oodt-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tom Barber <tom.bar...@meteorite.bi>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Apache OODT 1.1 RC #1
Date Sat, 22 Jul 2017 16:21:04 GMT
Crapola, I just responded to the top thread..... can't even blame it on
alcohol..... hold on......

On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 4:16 PM, Chris Mattmann <mattmann@apache.org> wrote:

> Yep there is a new VOTE (RC #2) my friend (
>
> Please look at that one (
>
>
>
>
> On 7/22/17, 7:51 AM, "Tom Barber" <tom.barber@meteorite.bi> wrote:
>
>     Build looks good
>     Tests pass (except its usual hated of the BST timezone)
>
>     I assume the repo is actually:
>     https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheoodt-1013
> ?
>
>     Artifacts look good, notice and license in place.
>
>     I shall say +1 on the assumption of the above repo mislinking.
>
>     Thanks for cobbling it together Chris.
>
>     Tom
>
>
>
>
>     On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Tom Barber <tom.barber@meteorite.bi>
> wrote:
>
>     > I have a kid free afternoon I'll test it later.
>     >
>     > Tom
>     >
>     > On 21 Jul 2017 9:20 pm, "Chris Mattmann" <mattmann@apache.org>
> wrote:
>     >
>     >> Thanks no worries. I just need 1 more +1 and I can release tomorrow…
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> On 7/21/17, 1:15 PM, "BW" <webb@apache.org> wrote:
>     >>
>     >>     Hi Chris. Haven't yet; deferred I guess. Sorry, on vacay..
>     >>
>     >>     On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 1:11 PM Chris Mattmann <
> mattmann@apache.org>
>     >> wrote:
>     >>
>     >>     > Hi BW, have you tried RC #2? +1 still?
>     >>     >
>     >>     > Cheers,
>     >>     > Chris
>     >>     >
>     >>     >
>     >>     >
>     >>     >
>     >>     > On 7/19/17, 5:32 PM, "BW" <webb@apache.org> wrote:
>     >>     >
>     >>     >     +1
>     >>     >
>     >>     >     On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 8:51 AM Chris Mattmann <
>     >> mattmann@apache.org>
>     >>     > wrote:
>     >>     >
>     >>     >     > Absolutely, here is a simple use case:
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     > If you look at CAS-PGE files, they typically include
> setup to
>     >> “stage
>     >>     > files”
>     >>     >     > (already archived in File Manager) to the local job
> working
>     >>     > directly. Many
>     >>     >     > times
>     >>     >     > this is just handled in the bash script (or Python or
>     >> whatever) that
>     >>     >     > CAS-PGE generates
>     >>     >     > itself. However it’s such a repetitive task and *part
> of* the
>     >> actual
>     >>     >     > workflow for running
>     >>     >     > a job, we added a simple interface to do so. See here:
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/apache/oodt/master/pge/src
>     >> /test/resources/pge-config.xml
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     > And notice this block:
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >   <fileStaging dir="[StagingDir]"
> force="[ForceStaging]">
>     >>     >     >     <stageFiles metadataKey="InputFiles" />
>     >>     >     >   </fileStaging>
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     > What the above does is inspect the value of the
> InputFiles
>     >> metadata
>     >>     > as
>     >>     >     > provided
>     >>     >     > to CAS-PGE (even if it’s a list) and for each of those
> files,
>     >> it
>     >>     > “stages”
>     >>     >     > them (aka uses
>     >>     >     > the associated and declared DataTransferer for this
> CAS-PGE
>     >>     > instance) to
>     >>     >     > the directory
>     >>     >     > defined by [StagingDir].
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     > Cool huh?
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     > Cheers,
>     >>     >     > Chris
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     > P.S. It doesn’t work now, but will shortly ;)
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     > On 7/19/17, 8:43 AM, "Mallder, Valerie" <
>     >> Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu>
>     >>     >     > wrote:
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >     Yes, adding a note to CHANGES.txt is fine.  The fix
> to the
>     >>     > fileStaging
>     >>     >     > feature of CAS-PGE sounds good, although I've never
>     >> understood what
>     >>     > that
>     >>     >     > feature is supposed to do :)  When you have some free
> time I
>     >> would
>     >>     > love to
>     >>     >     > hear about what you are using it for.
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >     Thanks!
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >     -----Original Message-----
>     >>     >     >     From: Chris Mattmann [mailto:mattmann@apache.org]
>     >>     >     >     Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 11:37 AM
>     >>     >     >     To: dev@oodt.apache.org
>     >>     >     >     Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache OODT 1.1 RC #1
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >     Thank you Val!
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >     I may spin another RC not only because of the below
>     >> (which I
>     >>     > think we
>     >>     >     > should just note in CHANGES.txt (I am happy to add a
> note on
>     >> it),
>     >>     > but also
>     >>     >     > b/c I found an interesting bug while testing OODT 1.1
> RC #1
>     >> with
>     >>     > DRAT – the
>     >>     >     > bug relates to using fileStaging – it doesn’t
> explicitly set a
>     >>     >     > Product.PRODUCT_STRUCTURE* and as so gets an NPE if you
> try
>     >> and use
>     >>     > it. I
>     >>     >     > never encountered this before b/c I never used OODT’s
> native
>     >> file
>     >>     > staging
>     >>     >     > support in CAS-PGE. It is a simple fix, and I think
> will add
>     >> a lot
>     >>     > of value
>     >>     >     > (fileStaging is inoperable without it in CAS-PGE).
