Re: Getting rid of NONE cache rebalance mode
As a reminder - we already have a ticket for a deprecation of rebalanceDelay as well [1] [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12662 ср, 22 июл. 2020 г. в 09:39, Alexei Scherbakov : > Ivan, > My opinion the ASYNC rebalancing is a best approach for off-loading 3-d > party store, and it provides consistency. > > +1 for deprecation of NONE in the next release - ignore NONE and use ASYNC > instead > For those who require absence of rebalancing for some reason still be > possible to use rebalanceDelay=infinity. > > +1 for removal of rebalanceMode in 3.0. > Note what we still require SYNC logic internally for system cache in some > places. > > > > вт, 21 июл. 2020 г. в 15:59, Ivan Pavlukhin : > >> Alexey, >> >> Thank you for explanation. I feel that I miss a couple bits to >> understand the picture fully. I am thinking about a case which I tend >> to call a Memcached use-case. There is a cache over underlying storage >> with read-through and expiration and without any rebalancing at all. >> When new nodes enter they take ownership for some partitions from >> already running nodes and serve client requests. Entries for not >> owning anymore partitions expire according to configuration. >> >> Actually, I have an idea. My guess is that "rebalancing" is a smarter >> and better approach than waiting for expiration. Am I right? >> >> 2020-07-21 15:31 GMT+03:00, Alexey Goncharuk > >: >> > Ivan, >> > >> > In my understanding this mode does not work at all even in the presence >> of >> > ForceKeysRequest which is now supposed to fetch values from peers in >> case >> > of a miss. In this mode we 1) move partitions to OWNING state >> > unconditionally, and 2) choose an arbitrary OWNING node for force keys >> > request. Therefore, after a user started two additional nodes in a >> cluster, >> > the request may be mapped to a node which does not hold any data. We >> will >> > do a read-through in this case, but it will result in significant load >> > increase on a third-party storage right after a node started, which >> means >> > that adding a node will increase, not decrease, the load on the database >> > being cached. >> > All these issues go away when (A)SYNC mode is used. >> > >> > Val, >> > The idea makes sense to me - a user can use rebalance future to wait for >> > rebalance to finish. This will simplify the configuration even further. >> > >> > пн, 20 июл. 2020 г. в 21:27, Valentin Kulichenko < >> > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com>: >> > >> >> +1 for deprecating/removing NONE mode. >> >> >> >> Alexey, what do you think about the SYNC mode? In my experience, it >> does >> >> not add much value as well. I would go as far as removing the >> >> rebalancingMode parameter altogether (probably in 3.0). >> >> >> >> -Val >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 11:09 AM Ivan Pavlukhin >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > Alexey, Igniters, >> >> > >> >> > Could you please outline motivation answering following questions? >> >> > 1. Does this mode generally work correctly today? >> >> > 2. Can this mode be useful at all? >> >> > >> >> > I can imagine that it might be useful in a transparent caching use >> >> > case (if I did not misunderstand). >> >> > >> >> > 2020-07-20 20:39 GMT+03:00, Pavel Tupitsyn : >> >> > > +1 >> >> > > >> >> > > More evidence: >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> >> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/62902640/apache-ignite-cacherebalancemode-is-not-respected-by-nodes >> >> > > >> >> > > On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 8:26 PM Alexey Goncharuk >> >> > > >> >> > > wrote: >> >> > > >> >> > >> Igniters, >> >> > >> >> >> > >> I would like to run the idea of deprecating and probably ignoring >> >> > >> the >> >> > >> NONE >> >> > >> rebalance mode by the community. It's in the removal list for >> Ignite >> >> 3.0 >> >> > >> [1], but it looks like it still confuses and creates issues for >> >> > >> users >> >> > >> [2]. >> >> > >> >> >> > >> What about deprecating it in one of the next releases and even >> >> ignoring >> >> > >> this constant in further releases, interpreting it as ASYNC, >> before >> >> > >> Ignite >> >> > >> 3.0? I find it hard to believe that any Ignite user actually has >> >> > >> RebalanceMode.NONE set in their configuration due to its >> absolutely >> >> > >> unpredictable behavior. >> >> > >> >> >> > >> Thanks for your thoughts, >> >> > >> --AG >> >> > >> >> >> > >> [1] >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+3.0+Wishlist >> >> > >> [2] >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/About-Rebalance-Mode-SYNC-amp-NONE-td47279.html >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > >> >> > Best regards, >> >> > Ivan Pavlukhin >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> -- >> >> Best regards, >> Ivan Pavlukhin >> > > > -- > > Best regards, > Alexei Scherbakov > -- Best regards, Alexei Scherbakov
Re: Re[2]: Apache Ignite 2.9.0 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]
Guys, We are in code-freeze phase now. I've moved almost all non-blocker unresolved tickets from 2.9 to the next release. If you think that some ticket is a blocker and should be included into 2.9 release, please write a note in this thread. There are some tickets with "blocker" priority targeted to 2.9, some of them in "open" state and still unassigned, and I'm not sure we need all of these tickets in 2.9: IGNITE-13006 [1] (Apache Ignite spring libs upgrade from version 4x to spring 5.2 version or later) - Is it really a blocker for 2.9 release? If yes, can somebody help with resolving this ticket? IGNITE-11942 [2] (IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator Discontinuation) - ticket in "Patch available" state. There is a thread on dev-list related to this ticket ([6]), but as far as I understand we still don't have consensus about version for this patch (2.9, 2.10, 3.0). IGNITE-12489 [3] (Error during purges by expiration: Unknown page type) - perhaps issue is already resolved by some related tickets, there is still no reproducer, no additional details and no work in progress. I propose to move this ticket to the next release. IGNITE-12911 [4] (B+Tree Corrupted exception when using a key extracted from a BinaryObject value object --- and SQL enabled) - ticket in "Patch available" state, but there is no activity since May 2020. Anton Kalashnikov, Ilya Kasnacheev, do we have any updates on this ticket? Is it still in progress? IGNITE-12553 [5] ([IEP-35] public Java metric API) - since the new metrics framework is already released in 2.8 and it's still marked with @IgniteExperemental annotation, I think this ticket is not a blocker. I propose to change the ticket priority and move it to the next release. [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13006 [2]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11942 [3]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12489 [4]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12911 [5]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12553 [6]: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSSION-Complete-Discontinuation-of-IGFS-and-Hadoop-Accelerator-td42282.html пт, 17 июл. 2020 г. в 11:50, Alex Plehanov : > Ivan, > > Merged to 2.9. > > Thanks > > пт, 17 июл. 2020 г. в 01:35, Ivan Rakov : > >> Alex, >> >> Tracing is merged to master: >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13060 >> >> Can you please port it to 2.9? >> For you convenience, there's PR versus 2.9 with conflicts resolved: >> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/8046/files >> >> -- >> Best Regards, >> Ivan Rakov >> >> On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 5:33 PM