-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Upgrade Spark / Hadoop / Zeppelin (Issue #535) #590
Conversation
<property> | ||
<name>zeppelin.interpreter.exclude</name> | ||
<value>angular,livy,alluxio,file,psql,flink,ignite,lens,cassandra,geode,kylin,elasticsearch,scalding,jdbc,hbase,bigquery,beam,groovy,flink-cmd,hazelcastjet,influxdb,java,jupyter,kotlin,ksql,mongodb,neo4j,pig,r,sap,spark-submit,sparql,submarine</value> | ||
<description>All the inteprreters that you would like to exclude. You can only specify either 'zeppelin.interpreter.include' or 'zeppelin.interpreter.exclude'. Specifying them together is not allowed.</description> | ||
</property> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why are these excluded ?
In might be better to explicitly list the interpreters we do want in zeppelin.interpreter.include
rather than excluding an arbitrary list in zeppelin.interpreter.exclude
.
I've created an issue to follow this up #593.
# After some investigation, it looks like the new Zeppelin runs Spark jobs as the logged in Zeppelin user, and fails because it lacks permission. | ||
# Turn this off for now, so that everything is sent as the main Zeppelin user (After this change Spark notebooks work) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How do we turn this ON/OFF ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We will need to re-visit this.Created a new issue to follow this up #594.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good, tests pass, go for it.
Description
This PR upgrades the versions of our components as described below:
What Issue is this related to:
#535
What type of PR is it?
Upgrade
Has this been tested:
Yes. This was tested using the Benchmarking suite that was introduced here: #583
Probably shouldn't have included the same change here, the reason for including them in the first place is that it was used for testing this branch, and the notes are based on a version that includes the benchmarker.