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >     Due to that, I will spin another RC shortly.
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >     Thank you!
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >     Cheers,
>     >>     >     >     Chris
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >     On 7/19/17, 7:55 AM, "Mallder, Valerie" <
>     >>     > Valerie.Mallder@jhuapl.edu>
>     >>     >     > wrote:
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         +1
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         I downloaded the source and built it with "mvn
> package
>     >>     > -skipTests"
>     >>     >     > and it built ok. I did a system test by running some
> data
>     >> through my
>     >>     >     > pipeline that uses cas-workflow-1.1, cas-filemgr-1.1 and
>     >> cas-pge-1.1
>     >>     > and
>     >>     >     > everything worked as I expected.  And it even helped
> find some
>     >>     > things that
>     >>     >     > I needed to tweak in my test environment :)
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         The only problem I should note is that had to
> delete
>     >> the
>     >>     > workflow
>     >>     >     > repository directory and allow cas-workflow-1.1 to
> create a
>     >>     > repository from
>     >>     >     > scratch. cas-workflow-1.1 reported an incompatibility
> with
>     >> workflow
>     >>     >     > repository that was created with cas-workflow-0.10 and
> has
>     >> been used
>     >>     > with
>     >>     >     > cas-workflow-1.0 for a while now. (Also note that, if
> the
>     >> repository
>     >>     >     > directory exists but it is empty, workflow manager will
>     >> crash. So, I
>     >>     > had to
>     >>     >     > delete the repository directory itself rather than just
>     >> delete the
>     >>     > contents
>     >>     >     > within it.)
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >          The error I received is below. It looks like
> the
>     >> change from
>     >>     >     > lucene-core-2.0.0.jar to the lucene-core-6.1.0.jar
> caused this
>     >>     >     > incompatibility between cas-workflow-1.0 and
> cas-workflow-1.1.
>     >>     > Deleting my
>     >>     >     > pipeline's workflow respository and allowing
>     >> cas-workflow-1.1 to
>     >>     > create a
>     >>     >     > new one was not a problem for me, but I can't speak for
>     >> everyone.
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         Jul 19, 2017 10:45:02 AM
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     > org.apache.oodt.cas.workflow.instrepo.LuceneWorkflowInstance
>     >> Repository
>     >>     >     > addWorkflowInstanceToCatalog
>     >>     >     >         WARNING: Unable to index workflow instance:
>     >>     >     > [d8dad567-6c90-11e7-9e4e-7574e3a12106]: Message: Format
>     >> version is
>     >>     > not
>     >>     >     > supported (resource
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     > BufferedChecksumIndexInput(MMapIndexInput(path="/project/ood
>     >> t/dev/jedi/data/workflow/slothrop/segments"))):
>     >>     >     > -1 (needs to be between 1071082519 and 1071082519). This
>     >> version of
>     >>     > Lucene
>     >>     >     > only supports indexes created with release 5.0 and
> later.
>     >>     >     >         java.lang.NullPointerException
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         Val
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         -----Original Message-----
>     >>     >     >         From: Chris Mattmann [mailto:
> mattmann@apache.org]
>     >>     >     >         Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 6:54 PM
>     >>     >     >         To: dev@oodt.apache.org
>     >>     >     >         Subject: [VOTE] Apache OODT 1.1 RC #1
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         Hi Folks,
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         I have posted a 1st release candidate for the
> Apache
>     >> OODT 1.1
>     >>     >     > release. The source code is at:
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/oodt/
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         For more detailed information, see the included
>     >> CHANGES.txt
>     >>     > file
>     >>     >     > for details on release contents and latest changes. The
>     >> release was
>     >>     > made
>     >>     >     > using the OODT release process, documented on the Wiki
> here:
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OODT/
> Release+Process
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         The release was made from the OODT 1.1 tag at:
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         https://github.com/apache/oodt/tree/1.1
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         A staged Maven repository is available at:
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache
>     >> oodt-1012/
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         Please vote on releasing these packages as
> Apache
>     >> OODT 1.1.
>     >>     > The
>     >>     >     > vote is open for at least the next 72 hours.
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         Only votes from OODT PMC are binding, but folks
> are
>     >> welcome
>     >>     > to
>     >>     >     > check the release candidate and voice their approval or
>     >> disapproval.
>     >>     > The
>     >>     >     > vote passes if at least three binding +1 votes are cast.
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache OODT 1.1
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         [ ] -1 Do not release the packages because...
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         Thanks!
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         Chris Mattmann
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >         P.S. Here is my +1.
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >     >
>     >>     >
>     >>     >
>     >>     >
>     >>     >
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>
>
>
>

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