All - Sergey has created v1.4.x branch and I opened first PR: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13469
Please add critical - and only critical - bug fixes to v1.4.x branch and add myself as approver. Regards, Steffen On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 2:17 PM Lin Yuan <[email protected]> wrote: > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13452 is needed in 1.4.0 to > support Horovod integration project. > > Thanks! > > Lin > > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 1:40 PM Davydenko, Denis < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > I suggest to include this issue into tracked ones for the release: > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/12255. It has proven to > > be a problem with MXNet start up time and it will cause even more > problems > > down the line with Elastic Training, EIA where MXNet is a commodity > rather > > than statically running process. Also it already causes noticeable issues > > with MMS (MXNet Model Server [1]). MMS users already noticed significant > > lag with MMS start up time, especially on beefy instances like C5.18xl > with > > 72 vCPUs. MMS spins up multiple MXNet instances during its start up to > > ensure full utilization of CPU or GPU resources on the host. By default > it > > spins up as many MXNet instances as there are cores (either CPU or GPU > > cores) and the bigger the host the more MXNet instances are spun up. And > > the more MXNet instances spun up - the more each instance takes time to > > start. For example, on C5.4xl users reported waiting for as long as 2 > > minutes to have just 8 MXNet instances spun up with MXNet 1.3. Same > efforts > > with MXNet 1.1 take less than 0.5 sec. > > > > This is quite a significant regression in MXNet when it comes to start up > > experience. I suggest to consider this as a blocker for 1.4. > > > > [1] https://github.com/awslabs/mxnet-model-server > > > > On 11/29/18, 12:51 PM, "Steffen Rochel" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > added to 1.4.0 tracking list > > < > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Plan+and+Status#ApacheMXNet(incubating)1.4.0ReleasePlanandStatus-OpenPRstotrack > > > > > . > > Steffen > > > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 9:32 AM Zheng, Da <[email protected] > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hello Steffen, > > > > > > Can this bug be fixed in 1.4.0 release? It's a significant > > performance > > > regression on sparse matrix multiplication. > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/13449 > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Da > > > > > > On 11/26/18, 6:42 AM, "Steffen Rochel" <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > Dear MXNet community, > > > > > > I will be the release manager for the upcoming Apache MXNet > 1.4.0 > > > release. > > > Sergey Kolychev will be co-managing the release and providing > > help > > > from the > > > committers side. > > > A release candidate will be cut on November 29, 2018 and voting > > will > > > start > > > December 7, 2018. Release notes have been drafted here [1]. If > > you > > > have any > > > additional features in progress and would like to include it in > > this > > > release, please assure they have been merged by November 27, > > 2018. > > > Release > > > schedule is available here [2]. > > > > > > Feel free to add any other comments/suggestions. Please help to > > review > > > and > > > merge outstanding PR's and resolve issues impacting the quality > > of the > > > 1.4.0 release. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Steffen > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Notes > > > > > > [2] > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Apache+MXNet+%28incubating%29+1.4.0+Release+Plan+and+Status > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 7:15 PM kellen sunderland < > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Spoke too soon[1], looks like others have been adding Turing > > support > > > as > > > > well (thanks to those helping with this). I believe there's > > still a > > > few > > > > changes we'd have to make to claim support though (mshadow > > CMake > > > changes, > > > > PyPi package creation tweaks). > > > > > > > > 1: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/commit/2c3357443ec3d49a11e93c89f278264ce10c2f08 > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 7:00 PM kellen sunderland < > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hey Steffen, I'd like to be able to merge this PR for > > version 1.4: > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/13310 . It > > fixes a > > > > > regression in master which causes incorrect feature vectors > > to be > > > output > > > > > when using the TensorRT feature. (Thanks to Nathalie for > > helping > > > me > > > > track > > > > > down the root cause of the issue). I'm currently blocked > > on a CI > > > issue > > > > I > > > > > haven't seen before, but hope to have it resolved by EOW. > > > > > > > > > > One call-out I would make is that we currently don't > support > > Turing > > > > > architecture (sm_75). I've been slowly trying to add > > support, but > > > I > > > > don't > > > > > think I'd have capacity to do this done by EOW. Does > anyone > > feel > > > > strongly > > > > > we need this in the 1.4 release? From my perspective this > > will > > > already > > > > be > > > > > a strong release without it. > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 6:42 PM Steffen Rochel < > > > [email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Thanks Patrick, lets target to get the PR's merged this > > week. > > > > >> > > > > >> Call for contributions from the community: Right now we > > have 10 PR > > > > >> awaiting > > > > >> merge > > > > >> < > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3Apr-awaiting-merge+ > > > > >> > > > > > >> and > > > > >> we have 61 open PR awaiting review. > > > > >> < > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3Apr-awaiting-review > > > > >> > > > > > >> I would appreciate if you all can help to review the open > > PR and > > > the > > > > >> committers can drive the merge before code freeze for > 1.4.0. > > > > >> > > > > >> The contributors on the Java API are making progress, but > > not all > > > > >> performance issues are resolved. With some luck it should > be > > > possible to > > > > >> code freeze towards end of this week. > > > > >> > > > > >> Are there other critical features/bugs/PR you think need > to > > be > > > included > > > > in > > > > >> 1.4.0? If so, please communicate as soon as possible. > > > > >> > > > > >> Regards, > > > > >> Steffen > > > > >> > > > > >> On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 8:26 PM Zhao, Patric < > > > [email protected]> > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> > Thanks, Steffen. I think there is NO open issue to block > > the > > > MKLDNN to > > > > >> GA > > > > >> > now. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > BTW, several quantization related PRs (#13297,#13260) > are > > under > > > the > > > > >> review > > > > >> > and I think it can be merged in this week. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Thanks, > > > > >> > > > > > >> > --Patric > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > -----Original Message----- > > > > >> > > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:[email protected]] > > > > >> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2018 2:57 AM > > > > >> > > To: [email protected] > > > > >> > > Subject: Re: [Announce] Upcoming Apache MXNet > > (incubating) > > > 1.4.0 > > > > >> release > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > On Friday the contributors working on Java API > > discovered a > > > > potential > > > > >> > > performance problem with inference using Java API vs. > > Python. > > > > >> > Investigation > > > > >> > > is ongoing. > > > > >> > > As the Java API is one of the main features for the > > upcoming > > > > release, > > > > >> I > > > > >> > > suggest to post-pone the code freeze towards end of > > this week. > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Please provide feedback and concern about the change > in > > dates > > > for > > > > code > > > > >> > > freeze and 1.4.0 release. I will provide updates on > > progress > > > > resolving > > > > >> > the > > > > >> > > potential performance problem. > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Patrick - do you think it is possible to resolve the > > remaining > > > > issues > > > > >> on > > > > >> > MKL- > > > > >> > > DNN this week, so we can consider GA for MKL-DNN with > > 1.4.0? > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Regards, > > > > >> > > Steffen > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 5:26 AM Anton Chernov < > > > [email protected]> > > > > >> > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > I'd like to remind everyone that 'code freeze' would > > mean > > > cutting > > > > a > > > > >> > > > v1.4.x release branch and all following fixes would > > need to > > > be > > > > >> > backported. > > > > >> > > > Development on master can be continued as usual. > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > Best > > > > >> > > > Anton > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > ср, 14 нояб. 2018 г. в 6:04, Steffen Rochel < > > > > >> [email protected]>: > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Dear MXNet community, > > > > >> > > > > the agreed plan was to establish code freeze for > > 1.4.0 > > > release > > > > >> > > > > today. As the 1.3.1 patch release is still > ongoing I > > > suggest to > > > > >> > > > > post-pone the code freeze to Friday 16th November > > 2018. > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > Sergey Kolychev has agreed to act as co-release > > manager > > > for all > > > > >> > > > > tasks > > > > >> > > > which > > > > >> > > > > require committer privileges. If anybody is > > interested to > > > > >> volunteer > > > > >> > > > > as release manager - now is the time to speak up. > > > Otherwise I > > > > will > > > > >> > > > > manage > > > > >> > > > the > > > > >> > > > > release. > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > Regards, > > > > >> > > > > Steffen > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
