Re: When to release Cloudberry 2.0
Hi, One more request from the community member, FYI: Any chance to provide one official docker image for the new release? Best, Dianjin Wang On Fri, Mar 7, 2025 at 11:33 AM Dianjin Wang wrote: > > As the first phase of the cherry-pick work nears completion, I believe > it’s time to start preparing for the Cloudberry 2.0 release as Reshke > asked earlier this week. > > I would like to provide some inputs for consideration from my perspective: > * High Priority: Cleanup PRs (#731, #812, #920) should be included in > the 2.0 release for a better codebase and ASF compliance > * Low Priority: Other ideas that need more feedback (#948, #961, #909) > > Additionally, I’ve gathered some requests from community members: > * Besides providing RPM packages for EL 8/9, will offer .deb packages? > * How can upgrade from 1.6.0 to 2.0.0? Will there be documentation for this? > > Thanks! Looking forward to your thoughts! > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 1:56 PM Max Yang wrote: > > > > It's good that we are starting to work on the pg_upgrade now. > > > > On Sat, Feb 22, 2025 at 3:23 PM Kirill Reshke wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 30 Jan 2025 at 00:14, Kirill Reshke > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I tried gp_upgrade once again today. Our gp 6 fork is here[1]. > > > > Currently, there is some vital work from GP7 missing in CBDB, so I did > > > > a cherry-pick PR [2]. Most probably, gpupgrade will need some more > > > > attention after [2] merged, this is what I'm currently working on. > > > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/open-gpdb/gpupgrade > > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/cloudberry/pull/898 > > > > > > > > > > Today I was hacking a new set of pg_upgrade cherry-picks [0]. While > > > doing so, I discovered that Apache Cloudberry (CDBD) has basically no > > > CI for pg_upgrade (and thus, gp_upgrade). I believe this open source > > > project should derive the best service and experience to its community > > > and users, and thus we need to begin supporting gp_upgrade scenarios > > > (or, at least, activity in that direction). This includes, at very > > > least, CDBD to CDBD binary upgrade support. In ideal case, with > > > release of CDBD there will be support for 1.6 to 2.0 binary upgrade > > > using gp_upgrade, along with comprehensive instructions on how to > > > handle specific problems. I am aware that this is overly optimistic, > > > though. > > > > > > I'll keep working in this direction, attempting to engage as many > > > engineer resources (other pg/cbdb hackers) as possible. I cannot, > > > however, promise that I will be successful here by the release of 2.0. > > > > > > [0] https://github.com/apache/cloudberry/pull/955 > > > > > > -- > > > Best regards, > > > Kirill Reshke > > > > > > - > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cloudberry.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cloudberry.apache.org > > > > > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cloudberry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cloudberry.apache.org
Re: When to release Cloudberry 2.0
We might be able to help with that. Founder - https://commandprompt.com/ - 24x7x365 Postgres since 1997Founder and Co-Chair - https://postgresconf.org/ Founder - https://postgresql.us - United States PostgreSQLPublic speaker, published author, postgresql expert, and people believer.Host - More than a refresh: A podcast about data and the people who wrangle it. Sent from Proton Mail Android Original Message On 3/19/25 07:01, Dianjin Wang wrote: > Hi, > > One more request from the community member, FYI: Any chance to provide > one official docker image for the new release? > > Best, > Dianjin Wang > > On Fri, Mar 7, 2025 at 11:33 AM Dianjin Wang wrote: > > > > As the first phase of the cherry-pick work nears completion, I believe > > it’s time to start preparing for the Cloudberry 2.0 release as Reshke > > asked earlier this week. > > > > I would like to provide some inputs for consideration from my perspective: > > * High Priority: Cleanup PRs (#731, #812, #920) should be included in > > the 2.0 release for a better codebase and ASF compliance > > * Low Priority: Other ideas that need more feedback (#948, #961, #909) > > > > Additionally, I’ve gathered some requests from community members: > > * Besides providing RPM packages for EL 8/9, will offer .deb packages? > > * How can upgrade from 1.6.0 to 2.0.0? Will there be documentation for > this? > > > > Thanks! Looking forward to your thoughts! > > > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 1:56 PM Max Yang wrote: > > > > > > It's good that we are starting to work on the pg_upgrade now. > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 22, 2025 at 3:23 PM Kirill Reshke wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, 30 Jan 2025 at 00:14, Kirill Reshke > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I tried gp_upgrade once again today. Our gp 6 fork is here[1]. > > > > > Currently, there is some vital work from GP7 missing in CBDB, so I > did > > > > > a cherry-pick PR [2]. Most probably, gpupgrade will need some more > > > > > attention after [2] merged, this is what I'm currently working on. > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/open-gpdb/gpupgrade > > > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/cloudberry/pull/898 > > > > > > > > > > > > > Today I was hacking a new set of pg_upgrade cherry-picks [0]. While > > > > doing so, I discovered that Apache Cloudberry (CDBD) has basically no > > > > CI for pg_upgrade (and thus, gp_upgrade). I believe this open source > > > > project should derive the best service and experience to its community > > > > and users, and thus we need to begin supporting gp_upgrade scenarios > > > > (or, at least, activity in that direction). This includes, at very > > > > least, CDBD to CDBD binary upgrade support. In ideal case, with > > > > release of CDBD there will be support for 1.6 to 2.0 binary upgrade > > > > using gp_upgrade, along with comprehensive instructions on how to > > > > handle specific problems. I am aware that this is overly optimistic, > > > > though. > > > > > > > > I'll keep working in this direction, attempting to engage as many > > > > engineer resources (other pg/cbdb hackers) as possible. I cannot, > > > > however, promise that I will be successful here by the release of 2.0. > > > > > > > > [0] https://github.com/apache/cloudberry/pull/955 > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Best regards, > > > > Kirill Reshke > > > > > > > > - > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cloudberry.apache.org > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cloudberry.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cloudberry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cloudberry.apache.org > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cloudberry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cloudberry.apache.org
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] New Committer: Xiong Tong (TomShawn)
Congratulations and Welcome Xiong Tong! Cheers, -=e On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 9:02 PM Dianjin Wang wrote: > The Podling Project Management Committee (PPMC) for Apache Cloudberry > has invited Xiong Tong to become a committer and we are pleased > to announce that he has accepted. > > TomShawn has made significant contributions to the project’s documentation > over the past two years, which can be reviewed here[1]. His dedication > and engagement have been instrumental in shaping the project's > documentation efforts. > > Please join us in welcoming Xiong Tong to his new role and > responsibility in our project community. > > [1] https://github.com/apache/cloudberry-site/commits?author=TomShawn > > Dianjin Wang > On behalf of the Cloudberry PPMC > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cloudberry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cloudberry.apache.org > > -- Ed Espino Apache Cloudberry (incubating) & MADlib
Re: [D] cbcopy freeze in the middle [cloudberry]
GitHub user robertmu added a comment to the discussion: cbcopy freeze in the middle Based on the command you shared, it seems that specifying --dest-host=127.0.0.1 (localhost) may be causing communication failures between the helper processes. Here's what might be happening: 1. cbcopy works by starting a cbcopy_helper process on both the source and destination database servers 1. When you specify --dest-host=127.0.0.1, the source database's helper process likely tries to connect to port 1024 on localhost (itself), not to the actual destination server 1. The source helper process will continue retrying these connection attempts, causing the tool to appear frozen while it waits for a connection that can never be established 1. This could cause the data transfer to fail silently and the process to hang, as shown in your logs GitHub link: https://github.com/apache/cloudberry/discussions/999#discussioncomment-12551590 This is an automatically sent email for dev@cloudberry.apache.org. To unsubscribe, please send an email to: dev-unsubscr...@cloudberry.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cloudberry.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cloudberry.apache.org
