side,
>>>
>>>> right?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> – Ufuk
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Robert Metzger <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
rmetzger@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear
Flink community,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Please vote on releasing the following candidate as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Apache
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Flink
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version 1.2
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .1.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The commit to be voted on:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
*732e55bd* (*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
http://git-wip-us.apache.org/r
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> epos/asf/flink/commit/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 732e55bd
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://git-wip-us.apache.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
repos/asf/flink/commit/732e55b
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> d>*)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Branch:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
release-1.2.1-rc1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The release artifacts to be voted on can be found
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
at:
>>>
>>>> *http://people.apache.org/~
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
rmetzger/flink-1.2.1-rc1/
>>>
>>>> <http://people.apache.org/~
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
rmetzger/flink-1.2.1-rc1/
>>>
>>>> *
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The release artifacts are signed with the key with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
fingerprint
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> D9839159:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/flink/KEYS
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The staging repository for this release can be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
found
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
at:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> content/repositories/orgapache
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> flink-1116
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The vote ends on Wednesday, March 29, 2017, 3pm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
CET.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Flink 1.2.1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
[ ] -1 Do not release this package, because ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>


-- 
Flavio Pompermaier
Development Department

OKKAM S.r.l.
Tel. +(39) 0461 1823908

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