spark-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joseph Bradley <jos...@databricks.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Spark 1.3.0 (RC3)
Date Tue, 10 Mar 2015 00:49:07 GMT
+1
Tested on Mac OS X

On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Xiangrui Meng <mengxr@gmail.com> wrote:

> Krishna, I tested your linear regression example. For linear
> regression, we changed its objective function from 1/n * \|A x -
> b\|_2^2 to 1/(2n) * \|Ax - b\|_2^2 to be consistent with common least
> squares formulations. It means you could re-produce the same result by
> multiplying the step size by 2. This is not a problem if both run
> until convergence (if not blow up). However, in your example, a very
> small step size is chosen and it didn't converge in 100 iterations. In
> this case, the step size matters. I will put a note in the migration
> guide. Thanks! -Xiangrui
>
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Sean Owen <sowen@cloudera.com> wrote:
> > I'm +1 as I have not heard of any one else seeing the Hive test
> > failure, which is likely a test issue rather than code issue anyway,
> > and not a blocker.
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Sean Owen <sowen@cloudera.com> wrote:
> >> Although the problem is small, especially if indeed the essential docs
> >> changes are following just a couple days behind the final release, I
> >> mean, why the rush if they're essential? wait a couple days, finish
> >> them, make the release.
> >>
> >> Answer is, I think these changes aren't actually essential given the
> >> comment from tdas, so: just mark these Critical? (although ... they do
> >> say they're changes for the 1.3 release, so kind of funny to get to
> >> them for 1.3.x or 1.4, but that's not important now.)
> >>
> >> I thought that Blocker really meant Blocker in this project, as I've
> >> been encouraged to use it to mean "don't release without this." I
> >> think we should use it that way. Just thinking of it as "extra
> >> Critical" doesn't add anything. I don't think Documentation should be
> >> special-cased as less important, and I don't think there's confusion
> >> if Blocker means what it says, so I'd 'fix' that way.
> >>
> >> If nobody sees the Hive failure I observed, and if we can just zap
> >> those "Blockers" one way or the other, +1
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 9:17 PM, Patrick Wendell <pwendell@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>> Sean,
> >>>
> >>> The docs are distributed and consumed in a fundamentally different way
> >>> than Spark code itself. So we've always considered the "deadline" for
> >>> doc changes to be when the release is finally posted.
> >>>
> >>> If there are small inconsistencies with the docs present in the source
> >>> code for that release tag, IMO that doesn't matter much since we don't
> >>> even distribute the docs with Spark's binary releases and virtually no
> >>> one builds and hosts the docs on their own (that I am aware of, at
> >>> least). Perhaps we can recommend if people want to build the doc
> >>> sources that they should always grab the head of the most recent
> >>> release branch, to set expectations accordingly.
> >>>
> >>> In the past we haven't considered it worth holding up the release
> >>> process for the purpose of the docs. It just doesn't make sense since
> >>> they are consumed "as a service". If we decide to change this
> >>> convention, it would mean shipping our releases later, since we
> >>> could't pipeline the doc finalization with voting.
> >>>
> >>> - Patrick
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Sean Owen <sowen@cloudera.com> wrote:
> >>>> Given the title and tagging, it sounds like there could be some
> >>>> must-have doc changes to go with what is being released as 1.3. It can
> >>>> be finished later, and published later, but then the docs source
> >>>> shipped with the release doesn't match the site, and until then, 1.3
> >>>> is released without some "must-have" docs for 1.3 on the site.
> >>>>
> >>>> The real question to me is: are there any further, absolutely
> >>>> essential doc changes that need to accompany 1.3 or not?
> >>>>
> >>>> If not, just resolve these. If there are, then it seems like the
> >>>> release has to block on them. If there are some docs that should have
> >>>> gone in for 1.3, but didn't, but aren't essential, well I suppose it
> >>>> bears thinking about how to not slip as much work, but it doesn't
> >>>> block.
> >>>>
> >>>> I think Documentation issues certainly can be a blocker and shouldn't
> >>>> be specially ignored.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> BTW the UISeleniumSuite issue is a real failure, but I do not think
it
> >>>> is serious: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-6205  It isn't
> >>>> a regression from 1.2.x, but only affects tests, and only affects a
> >>>> subset of build profiles.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 6:43 PM, Patrick Wendell <pwendell@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>> Hey Sean,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> SPARK-5310 Update SQL programming guide for 1.3
> >>>>>> SPARK-5183 Document data source API
> >>>>>> SPARK-6128 Update Spark Streaming Guide for Spark 1.3
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For these, the issue is that they are documentation JIRA's, which
> >>>>> don't need to be timed exactly with the release vote, since we can
> >>>>> update the documentation on the website whenever we want. In the
past
> >>>>> I've just mentally filtered these out when considering RC's. I see
a
> >>>>> few options here:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1. We downgrade such issues away from Blocker (more clear, but we
> risk
> >>>>> loosing them in the fray if they really are things we want to have
> >>>>> before the release is posted).
> >>>>> 2. We provide a filter to the community that excludes 'Documentation'
> >>>>> issues and shows all other blockers for 1.3. We can put this on
the
> >>>>> wiki, for instance.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Which do you prefer?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - Patrick
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@spark.apache.org
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@spark.apache.org
>
>

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