Alex Plehanov >> wrote: >> >>> Ivan, >>> >>> Looks like master is broken after IGNITE-13246 (but everything is ok in >>> 2.9 >>> branch) >>> >>> ср, 15 июл. 2020 г. в 18:54, Alex Plehanov : >>> >>> > Zhenya, Ivan, >>> > >>> > I've cherry-picked IGNITE-13229 and IGNITE-13246 to ignite-2.9 branch. >>> > Thank you. >>> > >>> > ср, 15 июл. 2020 г. в 18:31, Ivan Bessonov : >>> > >>> >> Guys, >>> >> >>> >> can you please backport >>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13246 >>> >> to ignite-2.9? Me and Alexey Kuznetsov really want these new events in >>> >> release. >>> >> >>> >> This time I prepared PR with resolved conflicts: >>> >> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/8042 >>> >> >>> >> Thank you! >>> >> >>> >> вт, 14 июл. 2020 г. в 19:39, Zhenya Stanilovsky >>> >> >> >> >: >>> >> >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > Alex, i also suggest to merge this >>> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13229 too, GridClient >>> >> > leakage and further TC OOM preventing. >>> >> > >>> >> > >Ivan, >>> >> > > >>> >> > >It was already in release scope as discussed in this thread. >>> >> > > >>> >> > >вт, 14 июл. 2020 г. в 14:31, Ivan Rakov < ivan.glu...@gmail.com >: >>> >> > > >>> >> > >> Hi, >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> We are still waiting for a final review of Tracing functionality >>> [1] >>> >> > until >>> >> > >> the end of tomorrow (July 15). >>> >> > >> We anticipate that it will be merged to Ignite master no later >>> than >>> >> July >>> >> > >> 16. >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> Sorry for being a bit late here. Alex P., can you include [1] to >>> the >>> >> > >> release scope? >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13060 >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> -- >>> >> > >> Best Regards, >>> >> > >> Ivan Rakov >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 6:16 AM Alexey Kuznetsov < >>> >> > akuznet...@gridgain.com > >>> >> > >> wrote: >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >>> Alex, >>> >> > >>> >>> >> > >>> Can you cherry-pick to Ignite 2.9 this issue: >>> >> > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13246 ? >>> >> > >>> >>> >> > >>> This issue is about BASELINE events and it is very useful for >>> >> > notification >>> >> > >>> external tools about changes in baseline. >>> >> > >>> >>> >> > >>> Thank you! >>> >> > >>> >>> >> > >>> --- >>> >> > >>> Alexey Kuznetsov >>> >> > >>> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>
Re: Moving Ignite documentation to github
Guys, What about documentation for 2.9 release? Are we going to publish it on readme.io or publish it on ignite.apache.org? What about new edits? Should we still edit pages on readme.io or already make changes in git repository? Artem, could you please clarify the current documentation workflow? пн, 20 июл. 2020 г. в 16:42, Artem Budnikov : > Denis, > > > How about the next step of taking the HTML and committing it to the > website > > repository? Did you have a chance to think through this step? > > Yes, I'll look into this this week. This shouldn't be very difficult. > > -Artem > > On 18.07.2020 00:43, Denis Magda wrote: > > Worked out well on my end. Thanks for sending the update! > > > > How about the next step of taking the HTML and committing it to the > website > > repository? Did you have a chance to think through this step? > > > > - > > Denis > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 5:27 AM Artem Budnikov < > a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Hi everyone, > >> > >> I've prepared the initial set of source files for the Ignite > >> documentation. If you are interested, you can take a look at > >> https://github.com/apache/ignite/tree/IGNITE-7595/docs > >> > >> You can run a local web-server (jekyll) if you want to view the docs in > >> your browser. Refer to the README.adoc for instructions. Some people had > >> troubles installing Jekyll locally, so I added an instruction on how to > >> use jekyll docker image. > >> > >> If you have any comments on the overall approach, please let me know. > >> The styles and content are still a work in progress, so please don't > >> report issues related to that. > >> > >> -Artem > >> > >> On 26.06.2020 01:54, Guru Stron wrote: > >>> +1 for migrating docs to github. It will allow an easier contribution > for > >>> docs, I think. As a nice feature - adding an edit link (submit PR for > >> docs) > >>> to the document page on site. > >>> > >>> As for keeping them separate - Microsoft keeps docs for it's products > in > >>> separate repos, for example. > >>> > >>> On Thu, 25 Jun 2020 at 15:48, Artem Budnikov < > >> a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com> > >>> wrote: > >>> > OK, let's give it a try. > > The way I see it, the documentation source files will be located in > the > "/docs" folder, including UI templates/styles, asciidoc files, and > build > scripts. I'll start experimenting with this and will let you know when > basic setup is ready. > > -Artem > > On 23.06.2020 20:19, Denis Magda wrote: > > I believe that by keeping the documentation sources in the same > repository > > with the source code will help us to prepare and release all the > >> release > > artifacts at the same time. So, +1 for hosting raw documentation > ascii-doc > > pages in the main Ignite repo. However, the HTML version needs to > >> reside > on > > the Ignite website, which is similar to the API docs. We can create > >> tools > > to do this in one click. > > > > Post-reviews are not prohibited in Apache, quite the opposite, and > they > > suit the documentation contribution process better. It's ok if > >> committers > > to the documentation merge the changes first and ask for a review > later > if > > needed. > > > > - > > Denis > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 6:53 AM Artem Budnikov < > a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Pavel, > >> > >>> I don't think so: we can't add snippets pointing to new APIs from a > >>> separate repo, > >> Snippets are kept together with the docs, they /don't need/ to be > >> stored > >> in the main repo, although they can. They are compilable and up to > >> date. > >> I update the docs and API samples for features that hasn't been > >> released > >> in the GridGain docs and never thought it was a problem. I > understand > >> that you don't want to do extra work when adding code samples, but > it > >> looks like just an inconvenience. Let me suggest this: Let's think > >> about > >> a solution that will be comfortable for you, I'm pretty sure this > >> inconvenience can be solved technically. But I need time to think it > >> through. > >> > >>> we can't see the docs when doing global search (and/or replace) > from > >>> the IDE. > >> I think you can add the docs repo to your IDE as a project. I used > to > >> do > >> it in the beginning but then switched to Sublime Text, because it's > >> more > >> convenient to me. We are looking at it from different perspectives. > >> I'm > >> trying to create a process that is comfortable for tech writers > rather > >> than developers. And everybody has to accept some kind of a > >> compromise:) > Well, no one is able to "freely" commit code to Apache master, > there > is a process to follow - CI, reviews, etc. > Same should happen for the docs, se
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13283) javadoc - enabled vs. disabled event type
Focus Koweissen created IGNITE-13283:
Summary: javadoc - enabled vs. disabled event type
Key: IGNITE-13283
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13283
Project: Ignite
Issue Type: Bug
Components: documentation
Reporter: Focus Koweissen
Javadoc regarding event types is incosistent and confusing.
