Denis, 

ok

> 13 марта 2017 г., в 18:59, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org> написал(а):
> 
> Maxim,
> 
> Please update Apache Ignite 2.0 migration guide:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide
>  
> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide>
> 
> You need to say that the parameter has been discontinued and the users can 
> use CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.PRIMARY instead.
> 
> Agreed?
> 
> —
> Denis
> 
>> On Mar 10, 2017, at 12:06 AM, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Andrey, Alexey, please review 
>> PR - https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 
>> <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>
>> tests - 
>> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv
>>  
>> <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>
>> 
>>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 14:15, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> написал(а):
>>> 
>>> Maxim,
>>> 
>>> all GridClockSyncProcessor related code should be remove (objects,
>>> messages, etc)
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Andrey, or better remove GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class?
>>>> 
>>>>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 12:21, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com> написал(а):
>>>>> 
>>>>> Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods: testTimeSync() 
>>>>> and testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> написал(а):
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes when
>>>>>> times are equal:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder();
>>>>>> int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder();
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) {
>>>>>> long order1 = ver1.order();
>>>>>> long order2 = ver2.order();
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> assert order1 != order2;
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> else
>>>>>> return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1;
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>>> <alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you should 
>>>>>>> modify
>>>>>>> the code as if ignoreTime is always true.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ok,
>>>>>>>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method
>>>>>>>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean 
>>>>>>>> ignoreTime)
>>>>>>>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) {  // => if 
>>>>>>>> (ignoreTime) {
>>>>>>>> .....
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>> return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1;   // => return -1;
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> and,
>>>>>>>> GridCacheMvcc class,
>>>>>>>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove and 
>>>>>>>> remove
>>>>>>>> compareSerializableVersion?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> updateTime() method should be removed.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> @Override public long updateTime() {
>>>>>>>>>> return ver.globalTime();
>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Than is better to replace this variable?
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> I think the next implementation will be good enough:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer), order);
>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime field
>>>>>>>>>>> should be removed.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Alexey,
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer << 32),
>>>>>>>> order);
>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> So you want to change or not?
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> And
>>>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter writer)
>>>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader reader)
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both methods) 
>>>>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>> replace globalTime?
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code changes but 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be avoided on this step.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would just 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remove
>>>>>>>> global
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts of high
>>>>>>>> and low
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --AG
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) |
>>>>>>>> nodeOrderDrId,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime), order);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> method?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review PR again.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>> dreamx....@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that during renaming we should not lose "Atomic"
>>>>>>>> prefix.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>> dreamx....@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, ok.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rename classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal (commit)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderWithStoreInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS
>>>>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>>> ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.
>>>>>>>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe
>>>>>>>> lfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS
>>>>>>>> elfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrderOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT
>>>>>>>> est
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry last 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> update
>>>>>>>> time
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time as 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> entry
>>>>>>>> field.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <dsetrak...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <
>>>>>>>> ag...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we need
>>>>>>>> remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also there is component called GridClockSyncProcessor 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime field 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dreamx....@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valentin,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there is no need for setting CacheConfiguration.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> atomicWriteOrderMode.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related methods?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> написал(а):
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Max,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we should
>>>>>>>> remove the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too, as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code using
>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum. Having
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dreamx....@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode, CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contains now
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition remove
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira: 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587
>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>> Max K.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> Max K.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>> Max K.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

--
Best Regards,
Max K.




Reply via email to