flink-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Flink 1.2.1 (RC1)
Date Mon, 03 Apr 2017 14:57:04 GMT
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/repos/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 ...
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
>
>

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