[EventType|https://ignite.apache.org/releases/latest/javadoc/org/apache/ignite/events/EventType.html]:
{noformat}
Note that by default all events in Ignite are enabled
{noformat}
[IgniteConfiguration|https://ignite.apache.org/releases/latest/javadoc/org/apache/ignite/configuration/IgniteConfiguration.html#getIncludeEventTypes--]:
{noformat}
Note that by default all events in Ignite are disabled
{noformat}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
Re: [DISCUSSION] Complete Discontinuation of IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator
Guys, Any updates here? Looks like we still don't have a consensus about release version for this patch (already mention it in the release thread). Currently, the ticket is still targeted to 2.9. ср, 15 июл. 2020 г. в 00:40, Denis Magda : > I don't think it's required to wait until Ignite 3.0 to make this happen. > If I'm not mistaken, we stopped releasing Hadoop binaries and sources a > long time ago (at least you can't longer find them on the downloads page). > Also, we removed all the mentioning from the documentation and website. > Nobody complained or requested for a maintenance release since that time. > Thus, I would remove the integration in 2.9. If anybody shows up later then > they can use the sources in the 2.8 branch and do whatever they want. > > - > Denis > > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 3:52 AM Pavel Tupitsyn > wrote: > > > We are breaking backwards compatibility, > > so this can be only done for Ignite 3.0, am I right? > > > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 1:46 PM Anton Kalashnikov > > wrote: > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > The task of removal IGFS and Hadoop accelerator is ready to review.( > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11942) > > > I've already asked some guys to take a look at it but if somebody > > familiar > > > with this part of code, feel free to take a look at the changes > > > too(especially scripts changes). > > > > > > I also think it is good to decide which release it should be planned > on. > > > This task planned for 2.9 right now but I should notice that first of > all > > > there are a lot of changes and secondly there are some changes in > public > > > API(removed some methods from configuration). So maybe it makes sense > to > > > move this ticket to the next release. What do you think? > > > > > > -- > > > Best regards, > > > Anton Kalashnikov > > > > > > > > > 10.02.2020, 15:45, "Alexey Zinoviev" : > > > > Thank you so you much! Will wait:) > > > > > > > > пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 15:13, Alexey Goncharuk < > > > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > >> Got it, then no need to rush, let's wait for the TF-IGFS > decoupling. > > > >> > > > >> пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 13:15, Alexey Zinoviev < > > zaleslaw@gmail.com > > > >: > > > >> > > > >> > Tensorflow integration uses IGFS, if you have any idea how to > store > > > files > > > >> > in memory by another way, please suggest something. > > > >> > I hope to decouple Ignite-TF integration to the separate > repository > > > >> before > > > >> > release 2.9 with its own file system over Ignite Caches > > > >> > > > > >> > пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 12:49, Ivan Pavlukhin < > vololo...@gmail.com > > >: > > > >> > > > > >> > > Is not it blocked by > > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10292 as stated > in > > > JIRA? > > > >> > > > > > >> > > @Alex Zinoviev could you please shed some light on this? > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Best regards, > > > >> > > Ivan Pavlukhin > > > >> > > > > > >> > > пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 12:46, Anton Kalashnikov < > > kaa@yandex.ru > > > >: > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > I found the correct ticket for such activity - > > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11942 > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > -- > > > >> > > > Best regards, > > > >> > > > Anton Kalashnikov > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > 10.02.2020, 12:16, "Anton Kalashnikov" : > > > >> > > > > Hello. > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > I created a ticket for this activity - > > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12647. And if we > > are > > > >> still > > > >> > > in consensus I'll do it at the nearest time(I've already had > the > > > >> prepared > > > >> > > code). > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > -- > > > >> > > > > Best regards, > > > >> > > > > Anton Kalashnikov > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > 10.02.2020, 12:07, "Alexey Goncharuk" < > > > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com > > > >> >: > > > >> > > > >> Folks, > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> I think there is a consensus here, but we did not remove > > IGFS > > > >> > > neither in > > > >> > > > >> 2.7 nor in 2.8, did we? Should we schedule a corresponding > > > ticket > > > >> > > for 2.9? > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
Re: IEP-50 Thin Client Continuous Queries
Since there are no comments, I'll keep it as is for now (count continuous query cursors the same way as other cursors) On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 10:29 AM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > Igniters, > > Igor raised an interesting point in the PR: > > Should we limit the number of Continuous Queries together with other > queries > according to ClientConnectorConfiguration.maxOpenCursorsPerConn? > Or should we have a separate limit? > > Technically, Ignite returns a QueryCursor, but it is very different from > other cursors. > > On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 11:25 AM Pavel Tupitsyn > wrote: > >> The pull request is ready for review. >> >> On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 4:11 AM Igor Sapego wrote: >> >>> I've reviewed changes made to IEP and they look good to me. >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> Igor >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 1:03 PM Pavel Tupitsyn >>> wrote: >>> >>> > Alex, >>> > >>> > You are correct, OP_RESOURCE_CLOSE is enough. >>> > Removed the extra op. >>> > >>> > > If client closes CQ it doesn't want to receive any new events. Why >>> can't >>> > we >>> > > just ignore events for this CQ after that moment? >>> > I don't think that our protocol should involve ignoring messages. >>> > If the client stops the query, the server should guarantee that no >>> events >>> > will be sent >>> > to the client after the OP_RESOURCE_CLOSE response. >>> > >>> > I had some concerns about this guarantee, but after reviewing >>> GridNioServer >>> > logic, >>> > the current implementation with OP_RESOURCE_CLOSE seems to be fine. >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 10:09 AM Alex Plehanov < >>> plehanov.a...@gmail.com> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > > Pavel, >>> > > >>> > > > OP_QUERY_CONTINUOUS_END_NOTIFICATION is another client -> server >>> > message >>> > > I think you mean "server -> client" here. >>> > > >>> > > But I still didn't get why do we need it. >>> > > I've briefly looked to the POC implementation and, as far as I >>> > understand, >>> > > OP_QUERY_CONTINUOUS_END_NOTIFICATION can be sent only when >>> > > OP_RESOURCE_CLOSE is received by server (client closes the CQ >>> > explicitly). >>> > > If client closes CQ it doesn't want to receive any new events. Why >>> can't >>> > we >>> > > just ignore events for this CQ after that moment? >>> > > Also, in current implementation OP_QUERY_CONTINUOUS_END_NOTIFICATION >>> is >>> > > sent before OP_RESOURCE_CLOSE response, so OP_RESOURCE_CLOSE >>> response can >>> > > be used the same way as OP_QUERY_CONTINUOUS_END_NOTIFICATION. >>> > > >>> > > Such notification (or something more generalized like >>> OP_RESOURCE_CLOSED) >>> > > can be helpful if CQ is closed by someone else (for example if >>> > > administrator call QueryMXBean.cancelContinuous), but AFAIK now we >>> don't >>> > > have callbacks for this action on user side. >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > ср, 15 июл. 2020 г. в 01:26, Pavel Tupitsyn : >>> > > >>> > > > Igniters, >>> > > > >>> > > > I've made an important change to the IEP (and the POC): >>> > > > OP_QUERY_CONTINUOUS_END_NOTIFICATION is another client -> server >>> > message >>> > > > that notifies the client that the query has stopped and no more >>> events >>> > > > should be expected. >>> > > > >>> > > > This is important because client can't immediately stop listening >>> > > > for OP_QUERY_CONTINUOUS_EVENT_NOTIFICATION >>> > > > after sending OP_RESOURCE_CLOSE - some more events can be present >>> in >>> > one >>> > > of >>> > > > the buffers/queues of the server and/or the OS. >>> > > > >>> > > > Let me know if this makes sense. >>> > > > >>> > > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 3:25 PM Pavel Tupitsyn < >>> ptupit...@apache.org> >>> > > > wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > > I've removed Initial Query from the POC and IEP (left a note >>> there >>> > > about >>> > > > > the decision). >>> > > > > >>> > > > > Since there are no other comments and concerns, I'll move on >>> with the >>> > > > > final implementation. >>> > > > > >>> > > > > On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 4:14 PM Pavel Tupitsyn < >>> ptupit...@apache.org >>> > > >>> > > > > wrote: >>> > > > > >>> > > > >> Igor, Alex, >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> I was aware of the duplicates issue with the initial query, but >>> I >>> > did >>> > > > not >>> > > > >> give it a second thought. >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> Now I see that Vladimir was right - Initial query seems to be >>> > > pointless, >>> > > > >> since users can >>> > > > >> achieve the same by simply invoking the regular query. >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> I will remove Initial Query from the IEP and POC next week if >>> there >>> > > are >>> > > > >> no objections by then. >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 3:58 PM Alex Plehanov < >>> > > plehanov.a...@gmail.com> >>> > > > >> wrote: >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >>> Igor, Pavel, >>> > > > >>> >>> > > > >>> Here is discussion about removal: [1] >>> > > > >>> >>> > > > >>> [1] : >>> > > > >>> >>> > > > >>> >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/ContinuousQueryWithTrans
Re: [jira] [Updated] (IGNITE-12033) Callbacks from striped pool due to async/await may hang cluster
HI Team,
I have unsubscribed ignite users, still i am getting below emails.
