systemml-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Deron Eriksson <deroneriks...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Migration to Spark 2.0.0
Date Tue, 16 Aug 2016 21:41:36 GMT
Hi Glenn,

I am fine with this approach. If this approach is taken, I would like to
set the documentation version in _config.yml to 0.10.x before the project
is tagged (I recently set it to 0.11).

Deron


On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Glenn Weidner <gweidner@us.ibm.com> wrote:

> I would like to propose an alternative to supporting Spark 2.0 and Spark
> 1.x within single stream.
>
> 1) Capture snapshot and establish label of current Apache SystemML master
> which includes new features added since 0.10.0 release.
>
> 2) After step 1 completed, enable master to move forward with support for
> Spark 2.x only.
>
> This is similar to what Fred initially proposed except step 1 would not
> involve a separate release. The 0.11 release of Apache SystemML would be
> compatible for Spark 2.0 and Scala 2.11.
>
> Thanks,
> Glenn
>
> [image: Inactive hide details for Glenn Weidner---08/08/2016 03:33:43
> PM---As a preliminary experiment in attempt to compile against bo]Glenn
> Weidner---08/08/2016 03:33:43 PM---As a preliminary experiment in attempt
> to compile against both Spark 2.0.0 and Spark 1.6.2 from same
>
> From: Glenn Weidner/Silicon Valley/IBM@IBMUS
> To: dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org
> Date: 08/08/2016 03:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Migration to Spark 2.0.0
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> As a preliminary experiment in attempt to compile against both Spark 2.0.0
> and Spark 1.6.2 from same code base, I made another set of changes for
> comparison against previous proposed changes for [SYSTEMML-776].
> This experimental set can be viewed here:
>
> *https://github.com/gweidner/incubator-systemml/commit/0611f0c197e4a0e816b3325093168bc5162d62c0*
> <https://github.com/gweidner/incubator-systemml/commit/0611f0c197e4a0e816b3325093168bc5162d62c0>
>
> This compiles against Spark 2.0.0 and Spark 1.6.2 except for fit/transform
> overrides in LogisticRegression.scala due to:
> SPARK-14500 Accept Dataset[] instead of DataFrame in MLlib APIs
>
> Detailed code comments and suggestions to try out can be made in the
> branch commit instead of this mail thread.
>
> Thanks,
> Glenn
>
> Deron Eriksson ---08/05/2016 02:02:10 PM---I am open to the idea of
> supporting Spark 2 and Spark<2 concurrently if someone shows that it can be
>
> From: Deron Eriksson <deroneriksson@gmail.com>
> To: dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org
> Date: 08/05/2016 02:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Migration to Spark 2.0.0
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> I am open to the idea of supporting Spark 2 and Spark<2 concurrently if
> someone shows that it can be accomplished with minimal inconvenience.
>
> However, I would lean towards Fred's approach (Spark 1.6 release followed
> shortly by a Spark 2 release). If possible, I want to be able to focus most
> of our efforts towards the future rather than the past.
>
> Deron
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Luciano Resende <luckbr1975@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > That was going to be my suggestion... In Zeppelin, we just introduced
> > support for different versions of scala and added support for spark 2.0
> > based on profiles and a bit of reflections...
> >
> > Do we have to do anything related to Scala versions as well ?
> >
> > On Thursday, August 4, 2016, Matthias Boehm <mboehm@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I would recommend to start an investigation if we could support both
> the
> > > 1.x and 2.x lines with a single code base. It seems feasible to
> refactor
> > > the code a bit, compile against 2.0 (or with profiles), and run on
> either
> > > 1.6 or 2.0. For example, by creating a wrapper that implements both
> > > Iterable and Iterator, we could overcome the Iterator API change as
> shown
> > > by our LazyIterableIterator which did not require any change in related
> > > functions. Btw, we did the same for MRv1 and Yarn by ensuring that on
> > MRv1,
> > > we don't touch Yarn related APIs. Similarly on Spark, we already
> support
> > > both legacy and >=1.6 memory management. I think this kind of platform
> > > independence is really valuable but it obviously adds complexity.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Matthias
> > >
> > >
> > > [image: Inactive hide details for Niketan Pansare---08/03/2016 05:15:21
> > > PM---I am in favor of having one more release against Spark 1.6]Niketan
> > > Pansare---08/03/2016 05:15:21 PM---I am in favor of having one more
> > release
> > > against Spark 1.6. Since default scala version for Spark 1.
> > >
> > > From: Niketan Pansare/Almaden/IBM@IBMUS
> > > To: dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org
> > > <*javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org')*;>
> > > Date: 08/03/2016 05:15 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Migration to Spark 2.0.0
