hadoop-common-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Konstantin Shvachko <shv.had...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Re-swizzle 2.3
Date Tue, 11 Feb 2014 01:53:03 GMT
Sorry for the last minute request.
Can we add HDFS-4858 to the release, please?
It solves pretty important bug related to failover.
I can commit momentarily if there are no objections.

Thanks,
--Konstantin


On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Aaron T. Myers <atm@cloudera.com> wrote:

> Just committed a fix for HDFS-5921 to branch-2.3.
>
> Fire away.
>
> --
> Aaron T. Myers
> Software Engineer, Cloudera
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Aaron T. Myers <atm@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> > OK. I think I should be able to get it in by 6pm PT, thanks to a quick +1
> > from Andrew, but certainly don't let it hold up the train if for some
> > reason it takes longer than that.
> >
> > --
> > Aaron T. Myers
> > Software Engineer, Cloudera
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 12:04 PM, Arun C Murthy <acm@hortonworks.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Looks like we are down to 0 blockers; I'll create rc0 tonight.
> >>
> >> ATM - Your call, you have until 6pm tonight to get this in.
> >>
> >> thanks,
> >> Arun
> >>
> >> On Feb 10, 2014, at 11:44 AM, "Aaron T. Myers" <atm@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I just filed an issue for the fact that browsing the FS from the NN is
> >> > broken if you have a directory with the sticky bit set:
> >> >
> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-5921
> >> >
> >> > I didn't set this to be targeted for 2.3 because it doesn't seem like
> a
> >> > _blocker_ to me, but if we're not going to get 2.3 out today anyway,
> I'd
> >> > like to put this in. It's a small fix, and since many people have the
> >> > sticky bit set on /tmp, they won't be able to browse any of the FS
> >> > hierarchy from the NN without this fix.
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Aaron T. Myers
> >> > Software Engineer, Cloudera
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli <
> >> vinodkv@apache.org
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Heres what I've done:
> >> >> - Reverted YARN-1493,YARN-1490,YARN-1041,
> >> >> YARN-1166,YARN-1566,YARN-1689,YARN-1661 from branch-2.3.
> >> >> - Updated YARN's CHANGES.txt in trunk, branch-2 and branch-2.3.
> >> >> - Updated these JIRAs to have 2.4 as the fix-version.
> >> >> - Compiled branch-2.3.
> >> >>
> >> >> Let me know if you run into any issues caused by this revert.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> +Vinod
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 11:41 AM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli <
> >> >> vinodkv@apache.org
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Haven't heard back from Jian. Reverting the set from branch-2.3
> >> (only).
> >> >> Tx
> >> >>> for the offline list.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> +Vinod
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Alejandro Abdelnur <
> tucu@cloudera.com
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> Vinod, I have the patches to revert most of the JIRAs, the
first
> >> batch,
> >> >>>> I'll send them off line to you.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Thanks.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 8:56 PM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli
> >> >>>> <vinodkv@apache.org>wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Thanks. please post your findings, Jian wrote this part
of the
> code
> >> >> and
> >> >>>>> between him/me, we can take care of those issues.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> +1 for going ahead with the revert on branch-2.3. I'll
go do that
> >> >>>> tomorrow
> >> >>>>> morning unless I hear otherwise from Jian.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Thanks,
> >> >>>>> +Vinod
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> On Feb 6, 2014, at 8:28 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <tucu@cloudera.com
> >
> >> >>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Hi Vinod,
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Nothing confidential,
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> * With umanaged AMs I'm seeing the trace I've posted
a couple of
> >> >> days
> >> >>>> ago
> >> >>>>>> in YARN-1577 (
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-1577?focusedCommentId=13891853&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13891853
> >> >>>>>> ).
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> * Also, Robert has been digging in Oozie testcases
> failing/getting
> >> >>>> suck
> >> >>>>>> with several token renewer threads, this failures happened
> >> >>>> consistently
> >> >>>>> at
> >> >>>>>> different places around the same testcases (like some
file
> >> >> descriptors
> >> >>>>>> leaking out), reverting YARN-1490 fixes the problem.
The
> potential
> >> >>>> issue
> >> >>>>>> with this is that a long running client (oozie) my
run into this
> >> >>>>> situation
> >> >>>>>> thus becoming unstable.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> *Robert,* mind posting to YARN-1490 the jvm thread
dump at the
> time
> >> >> of
> >> >>>>> test
> >> >>>>>> hanging?
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> After YARN-1493 & YARN-1490 we have a couple of
JIRAs trying to
> fix
> >> >>>>> issues
> >> >>>>>> introduced by them, and we still didn't get them right.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Because this, the improvements driven by YARN-1493
& YARN-1490
> seem
> >> >>>> that
> >> >>>>>> require more work before being stable.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> IMO, being conservative, we should do 2.3 without them
and roll
> >> them
> >> >>>> with
> >> >>>>>> 2.4. If we want to do regular releases we will have
to make this
> >> >> kind
> >> >>>> of
> >> >>>>>> calls, else we will start dragging the releases.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Sounds like a plan?