Could you please help me to unsubscribe all these emails?
Regards,
Ravikiran C
On Wed, 22 Jul, 2020, 12:04 pm Aleksey Plekhanov (Jira),
wrote:
>
> [
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12033?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
> ]
>
> Aleksey Plekhanov updated IGNITE-12033:
> ---
> Fix Version/s: (was: 2.9)
>2.10
>
> > Callbacks from striped pool due to async/await may hang cluster
> > ---
> >
> > Key: IGNITE-12033
> > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12033
> > Project: Ignite
> > Issue Type: Bug
> > Components: cache, platforms
> >Affects Versions: 2.7.5
> >Reporter: Ilya Kasnacheev
> >Priority: Critical
> > Fix For: 2.10
> >
> >
> > Discussed on dev-list:
> >
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Re-EXTERNAL-Re-Replace-or-Put-after-PutAsync-causes-Ignite-to-hang-td42921.html
> > *Must use the public pool for callbacks as the most obvious step.*
> >
> >
> http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Replace-or-Put-after-PutAsync-causes-Ignite-to-hang-td27871.html#a28051
> > There's a reproducer project. Long story short, .Net can invoke cache
> operations with future callbacks, which will be invoked from striped pool.
> If such callbacks are to use cache operations, those will be possibly
> sheduled to the same stripe and cause a deadlock.
> > The code is very simple:
> > {code}
> > Console.WriteLine("PutAsync");
> > await cache.PutAsync(1, "Test");
> > Console.WriteLine("Replace");
> > cache.Replace(1, "Testing"); // Hangs here
> > Console.WriteLine("Wait");
> > await Task.Delay(Timeout.Infinite);
> > {code}
> > async/await should absolutely not allow any client code to be run from
> stripes.
>
>
>
> --
> This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
> (v8.3.4#803005)
>
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13284) Incorrect version check in GridDhtPartitionsReservation#release
Alexey Scherbakov created IGNITE-13284: -- Summary: Incorrect version check in GridDhtPartitionsReservation#release Key: IGNITE-13284 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13284 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Bug Reporter: Alexey Scherbakov Fix For: 2.10 Currently GridDhtPartitionsReservation holds a last server topology version, but compares it with a current version in reserve, causing unnecessary eviction attempts. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
Re: [jira] [Updated] (IGNITE-12033) Callbacks from striped pool due to async/await may hang cluster
Hi Ravikiran C,
JIRA sends emails about issue updates to participants. I guess
clicking "Stop watching this issue" on a particular issue in JIRA can
help here.
2020-07-22 12:41 GMT+03:00, C Ravikiran :
> HI Team,
>
> I have unsubscribed ignite users, still i am getting below emails.
>
> Could you please help me to unsubscribe all these emails?
>
> Regards,
> Ravikiran C
>
> On Wed, 22 Jul, 2020, 12:04 pm Aleksey Plekhanov (Jira),
> wrote:
>
>>
>> [
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12033?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
>> ]
>>
>> Aleksey Plekhanov updated IGNITE-12033:
>> ---
>> Fix Version/s: (was: 2.9)
>>2.10
>>
>> > Callbacks from striped pool due to async/await may hang cluster
>> > ---
>> >
>> > Key: IGNITE-12033
>> > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12033
>> > Project: Ignite
>> > Issue Type: Bug
>> > Components: cache, platforms
>> >Affects Versions: 2.7.5
>> >Reporter: Ilya Kasnacheev
>> >Priority: Critical
>> > Fix For: 2.10
>> >
>> >
>> > Discussed on dev-list:
>> >
>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Re-EXTERNAL-Re-Replace-or-Put-after-PutAsync-causes-Ignite-to-hang-td42921.html
>> > *Must use the public pool for callbacks as the most obvious step.*
>> >
>> >
>> http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Replace-or-Put-after-PutAsync-causes-Ignite-to-hang-td27871.html#a28051
>> > There's a reproducer project. Long story short, .Net can invoke cache
>> operations with future callbacks, which will be invoked from striped
>> pool.
>> If such callbacks are to use cache operations, those will be possibly
>> sheduled to the same stripe and cause a deadlock.
>> > The code is very simple:
>> > {code}
>> > Console.WriteLine("PutAsync");
>> > await cache.PutAsync(1, "Test");
>> > Console.WriteLine("Replace");
>> > cache.Replace(1, "Testing"); // Hangs here
>> > Console.WriteLine("Wait");
>> > await Task.Delay(Timeout.Infinite);
>> > {code}
>> > async/await should absolutely not allow any client code to be run from
>> stripes.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
>> (v8.3.4#803005)
>>
>
--
Best regards,
Ivan Pavlukhin
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13285) Document control.sh indexes manipulation commands
Vladimir Malinovskiy created IGNITE-13285:
-
Summary: Document control.sh indexes manipulation commands
Key: IGNITE-13285
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13285
Project: Ignite
Issue Type: Task
Components: control.sh, documentation
Reporter: Vladimir Malinovskiy
Fix For: 2.10
Under IGNITE-13268 3 new cache commands were added: "--indexes_list",
"--indexes_rebuild_status" and "--indexes_force_rebuild". New commands should
be documented.
Here is part of cache help that corresponds to the commands:
{code:java}
--cache indexes_list [--node-id nodeId] [--group-name grpRegExp]
[--cache-name cacheRegExp] [--index-name idxNameRegExp]
List all indexes that match specified filters.Parameters:
--node-id nodeId - Specify node for job execution. If not specified
explicitly, node will be chosen by grid
--group-name regExp - Regular expression allowing filtering by cache
group name
--cache-name regExp - Regular expression allowing filtering by cache name
--index-name regExp - Regular expression allowing filtering by index
name --cache indexes_rebuild_status [--node-id nodeId]
List all indexes that have index rebuild in progress.Parameters:
--node-id nodeId - Specify node for job execution. If not specified
explicitly, info will be gathered from all nodes --cache indexes_force_rebuild
--node-id nodeId --cache-name cacheName1,...cacheNameN|--group-name
groupName1,...groupNameN
Triggers rebuild of all indexes for specified caches or cache groups.
Parameters:
--node-id - Specify node for indexes rebuild.
--cache-names - Comma-separated list of cache names for which indexes
should be rebuilt.
--group-names - Comma-separated list of cache group names for which
indexes should be rebuilt.
{code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13286) .NET: Add true NuGet multi-targeting
Pavel Tupitsyn created IGNITE-13286: --- Summary: .NET: Add true NuGet multi-targeting Key: IGNITE-13286 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13286 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Improvement Components: platforms Reporter: Pavel Tupitsyn Assignee: Pavel Tupitsyn Fix For: 2.10 Right now we pack the same .NET 4.0 dll as `net40` and `netstandard2.0` (see nuspec file). While this works well, we can't truly use conditional compilation to leverage modern .NET features (e.g. async transaction flow). * Fix the build procedure to include true .NET Core assembly into NuGet package * Make sure .NET Core tests run on Windows as well as on Linux * Fix JVM dll detection (right now Windows Registry is excluded on .NET Core - bug) * Review all `#if` conditions to make sure we deliver proper code on all platforms -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13287) Minor optimizations forgotten from ignite-13086.
