> Pavel Tupitsyn, what about .NET stuff ?

1) Thank you for filing the ticket, personally I have no plans to work on
it in the near future.

2) .NET tests fail, please make sure they are fixed before merging:
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1175956

TransactionsParityTest should be fixed by adding new properties to ignore
list with a reference to IGNITE-8075, this is simple.

But I have concerns about
*CachePartitionedTest.TestTransactionScopeMultiCache, *
seems like something is broken with multi-cache transactions. Please
investigate this one.

Thanks,
Pavel


On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 6:24 PM, Alexei Scherbakov <
alexey.scherbak...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Guys,
>
> I've slightly modified public API javadoc as Denis Magda has suggested in
> PR review.
>
> Please take a look.
>
> Pavel Tupitsyn, what about .NET stuff ?
>
> I provided all necessary information in ticket [2]
>
> Upsource link [1]
>
> [1] https://reviews.ignite.apache.org/ignite/branch/PR%203624
>
> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-8075
>
>
>
> пн, 9 апр. 2018 г. в 16:57, Alexey Goncharuk <alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>:
>
> > I am not aware of any additional timeouts that we are willing to add in
> the
> > nearest future.
> >
> > 2018-04-09 16:01 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>:
> >
> > > On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 5:42 AM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Guys,
> > > >
> > > > After the review in Upsource the configuration parameter was renamed
> > > > to txTimeoutOnPartMapSync, and it makes sense to me because PME is an
> > > > implementation detail and it may change in future, partition map sync
> > is
> > > a
> > > > more abstract term. For the same reason I like this parameter being
> > > placed
> > > > on transactions configuration - we do not have any parameters for
> PME,
> > so
> > > > the configuration property goes to an object which affects a
> > user-exposed
> > > > API.
> > > >
> > >
> > > AG, are we going to have any other timeouts on PME, like locks? If yes,
> > > then I would still vote of adding PmeTimeout property.
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
> Alexei Scherbakov
>

Reply via email to