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I am in favor of having one more release against Spark 1.6. Since
> default
> > > scala version for Spark 1.6 is 2.10, I recommend either having SystemML
> > > compiled and released with Scala 2.10 profile or having two release
> > > candidates.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Niketan Pansare
> > > IBM Almaden Research Center
> > > E-mail: npansar At us.ibm.com
> > > *http://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/view.php?
> person=us-npansar*
> > > <
> *http://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/view.php?person=us-npansar*
> <http://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/view.php?person=us-npansar>>
> > >
> > > Frederick R Reiss---08/03/2016 03:58:17 PM---While I agree that getting
> > > onto Spark 2.0 quickly ought to be a priority, there are existing
> early u
> > >
> > > From: Frederick R Reiss/Almaden/IBM@IBMUS
> > > To: dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org
> > > <*javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org')*;>
> > > Date: 08/03/2016 03:58 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Migration to Spark 2.0.0
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > While I agree that getting onto Spark 2.0 quickly ought to be a
> priority,
> > > there are existing early users of SystemML who are likely stuck on
> Spark
> > > 1.6.x for the next few months. Those users could want some of the new
> > > experimental features since 0.10 (specifically frames, the prototype
> > Python
> > > DSL, and the new MLContext) and it would be good to have a Spark 1.6
> > branch
> > > of our version tree where we can backport the debugged versions of
> these
> > > features if needed.
> > >
> > > I would recommend that we do one more SystemML release against Spark
> 1.6,
> > > then switch the head version of SystemML over to Spark 2.0, then
> > > immediately perform a second SystemML release. Thoughts?
> > >
> > > Fred
> > >
> > > Deron Eriksson ---08/02/2016 12:13:07 PM---I would definitely be in
> favor
> > > of moving to Spark 2.0 as early as possible. This will allow SystemML
> > >
> > > From: Deron Eriksson <deroneriksson@gmail.com
> > > <*javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','deroneriksson@gmail.com')*;>>
> > > To: dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org
> > > <*javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','dev@systemml.incubator.apache.org')*;>
> > > Date: 08/02/2016 12:13 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Migration to Spark 2.0.0
> > > ------------------------------
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I would definitely be in favor of moving to Spark 2.0 as early as
> > possible.
> > > This will allow SystemML to be current with cutting edge Spark. It
> would
> > be
> > > nice to focus our efforts on the latest Spark.
> > >
> > > Deron
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 12:05 PM, <dusenberrymw@gmail.com
> > > <*javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','dusenberrymw@gmail.com')*;>> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm in favor of moving to Spark 2.0 now, meaning that our upcoming
> > > release
> > > > would include both new features and 2.0 support.  0.10 has plenty of
> > > > functionality for any existing 1.x users.
> > > >
> > > > -Mike
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Mike Dusenberry
> > > > GitHub: github.com/dusenberrymw
> > > > LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/mikedusenberry
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my iPhone.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On Aug 2, 2016, at 11:44 AM, Glenn Weidner <gweidner@us.ibm.com
> > > <*javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','gweidner@us.ibm.com')*;>> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > In the "[DISCUSS] SystemML 0.11 release" thread, native frame
> support
> > > and
> > > > > API updates such as new MLContext were identified as main new
> > features
> > > > for
> > > > > the release.  In addition, support for Spark 2.0.0 was targeted.
> > > > > Note code changes required for Spark 2.0.0 are not backward
> > compatible
> > > to
> > > > > earlier Spark versions (e.g., 1.6.2) so starting separate mail
> thread
> > > for
> > > > > anyone to raise objections/alternatives for migrating to Spark
> 2.0.0.
> > > > >
> > > > > One possible option is to do a release to include the new Apache
> > > SystemML
> > > > > features before migrating to Spark 2.0.0.  However, it seems better
> > to
> > > > have
> > > > > the next Apache SystemML release compatible with latest Spark
> version
> > > > > 2.0.0.  The Apache SystemML 0.10 release from June can be used with
> > > > earlier
> > > > > versions of Spark.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Glenn
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Sent from my Mobile device
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>

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