Stanilovsky Evgeny created IGNITE-13287: --- Summary: Minor optimizations forgotten from ignite-13086. Key: IGNITE-13287 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13287 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Improvement Components: general Reporter: Stanilovsky Evgeny Assignee: Stanilovsky Evgeny Some minor code improvements (pr #7864) have been forgotten after IGNITE-13086 merging. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13288) Include few system events by default
Aleksandr Kozhenkov created IGNITE-13288: Summary: Include few system events by default Key: IGNITE-13288 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13288 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Wish Reporter: Aleksandr Kozhenkov Assignee: Aleksandr Kozhenkov There are discovery events that are listened to by all nodes. It will be useful to include these events to listen on all nodes by default too: - EVT_CLUSTER_ACTIVATED - EVT_CLUSTER_DEACTIVATED - EVT_BASELINE_CHANGED - EVT_CLUSTER_STATE_CHANGED They all are rare, system and cluster-wide. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13289) PagesWriteThrottleSmokeTest.testThrottle start to fail on TC.
Stanilovsky Evgeny created IGNITE-13289: --- Summary: PagesWriteThrottleSmokeTest.testThrottle start to fail on TC. Key: IGNITE-13289 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13289 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Bug Components: persistence Affects Versions: 2.8.1 Reporter: Stanilovsky Evgeny Assignee: Stanilovsky Evgeny PagesWriteThrottleSmokeTest.testThrottle start to fail on master, possible after IGNITE-12802 was merged. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
Re: [jira] [Updated] (IGNITE-12033) Callbacks from striped pool due to async/await may hang cluster
I have not participated any of the jira issues.
I am getting lot emails related to jira.
How to unsubscribe all.
On Wed, 22 Jul, 2020, 3:37 pm Ivan Pavlukhin, wrote:
> Hi Ravikiran C,
>
> JIRA sends emails about issue updates to participants. I guess
> clicking "Stop watching this issue" on a particular issue in JIRA can
> help here.
>
> 2020-07-22 12:41 GMT+03:00, C Ravikiran :
> > HI Team,
> >
> > I have unsubscribed ignite users, still i am getting below emails.
> >
> > Could you please help me to unsubscribe all these emails?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ravikiran C
> >
> > On Wed, 22 Jul, 2020, 12:04 pm Aleksey Plekhanov (Jira), <
> j...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> [
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12033?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
> >> ]
> >>
> >> Aleksey Plekhanov updated IGNITE-12033:
> >> ---
> >> Fix Version/s: (was: 2.9)
> >>2.10
> >>
> >> > Callbacks from striped pool due to async/await may hang cluster
> >> > ---
> >> >
> >> > Key: IGNITE-12033
> >> > URL:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12033
> >> > Project: Ignite
> >> > Issue Type: Bug
> >> > Components: cache, platforms
> >> >Affects Versions: 2.7.5
> >> >Reporter: Ilya Kasnacheev
> >> >Priority: Critical
> >> > Fix For: 2.10
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Discussed on dev-list:
> >> >
> >>
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Re-EXTERNAL-Re-Replace-or-Put-after-PutAsync-causes-Ignite-to-hang-td42921.html
> >> > *Must use the public pool for callbacks as the most obvious step.*
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Replace-or-Put-after-PutAsync-causes-Ignite-to-hang-td27871.html#a28051
> >> > There's a reproducer project. Long story short, .Net can invoke cache
> >> operations with future callbacks, which will be invoked from striped
> >> pool.
> >> If such callbacks are to use cache operations, those will be possibly
> >> sheduled to the same stripe and cause a deadlock.
> >> > The code is very simple:
> >> > {code}
> >> > Console.WriteLine("PutAsync");
> >> > await cache.PutAsync(1, "Test");
> >> > Console.WriteLine("Replace");
> >> > cache.Replace(1, "Testing"); // Hangs here
> >> > Console.WriteLine("Wait");
> >> > await Task.Delay(Timeout.Infinite);
> >> > {code}
> >> > async/await should absolutely not allow any client code to be run from
> >> stripes.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
> >> (v8.3.4#803005)
> >>
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
> Ivan Pavlukhin
>
Expiry Policies
Good morning! I am trying to evaluate Apache Ignite for our production system. So far we like the product, but we are having problem with configuring Expiry Policies. We need to expire data from cache after 5 seconds but can't figure out how to do it. The records are still there after hours. We also enabled eagerTtl to true with no luck. Please advice. We are running Apache Ignite 2.8.1 on Ubuntu 18.4 using Java 11, C++ Apache Ignite client. Here is our configuration. http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans"; xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"; xsi:schemaLocation=" http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans/spring-beans.xsd";>
Re: [DISCUSSION] Complete Discontinuation of IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator
Hi Alex, It's been a year since we voted to discontinue this integration [1] and it wasn't removed from the source code earlier only because of the internal dependencies with the ML component. Now all the dependencies are gone and Ignite 2.9 is the right version to finish the discontinuation process. It would make sense to wait for Ignite 3.0 only there are some breaking changes in the APIs that will stay in Ignite. @Anton Kalashnikov , you mentioned that you removed some methods from the configuration. Could you please list them here? Are they Hadoop-specific or generic? [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-Complete-Discontinuation-of-IGFS-and-Hadoop-Accelerator-td42405.html - Denis On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 1:52 AM Alex Plehanov wrote: > Guys, > > Any updates here? Looks like we still don't have a consensus about release > version for this patch (already mention it in the release thread). > Currently, the ticket is still targeted to 2.9. > > ср, 15 июл. 2020 г. в 00:40, Denis Magda : > > > I don't think it's required to wait until Ignite 3.0 to make this happen. > > If I'm not mistaken, we stopped releasing Hadoop binaries and sources a > > long time ago (at least you can't longer find them on the downloads > page). > > Also, we removed all the mentioning from the documentation and website. > > Nobody complained or requested for a maintenance release since that time. > > Thus, I would remove the integration in 2.9. If anybody shows up later > then > > they can use the sources in the 2.8 branch and do whatever they want. > > > > - > > Denis > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 3:52 AM Pavel Tupitsyn > > wrote: > > > > > We are breaking backwards compatibility, > > > so this can be only done for Ignite 3.0, am I right? > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 1:46 PM Anton Kalashnikov > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > The task of removal IGFS and Hadoop accelerator is ready to review.( > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11942) > > > > I've already asked some guys to take a look at it but if somebody > > > familiar > > > > with this part of code, feel free to take a look at the changes > > > > too(especially scripts changes). > > > > > > > > I also think it is good to decide which release it should be planned > > on. > > > > This task planned for 2.9 right now but I should notice that first of > > all > > > > there are a lot of changes and secondly there are some changes in > > public > > > > API(removed some methods from configuration). So maybe it makes sense > > to > > > > move this ticket to the next release. What do you think? > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Best regards, > > > > Anton Kalashnikov > > > > > > > > > > > > 10.02.2020, 15:45, "Alexey Zinoviev" : > > > > > Thank you so you much! Will wait:) > > > > > > > > > > пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 15:13, Alexey Goncharuk < > > > > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > > >> Got it, then no need to rush, let's wait for the TF-IGFS > > decoupling. > > > > >> > > > > >> пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 13:15, Alexey Zinoviev < > > > zaleslaw@gmail.com > > > > >: > > > > >> > > > > >> > Tensorflow integration uses IGFS, if you have any idea how to > > store > > > > files > > > > >> > in memory by another way, please suggest something. > > > > >> > I hope to decouple Ignite-TF integration to the separate > > repository > > > > >> before > > > > >> > release 2.9 with its own file system over Ignite Caches > > > > >> > > > > > >> > пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 12:49, Ivan Pavlukhin < > > vololo...