Concerning Too many requests error, I see the following problem:
Your request has been rate limited, as we have detected excessive usage from your IP or net block: 15.575 SECONDS OF TIME SPENT OVER 120 SECONDS, MAX ALLOWED IS 15. Rate-limits are automatic and reset every two minutes. If you feel this is in error, please contact the Apache Infrastructure Team at: us...@infra.apache.org. Can someone check with them about it, please? > On 17 Dec 2021, at 13:14, Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Permissions updated. > > >> On 17 Dec 2021, at 13:09, Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Could you please add links to builds that are malfunctioning? >> As much as I see here [1] and here [2] — the release build changed to comply >> with 2.12 changes that are not merged to 2.11.1 >> >> >> [1] >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/Releases_ApacheIgniteMain_ReleaseBuild/6329822 >> [2] >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/Releases_ApacheIgniteMain_ReleaseBuild/6329824 >> >>> On 17 Dec 2021, at 12:11, Maxim Muzafarov <mmu...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> Hello Petr, >>> >>> Can you please assist with configuring the Release Teamcity suite that >>> has been changed for 2.x a month ago? These changes haven't been >>> discussed on the dev-list, so I'm not familiar with them. >>> >>> I've faced several issues: >>> - the default role for Apache Ignite 2.x (Release) suite is `Agent >>> manager`, however, it seems the right value is `Project developer and >>> queue manager`. I've looked through the documentation pages and >>> doesn't get an idea of how it can be changed. >>> - there was an issue with the Releases_ApacheIgniteMain_GitBoxIgnite >>> that throws `429 too many requests` exception each time a new list of >>> branches is fetched. I've changed the poll interval to 180 sec >>> (default value 60 sec), however, this change doesn't look good from my >>> side. What should I do here? >>> >>> On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 at 22:09, Вячеслав Коптилин >>> <slava.kopti...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Maxim, >>>> >>>> Thanks a lot! >>>> >>>>> Check the following links below. >>>> Looks good to me. >>>> >>>> >>>> чт, 16 дек. 2021 г. в 20:19, Maxim Muzafarov <mmu...@apache.org>: >>>> >>>>> Folks, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I'm OK with this. Let's go through the fastest way we have. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Check the following links below. I'll prepare the vote shortly. >>>>> >>>>> Compare branches 2.11 and 2.11.1: >>>>> https://github.com/apache/ignite/compare/ignite-2.11...ignite-2.11.1 >>>>> >>>>> The release branch: >>>>> https://github.com/apache/ignite/tree/ignite-2.11.1 >>>>> >>>>> JIRA 2.11.1 version: >>>>> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20IGNITE%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.11.1 >>>>> >>>>> Release notes: >>>>> https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/ignite-2.11.1/RELEASE_NOTES.txt >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 at 19:30, Ilya Kasnacheev <ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hello! >>>>>> >>>>>> I also agree with Stephen. If we wanted to do a stabilization release we >>>>>> should unbound it from this urgent fix. >>>>>> >>>>>> I wonder why 2.12 is not with us already, given that it was scheduled to >>>>> go >>>>>> out in August. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Ilya Kasnacheev >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> чт, 16 дек. 2021 г. в 19:25, Вячеслав Коптилин <slava.kopti...@gmail.com >>>>>> : >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Given that 2.12 is so close, my preference would be to limit the >>>>> scope of >>>>>>> 2.11.1 to just the log4j update. >>>>>>> I agree with Stephen. Apache Ignite 2.11.1 is an emergency release. >>>>> Using >>>>>>> log4j 2.16 instead of 2.14 is a quite small change that only requires a >>>>>>> "sanity" check and can be quickly released. A wider release scope >>>>> requires >>>>>>> full testing, IMHO. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> S. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> чт, 16 дек. 2021 г. в 16:03, Maxim Muzafarov <mmu...@apache.org>: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think it is completely possible to move vote/release dates >>>>>>>> significantly forward with keeping the scope. I will take a look at >>>>>>>> the list of fixed bugs more narrowly and exclude some of them that >>>>>>>> require additional verification. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 at 15:55, Stephen Darlington >>>>>>>> <stephen.darling...@gridgain.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Given that 2.12 is so close, my preference would be to limit the >>>>> scope >>>>>>>> of 2.11.1 to just the log4j update. Would that help bring the >>>>>>> vote/release >>>>>>>> date forward? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 16 Dec 2021, at 12:44, Maxim Muzafarov <mmu...@apache.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dear Ignite Community! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I suggest preparing the Apache Ignite 2.11.1 release and I want >>>>> to >>>>>>>>>> propose myself to be the release manager of the minor release. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> * RELEASE TIMELINE * >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Scope Freeze: December 16, 2021 >>>>>>>>>> Code Freeze: December 16, 2021 >>>>>>>>>> Voting Date: December 21, 2021 >>>>>>>>>> Release Date: December 24, 2021 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> * RELEASE SCOPE * >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> LOG4J dependency update >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-16101 >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-16127 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> B+Tree Corrupted exception when using a key extracted from a >>>>>>>> BinaryObject >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12911 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Regression: Ignite node crash(CorruptedTreeException: B+Tree is >>>>>>>> corrupted) >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15943 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> .NET: ClientFailoverSocket sets logger too late, resulting in >>>>> null >>>>>>>>>> loggers downstream >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14776 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The iterator of the ClientCacheQueryCursor can be closed during >>>>>>>> serialization. >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15346 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Possible owners desync when a node is restarted while rebalancing >>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>> enabled persistence >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15315 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thin client: Tx can fail if there are concurrent tx rollbacks by >>>>>>>> timeout >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15732 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> AssertionError: Unexpected rebalance on rebalanced cluster >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15033 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> JmxMetricExporterSpi throws assertion error on a filtered metric >>>>>>>> unregister >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15252 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ClassNotFoundException on an attempt to invoke service method >>>>> from >>>>>>>>>> Java ThinClient after a cluster failover >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15256 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> NullPointerException on an attempt to create a Java ThinClient >>>>> with >>>>>>>>>> BinaryConfiguration >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15138 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Java thin client: Type name is not cached on client-side for >>>>>>>>>> OptimizerMarshaller types >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15924 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> select count * returns multiple rows >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14120 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Fix StackOverflowError in case if an exception is suppressed with >>>>>>>> itself >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15716 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> WDYT? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >> >