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Thanks.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli
> >> >>>>>> <vinodkv@apache.org>wrote:
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> Hey
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> I am not against removing them from 2.3 if that
is helpful for
> >> >>>> progress.
> >> >>>>>>> But I want to understand what the issues are before
we make that
> >> >>>>> decision.
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> There is the issue with unmanaged AM that is clearly
known and I
> >> >> was
> >> >>>>>>> thinking of coming to the past two days, but couldn't.
What is
> >> this
> >> >>>> new
> >> >>>>>>> issue that we (confidently?) pinned down to YARN-1490?
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> Thanks
> >> >>>>>>> +Vinod
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> On Feb 6, 2014, at 5:07 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur
<
> tucu@cloudera.com
> >> >
> >> >>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Thanks Robert,
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> All,
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> So it seems that YARN-1493 and YARN-1490 are
introducing
> serious
> >> >>>>>>>> regressions.
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> I would propose to revert them and the follow
up JIRAs from the
> >> >> 2.3
> >> >>>>>>> branch
> >> >>>>>>>> and keep working on them on trunk/branch-2
until the are stable
> >> (I
> >> >>>>> would
> >> >>>>>>>> even prefer reverting them from branch-2 not
to block a 2.4 if
> >> >> they
> >> >>>> are
> >> >>>>>>> not
> >> >>>>>>>> ready in time).
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> As I've mentioned before, the list of JIRAs
to revert were:
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> YARN-1493
> >> >>>>>>>> YARN-1490
> >> >>>>>>>> YARN-1166
> >> >>>>>>>> YARN-1041
> >> >>>>>>>> YARN-1566
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Plus 2 additional JIRAs committed since my
email on this issue
> 2
> >> >>>> days
> >> >>>>>>> ago:
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> *YARN-1661
> >> >>>>>>>> *YARN-1689 (not sure if this JIRA is related
in functionality
> to
> >> >> the
> >> >>>>>>>> previous ones but it is creating conflicts).
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> I think we should hold on continuing work on
top of something
> >> that
> >> >>>> is
> >> >>>>>>>> broken until the broken stuff is fixed.
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Quoting Arun, "Committers - Henceforth, please
use extreme
> >> caution
> >> >>>>> while
> >> >>>>>>>> committing to branch-2.3. Please commit *only*
blockers to
> 2.3."
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> YARN-1661 & YARN-1689 are not blockers.
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Unless there are objections, I'll revert all
these JIRAs from
> >> >>>>> branch-2.3
> >> >>>>>>>> tomorrow around noon and I'll update fixedVersion
in the JIRAs.
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> I'm inclined to revert them from branch-2 as
well.
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Thoughts?
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Thanks.
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Robert Kanter
<
> >> >> rkanter@cloudera.com
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> I think we should revert YARN-1490 from
Hadoop 2.3 branch.  I
> >> >>>> think it
> >> >>>>>>> was
> >> >>>>>>>>> causing some strange behavior in the Oozie
unit tests:
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> Basically, we use a single MiniMRCluster
and MiniDFSCluster
> >> >> across
> >> >>>> all
> >> >>>>>>> unit
> >> >>>>>>>>> tests in a module.  With YARN-1490 we saw
that, regardless of
> >> >> test
> >> >>>>>>> order,
> >> >>>>>>>>> the last few tests would timeout waiting
for an MR job to
> >> finish;
> >> >>>> on
> >> >>>>>>> slower
> >> >>>>>>>>> machines, the entire test suite would timeout.
 Through some
> >> >>>> digging,
> >> >>>>> I
> >> >>>>>>>>> found that we were getting a ton of "Connection
refused"
> >> >>>> Exceptions on
> >> >>>>>>>>> LeaseRenewer talking to the NN and a few
on the AM talking to
> >> the
> >> >>>> RM.
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> After a bunch of investigation, I found
that the problem went
> >> >> away
> >> >>>>> once
> >> >>>>>>>>> YARN-1490 was removed.  Though I couldn't
figure out the exact
> >> >>>>> problem.
> >> >>>>>>>>> Even though this occurred in unit tests,
it does make me
> >> >> concerned
> >> >>>>> that
> >> >>>>>>> it
> >> >>>>>>>>> could indicate some bigger issue in a long-running
real
> cluster
> >> >>>> (where
> >> >>>>>>>>> everything isn't running on the same machine)
that we haven't
> >> >> seen
> >> >>>>> yet.
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Karthik
Kambatla <
> >> >>>> kasha@cloudera.com>
> >> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> I have marked MAPREDUCE-5744 a blocker
for 2.3. Committing it
> >> >>>>> shortly.