@gmail.com > > > >: > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Is not it blocked by > > > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10292 as stated > > in > > > > JIRA? > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > @Alex Zinoviev could you please shed some light on this? > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Best regards, > > > > >> > > Ivan Pavlukhin > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 12:46, Anton Kalashnikov < > > > kaa@yandex.ru > > > > >: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > I found the correct ticket for such activity - > > > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11942 > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > -- > > > > >> > > > Best regards, > > > > >> > > > Anton Kalashnikov > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > 10.02.2020, 12:16, "Anton Kalashnikov" >: > > > > >> > > > > Hello. > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > I created a ticket for this activity - > > > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12647. And if > we > > > are > > > > >> still > > > > >> > > in consensus I'll do it at the nearest time(I've already had > > the > > > > >> prepared > > > > >> > > code). > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > -- > > > > >> > > > > Best regards, > > > > >> > > > > Anton Kalashnikov > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > 10.02.2020, 12:07, "Alexey Goncharuk" < > > > > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com > > > > >> >: > > > > >> > > >
Re: Re[2]: Apache Ignite 2.9.0 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]
Hi Alex, Thanks for wrapping this up and sharing the progress. I've continued the discussion in the Hadoop thread. Let's take a couple of days to solve all open questions. Personally, I don't see any reason to put the merge off to Ignite 3.0. Also, I would try to deliver the following two changes in Ignite 2.9: - Communication SPI changes [1] and serverless functions support. @Ivan Bessonov , the first is completed but no merged. The second should be already solved too. Could you please shed some light on this? - Phasing out Web Console [3]. It's ready for the review and I believe that it can be merged quickly. @Alexey Kuznetsov , could you please share your thoughts? [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12438 [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13013 [3] https://ggsystems.atlassian.net/browse/IGN-15304 - Denis On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 12:22 AM Alex Plehanov wrote: > Guys, > > We are in code-freeze phase now. I've moved almost all non-blocker > unresolved tickets from 2.9 to the next release. If you think that > some ticket is a blocker and should be included into 2.9 release, please > write a note in this thread. > > There are some tickets with "blocker" priority targeted to 2.9, some of > them in "open" state and still unassigned, and I'm not sure we need all of > these tickets in 2.9: > > IGNITE-13006 [1] (Apache Ignite spring libs upgrade from version 4x to > spring 5.2 version or later) - Is it really a blocker for 2.9 release? If > yes, can somebody help with resolving this ticket? > > IGNITE-11942 [2] (IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator Discontinuation) - ticket in > "Patch available" state. There is a thread on dev-list related to this > ticket ([6]), but as far as I understand we still don't have consensus > about version for this patch (2.9, 2.10, 3.0). > > IGNITE-12489 [3] (Error during purges by expiration: Unknown page type) - > perhaps issue is already resolved by some related tickets, there is still > no reproducer, no additional details and no work in progress. I propose to > move this ticket to the next release. > > IGNITE-12911 [4] (B+Tree Corrupted exception when using a key extracted > from a BinaryObject value object --- and SQL enabled) - ticket in "Patch > available" state, but there is no activity since May 2020. Anton > Kalashnikov, Ilya Kasnacheev, do we have any updates on this ticket? Is it > still in progress? > > IGNITE-12553 [5] ([IEP-35] public Java metric API) - since the new metrics > framework is already released in 2.8 and it's still marked with > @IgniteExperemental annotation, I think this ticket is not a blocker. I > propose to change the ticket priority and move it to the next release. > > > [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13006 > [2]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11942 > [3]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12489 > [4]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12911 > [5]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12553 > [6]: > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSSION-Complete-Discontinuation-of-IGFS-and-Hadoop-Accelerator-td42282.html > > пт, 17 июл. 2020 г. в 11:50, Alex Plehanov : > > > Ivan, > > > > Merged to 2.9. > > > > Thanks > > > > пт, 17 июл. 2020 г. в 01:35, Ivan Rakov : > > > >> Alex, > >> > >> Tracing is merged to master: > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13060 > >> > >> Can you please port it to 2.9? > >> For you convenience, there's PR versus 2.9 with conflicts resolved: > >> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/8046/files > >> > >> -- > >> Best Regards, > >> Ivan Rakov > >> > >> On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 5:33 PM Alex Plehanov > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Ivan, > >>> > >>> Looks like master is broken after IGNITE-13246 (but everything is ok in > >>> 2.9 > >>> branch) > >>> > >>> ср, 15 июл. 2020 г. в 18:54, Alex Plehanov : > >>> > >>> > Zhenya, Ivan, > >>> > > >>> > I've cherry-picked IGNITE-13229 and IGNITE-13246 to ignite-2.9 > branch. > >>> > Thank you. > >>> > > >>> > ср, 15 июл. 2020 г. в 18:31, Ivan Bessonov : > >>> > > >>> >> Guys, > >>> >> > >>> >> can you please backport > >>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13246 > >>> >> to ignite-2.9? Me and Alexey Kuznetsov really want these new events > in > >>> >> release. > >>> >> > >>> >> This time I prepared PR with resolved conflicts: > >>> >> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/8042 > >>> >> > >>> >> Thank you! > >>> >> > >>> >> вт, 14 июл. 2020 г. в 19:39, Zhenya Stanilovsky > >>> >> >>> >> >: > >>> >> > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > Alex, i also suggest to merge this > >>> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13229 too, > GridClient > >>> >> > leakage and further TC OOM preventing. > >>> >> > > >>> >> > >Ivan, > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > >It was already in release scope as discussed in this thread. > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > >вт, 14 июл. 2020 г. в 14:31, Ivan Rakov < ivan.glu...@gmail.com > >: > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > >> Hi,
Re: Re[2]: Apache Ignite 2.9.0 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]
Sharing a correct link for the Web Console task: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13038 - Denis On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 7:59 AM Denis Magda wrote: > Hi Alex, > > Thanks for wrapping this up and sharing the progress. > > I've continued the discussion in the Hadoop thread. Let's take a couple of > days to solve all open questions. Personally, I don't see any reason to put > the merge off to Ignite 3.0. > > Also, I would try to deliver the following two changes in Ignite 2.9: > >- Communication SPI changes [1] and serverless functions support. @Ivan >Bessonov , the first is completed but no >merged. The second should be already solved too. Could you please shed some >light on this? >- Phasing out Web Console [3]. It's ready for the review and I believe >that it can be merged quickly. @Alexey Kuznetsov >, could you please share your thoughts? > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12438 > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13013 > [3] https://ggsystems.atlassian.net/browse/IGN-15304 > > - > Denis > > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 12:22 AM Alex Plehanov > wrote: > >> Guys, >> >> We are in code-freeze phase now. I've moved almost all non-blocker >> unresolved tickets from 2.9 to the next release. If you think that >> some ticket is a blocker and should be included into 2.9 release, please >> write a note in this thread. >> >> There are some tickets with "blocker" priority targeted to 2.9, some of >> them in "open" state and still unassigned, and I'm not sure we need all of >> these tickets in 2.9: >> >> IGNITE-13006 [1] (Apache Ignite spring libs upgrade from version 4x to >> spring 5.2 version or later) - Is it really a blocker for 2.9 release? If >> yes, can somebody help with resolving this ticket? >> >> IGNITE-11942 [2] (IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator Discontinuation) - ticket in >> "Patch available" state. There is a thread on dev-list related to this >> ticket ([6]), but as far as I understand we still don't have consensus >> about version for this patch (2.9, 2.10, 3.0). >> >> IGNITE-12489 [3] (Error during purges by expiration: Unknown page type) - >> perhaps issue is already resolved by some related tickets, there is still >> no reproducer, no additional details and no work in progress. I propose to >> move this ticket to the next release. >> >> IGNITE-12911 [4] (B+Tree Corrupted exception when using a key extracted >> from a BinaryObject value object --- and SQL enabled) - ticket in "Patch >> available" state, but there is no activity since May 2020. Anton >> Kalashnikov, Ilya Kasnacheev, do we have any updates on this ticket? Is it >> still in progress? >> >> IGNITE-12553 [5] ([IEP-35] public Java metric API) - since the new metrics >> framework is already released in 2.8 and it's still marked with >> @IgniteExperemental annotation, I think this ticket is not a blocker. I >> propose to change the ticket priority and move it to the next release. >> >> >> [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13006 >> [2]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11942 >> [3]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12489 >> [4]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12911 >> [5]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12553 >> [6]: >> >> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSSION-Complete-Discontinuation-of-IGFS-and-Hadoop-Accelerator-td42282.html >> >> пт, 17 июл. 2020 г. в 11:50, Alex Plehanov : >> >> > Ivan, >> > >> > Merged to 2.9. >> > >> > Thanks >> > >> > пт, 17 июл. 2020 г. в 01:35, Ivan Rakov : >> > >> >> Alex, >> >> >> >> Tracing is merged to master: >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13060 >> >> >> >> Can you please port it to 2.9? >> >> For you convenience, there's PR versus 2.9 with conflicts resolved: >> >> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/8046/files >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Best Regards, >> >> Ivan Rakov >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 5:33 PM Alex Plehanov > > >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Ivan, >> >>> >> >>> Looks like master is broken after IGNITE-13246 (but everything is ok >> in >> >>> 2.9 >> >>> branch) >> >>> >> >>> ср, 15 июл. 2020 г. в 18:54, Alex Plehanov : >> >>> >> >>> > Zhenya, Ivan, >> >>> > >> >>> > I've cherry-picked IGNITE-13229 and IGNITE-13246 to ignite-2.9 >> branch. >> >>> > Thank you. >> >>> > >> >>> > ср, 15 июл. 2020 г. в 18:31, Ivan Bessonov : >> >>> > >> >>> >> Guys, >> >>> >> >> >>> >> can you please backport >> >>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13246 >> >>> >> to ignite-2.9? Me and Alexey Kuznetsov really want these new >> events in >> >>> >> release. >> >>> >> >> >>> >> This time I prepared PR with resolved conflicts: >> >>> >> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/8042 >> >>> >> >> >>> >> Thank you! >> >>> >> >> >>> >> вт, 14 июл. 2020 г. в 19:39, Zhenya Stanilovsky >> >>> >> > >>> >> >: >> >>> >> >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > Alex, i also suggest to merge this >> >>> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jir
Re: [DISCUSSION] Complete Discontinuation of IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator
Hi, All of these methods are from IgniteConfiguration: Hadoop configuration: - HadoopConfiguration getHadoopConfiguration() - IgniteConfiguration setHadoopConfiguration(HadoopConfiguration hadoopCfg) IGFS (Ignite In-Memory File System) configurations: - FileSystemConfiguration[] getFileSystemConfiguration - IgniteConfiguration setFileSystemConfiguration(FileSystemConfiguration... igfsCfg) thread pool size that will be used to process outgoing IGFS messages: - IgniteConfiguration setIgfsThreadPoolSize(int poolSize) - int getIgfsThreadPoolSize() Of course, I can leave these methods intact but they will be doing nothing so API formally wouldn't be changed but, in fact, features would be removed. Does it make sense? I don't think so and in my opinion, perhaps it is ok to remove these methods right now if we are ready to remove these features right now. (but again, if there are some concerns about it, I can easily to leave these methods with empty implementation) -- Best regards, Anton Kalashnikov 22.07.2020, 17:47, "Denis Magda" : > Hi Alex, > > It's been a year since we voted to discontinue this integration [1] and it > wasn't removed from the source code earlier only because of the internal > dependencies with the ML component. Now all the dependencies are gone and > Ignite 2.9 is the right version to finish the discontinuation process. It > would make sense to wait for Ignite 3.0 only there are some breaking > changes in the APIs that will stay in Ignite. > > @Anton Kalashnikov , you mentioned that you > removed some methods from the configuration. Could you please list them > here? Are they Hadoop-specific or generic? > > [1] > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-Complete-Discontinuation-of-IGFS-and-Hadoop-Accelerator-td42405.html > > - > Denis > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 1:52 AM Alex Plehanov > wrote: > >> Guys, >> >> Any updates here? Looks like we still don't have a consensus about release >> version for this patch (already mention it in the release thread). >> Currently, the ticket is still targeted to 2.9. >> >> ср, 15 июл. 2020 г. в 00:40, Denis Magda : >> >> > I don't think it's required to wait until Ignite 3.0 to make this happen. >> > If I'm not mistaken, we stopped releasing Hadoop binaries and sources a >> > long time ago (at least you can't longer find them on the downloads >> page). >> > Also, we removed all the mentioning from the documentation and website. >> > Nobody complained or requested for a maintenance release since that time. >> > Thus, I would remove the integration in 2.9. If anybody shows up later >> then >> > they can use the sources in the 2.8 branch and do whatever they want. >> > >> > - >> > Denis >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 3:52 AM Pavel Tupitsyn >> > wrote: >> > >> > > We are breaking backwards compatibility, >> > > so this can be only done for Ignite 3.0, am I right? >> > > >> > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 1:46 PM Anton Kalashnikov >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > > Hi everyone, >> > > > >> > > > The task of removal IGFS and Hadoop accelerator is ready to review.( >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11942) >> > > > I've already asked some guys to take a look at it but if somebody >> > > familiar >> > > > with this part of code, feel free to take a look at the changes >> > > > too(especially scripts changes). >> > > > >> > > > I also think it is good to decide which release it should be planned >> > on. >> > > > This task planned for 2.9 right now but I should notice that first of >> > all >> > > > there are a lot of changes and secondly there are some changes in >> > public >> > > > API(removed some methods from configuration). So maybe it makes sense >> > to >> > > > move this ticket to the next release. What do you think? >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Best regards, >> > > > Anton Kalashnikov >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > 10.02.2020, 15:45, "Alexey Zinoviev" : >> > > > > Thank you so you much! Will wait:) >> > > > > >> > > > > пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 15:13, Alexey Goncharuk < >> > > > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>: >> > > > > >> > > > >> Got it, then no need to rush, let's wait for the TF-IGFS >> > decoupling. >> > > > >> >> > > > >> пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 13:15, Alexey Zinoviev < >> > > zaleslaw@gmail.com >> > > > >: >> > > > >> >> > > > >> > Tensorflow integration uses IGFS, if you have any idea how to >> > store >> > > > files >> > > > >> > in memory by another way, please suggest something. >> > > > >> > I hope to decouple Ignite-TF integration to the separate >> > repository >> > > > >> before >> > > > >> > release 2.9 with its own file system over Ignite Caches >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 12:49, Ivan Pavlukhin < >> > vololo...@gmail.com >> > > >: >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > Is not it blocked by >> > > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10292 as stated >> > in >> > > > JIRA? >> > >
Re: [DISCUSSION] Complete Discontinuation of IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator
