impala-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Nishidha Panpaliya" <>
Subject Contributions to Cloudera Impala
Date Wed, 17 Aug 2016 11:49:59 GMT

Hi All,

Hope you are doing great!

I'm glad to tell you that we are able to build and test Impala on Ubuntu
linux ppc64le with the great support from the Cloudera Community. We really
thank and admire you for your help and quick turn-around to our queries.

Our next action is to upstream all our changes to Cloudera Impala. With
this, our plan is to start building latest Impala on Power8 as we'd been
porting quite an old version (code from cdh5-trunk branch till 23rd March,
2016). Since then, I know there have been many many changes happened which
are yet to be ported, specially kudu stuff.

I'd couple of doubts/suggestions with respect to the upstream process -
   We know we need CLA to be signed to start contributions. We have already
   initiated the process and hoping to get it done soon.
    By the time we get CLA signed, we would start porting the changes done
   in last 5 months. So, I wanted to know which tag/branch should we take
   up for this. Working on cdh5-trunk will put us into an unending loop of
   porting as it is being modified everyday. We are thinking to create a
   branch from cdh5.8.0-release tag and start working on it. Please suggest
   us the best way to do this.
   Verifying all the changes on x86 platforms ourself here will also be
   time consuming and add potential delays in upstreaming. So, we were
   thinking if we can get a job on Cloudera's Continuous integration server
   which would simply fetch our branch and verify it on all the supported
   platforms and do all the required checks. I'm not sure if this is
   feasible but just a thought. Any other suggestions  to foster this
   activity would be appreciated.
   For every Pull Request, what are the basic sanity tests required to be
   ensured? Do you test all BE, FE, End-to-End tests, Custom cluster tests?

Please let us know your opinion on this. Also, if you have any other
approach, we would be happy to go with that.

My colleague Valencia Serrao will be working on this activity here onwards.


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