> >> >>>>>>>>> Will
> >> >>>>>>>>>> pull it out of branch-2.3 if anyone
objects.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Arpit
Agarwal <
> >> >>>>>>> aagarwal@hortonworks.com
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Merged HADOOP-10273 to branch-2.3
as r1565456.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 4:49 PM,
Arpit Agarwal <
> >> >>>>>>>>> aagarwal@hortonworks.com
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> IMO HADOOP-10273 (Fix 'mvn
site') should be included in
> 2.3.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> I will merge it to branch-2.3
tomorrow PST if no one
> >> >> disagrees.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 5:03
PM, Alejandro Abdelnur <
> >> >>>>>>>>> tucu@cloudera.com
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> IMO YARN-1577 is a blocker,
it is breaking unmanaged AMs
> in
> >> a
> >> >>>> very
> >> >>>>>>>>> odd
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ways
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> (to the point it seems
un-deterministic).
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd say eiher YARN-1577
is fixed or we revert
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> YARN-1493/YARN-1490/YARN-1166/YARN-1041/YARN-1566
(almost
> >> >> clean
> >> >>>>>>>>>> reverts)
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> from Hadoop 2.3 branch
before doing the release.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I've verified that after
reverting those JIRAs things work
> >> >> fine
> >> >>>>> with
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> unmanaged AMs.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at
11:45 AM, Arun C Murthy <
> >> >>>>> acm@hortonworks.com
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I punted YARN-1444
to 2.4 since it's a long-standing
> issue.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jian is away and I
don't see YARN-1577 & YARN-1206 making
> >> >> much
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> progress
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> till he is back; so
I'm inclined to push both to 2.4 too.
> >> >> Any
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> objections?
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Looks like Daryn has
both HADOOP-10301 & HDFS-4564
> covered.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Overall, I'll try get
this out in next couple of days if
> we
> >> >>>> can
> >> >>>>>>>>>> clear
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> list.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Arun
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 3, 2014, at
12:14 PM, Arun C Murthy <
> >> >>>> acm@hortonworks.com>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An update. Per
> >> https://s.apache.org/hadoop-2.3.0-blockerswe
> >> >>>>>>>>> are
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> now
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> down to 5 blockers:
1 Common, 1 HDFS, 3 YARN.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Daryn (thanks!)
has both the non-YARN covered. Vinod is
> >> >>>> helping
> >> >>>>>>>>>> out
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> with
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the YARN ones.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Arun
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Arun C. Murthy
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hortonworks Inc.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hortonworks.com/
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> NOTICE: This message
is intended for the use of the
> >> >>>> individual or
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> entity to
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> which it is addressed
and may contain information that is
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> confidential,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> privileged and exempt
from disclosure under applicable
> law.
> >> >> If
> >> >>>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> reader
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of this message is
not the intended recipient, you are
> >> >> hereby
> >> >>>>>>>>>> notified
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> that
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> any printing, copying,
dissemination, distribution,
> >> >>>> disclosure or
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> forwarding of this
communication is strictly prohibited.
> If
> >> >>>> you
> >> >>>>>>>>> have
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> received this communication
in error, please contact the
> >> >>>> sender
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> immediately
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and delete it from
your system. Thank You.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alejandro
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> --
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> NOTICE: This message is intended
for the use of the
> individual
> >> >> or
> >> >>>>>>>>> entity
> >> >>>>>>>>>> to
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> which it is addressed and may contain
information that is
> >> >>>>>>> confidential,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure
under applicable law.
> If
> >> >>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>> reader
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are
> hereby
> >> >>>>> notified
> >> >>>>>>>>>> that
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> any printing, copying, dissemination,
distribution,
> disclosure
> >> >> or
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> forwarding of this communication
is strictly prohibited. If
> >> you
> >> >>>> have
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> received this communication in
error, please contact the
> >> sender
> >> >>>>>>>>>> immediately
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> and delete it from your system.
Thank You.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> --
> >> >>>>>>>> Alejandro
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> --
> >> >>>>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> >> >>>>>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of
the individual
> or
> >> >>>>> entity to
> >> >>>>>>> which it is addressed and may contain information
that is
> >> >>>> confidential,
> >> >>>>>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable
law. If
> the
> >> >>>>> reader
> >> >>>>>>> of this message is not the intended recipient,
you are hereby
> >> >>>> notified
> >> >>>>> that
> >> >>>>>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution,
disclosure
> or
> >> >>>>>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you
> >> >> have
> >> >>>>>>> received this communication in error, please contact
the sender
> >> >>>>> immediately
> >> >>>>>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> --
> >> >>>>>> Alejandro
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> --
> >> >>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> >> >>>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual
or
> >> >>>> entity to
> >> >>>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that
is
> >> >> confidential,
> >> >>>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable
law. If the
> >> >>>> reader
> >> >>>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
hereby
> >> notified
> >> >>>> that
> >> >>>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure
or
> >> >>>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you
> have
> >> >>>>> received this communication in error, please contact the
sender
> >> >>>> immediately
> >> >>>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> --
> >> >>>> Alejandro
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> >> >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> >> entity to
> >> >> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> confidential,
> >> >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> >> reader
> >> >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified
> >> that
> >> >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> >> >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> >> >> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> >> immediately
> >> >> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> >> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Arun C. Murthy
> >> Hortonworks Inc.
> >> http://hortonworks.com/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity
> >> to
> >> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> reader
> >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> >> that
> >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> >> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> >> immediately
> >> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> >>
> >
> >
>

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