Sorry, I was mistaken, we can not leave these methods because at least FileSystemConfiguration and HadoopConfiguration require corresponded classes that were deleted. So I think we should just remove it right now. -- Best regards, Anton Kalashnikov 22.07.2020, 18:56, "Anton Kalashnikov" : > Hi, > > All of these methods are from IgniteConfiguration: > Hadoop configuration: > - HadoopConfiguration getHadoopConfiguration() > - IgniteConfiguration setHadoopConfiguration(HadoopConfiguration hadoopCfg) > > IGFS (Ignite In-Memory File System) configurations: > - FileSystemConfiguration[] getFileSystemConfiguration > - IgniteConfiguration setFileSystemConfiguration(FileSystemConfiguration... > igfsCfg) > > thread pool size that will be used to process outgoing IGFS messages: > - IgniteConfiguration setIgfsThreadPoolSize(int poolSize) > - int getIgfsThreadPoolSize() > > Of course, I can leave these methods intact but they will be doing nothing so > API formally wouldn't be changed but, in fact, features would be removed. > Does it make sense? I don't think so and in my opinion, perhaps it is ok to > remove these methods right now if we are ready to remove these features right > now. (but again, if there are some concerns about it, I can easily to leave > these methods with empty implementation) > > -- > Best regards, > Anton Kalashnikov > > 22.07.2020, 17:47, "Denis Magda" : >> Hi Alex, >> >> It's been a year since we voted to discontinue this integration [1] and it >> wasn't removed from the source code earlier only because of the internal >> dependencies with the ML component. Now all the dependencies are gone and >> Ignite 2.9 is the right version to finish the discontinuation process. It >> would make sense to wait for Ignite 3.0 only there are some breaking >> changes in the APIs that will stay in Ignite. >> >> @Anton Kalashnikov , you mentioned that you >> removed some methods from the configuration. Could you please list them >> here? Are they Hadoop-specific or generic? >> >> [1] >> >> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-Complete-Discontinuation-of-IGFS-and-Hadoop-Accelerator-td42405.html >> >> - >> Denis >> >> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 1:52 AM Alex Plehanov >> wrote: >> >>> Guys, >>> >>> Any updates here? Looks like we still don't have a consensus about release >>> version for this patch (already mention it in the release thread). >>> Currently, the ticket is still targeted to 2.9. >>> >>> ср, 15 июл. 2020 г. в 00:40, Denis Magda : >>> >>> > I don't think it's required to wait until Ignite 3.0 to make this >>> happen. >>> > If I'm not mistaken, we stopped releasing Hadoop binaries and sources a >>> > long time ago (at least you can't longer find them on the downloads >>> page). >>> > Also, we removed all the mentioning from the documentation and website. >>> > Nobody complained or requested for a maintenance release since that >>> time. >>> > Thus, I would remove the integration in 2.9. If anybody shows up later >>> then >>> > they can use the sources in the 2.8 branch and do whatever they want. >>> > >>> > - >>> > Denis >>> > >>> > >>> > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 3:52 AM Pavel Tupitsyn >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > > We are breaking backwards compatibility, >>> > > so this can be only done for Ignite 3.0, am I right? >>> > > >>> > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 1:46 PM Anton Kalashnikov >>> > > wrote: >>> > > >>> > > > Hi everyone, >>> > > > >>> > > > The task of removal IGFS and Hadoop accelerator is ready to review.( >>> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11942) >>> > > > I've already asked some guys to take a look at it but if somebody >>> > > familiar >>> > > > with this part of code, feel free to take a look at the changes >>> > > > too(especially scripts changes). >>> > > > >>> > > > I also think it is good to decide which release it should be planned >>> > on. >>> > > > This task planned for 2.9 right now but I should notice that first >>> of >>> > all >>> > > > there are a lot of changes and secondly there are some changes in >>> > public >>> > > > API(removed some methods from configuration). So maybe it makes >>> sense >>> > to >>> > > > move this ticket to the next release. What do you think? >>> > > > >>> > > > -- >>> > > > Best regards, >>> > > > Anton Kalashnikov >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > 10.02.2020, 15:45, "Alexey Zinoviev" : >>> > > > > Thank you so you much! Will wait:) >>> > > > > >>> > > > > пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 15:13, Alexey Goncharuk < >>> > > > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>: >>> > > > > >>> > > > >> Got it, then no need to rush, let's wait for the TF-IGFS >>> > decoupling. >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 13:15, Alexey Zinoviev < >>> > > zaleslaw@gmail.com >>> > > > >: >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> > Tensorflow integration uses IGFS, if you have any idea how to >>> > store
Re: [DISCUSSION] Complete Discontinuation of IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator
Hi, Could you please help me to unsubscribe all these ignite mails. I have unsubscribed it, but still I am getting lot of emails Could you please help me.. On Wed, 22 Jul, 2020, 9:45 pm Anton Kalashnikov, wrote: > Sorry, I was mistaken, we can not leave these methods because at least > FileSystemConfiguration and HadoopConfiguration require corresponded > classes that were deleted. So I think we should just remove it right now. > > -- > Best regards, > Anton Kalashnikov > > > > 22.07.2020, 18:56, "Anton Kalashnikov" : > > Hi, > > > > All of these methods are from IgniteConfiguration: > > Hadoop configuration: > > - HadoopConfiguration getHadoopConfiguration() > > - IgniteConfiguration setHadoopConfiguration(HadoopConfiguration > hadoopCfg) > > > > IGFS (Ignite In-Memory File System) configurations: > > - FileSystemConfiguration[] getFileSystemConfiguration > > - IgniteConfiguration > setFileSystemConfiguration(FileSystemConfiguration... igfsCfg) > > > > thread pool size that will be used to process outgoing IGFS messages: > > - IgniteConfiguration setIgfsThreadPoolSize(int poolSize) > > - int getIgfsThreadPoolSize() > > > > Of course, I can leave these methods intact but they will be doing > nothing so API formally wouldn't be changed but, in fact, features would be > removed. Does it make sense? I don't think so and in my opinion, perhaps it > is ok to remove these methods right now if we are ready to remove these > features right now. (but again, if there are some concerns about it, I can > easily to leave these methods with empty implementation) > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Anton Kalashnikov > > > > 22.07.2020, 17:47, "Denis Magda" : > >> Hi Alex, > >> > >> It's been a year since we voted to discontinue this integration [1] > and it > >> wasn't removed from the source code earlier only because of the > internal > >> dependencies with the ML component. Now all the dependencies are gone > and > >> Ignite 2.9 is the right version to finish the discontinuation process. > It > >> would make sense to wait for Ignite 3.0 only there are some breaking > >> changes in the APIs that will stay in Ignite. > >> > >> @Anton Kalashnikov , you mentioned that > you > >> removed some methods from the configuration. Could you please list them > >> here? Are they Hadoop-specific or generic? > >> > >> [1] > >> > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-Complete-Discontinuation-of-IGFS-and-Hadoop-Accelerator-td42405.html > >> > >> - > >> Denis > >> > >> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 1:52 AM Alex Plehanov > > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Guys, > >>> > >>> Any updates here? Looks like we still don't have a consensus about > release > >>> version for this patch (already mention it in the release thread). > >>> Currently, the ticket is still targeted to 2.9. > >>> > >>> ср, 15 июл. 2020 г. в 00:40, Denis Magda : > >>> > >>> > I don't think it's required to wait until Ignite 3.0 to make this > happen. > >>> > If I'm not mistaken, we stopped releasing Hadoop binaries and > sources a > >>> > long time ago (at least you can't longer find them on the downloads > >>> page). > >>> > Also, we removed all the mentioning from the documentation and > website. > >>> > Nobody complained or requested for a maintenance release since > that time. > >>> > Thus, I would remove the integration in 2.9. If anybody shows up > later > >>> then > >>> > they can use the sources in the 2.8 branch and do whatever they > want. > >>> > > >>> > - > >>> > Denis > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 3:52 AM Pavel Tupitsyn < > ptupit...@apache.org> > >>> > wrote: > >>> > > >>> > > We are breaking backwards compatibility, > >>> > > so this can be only done for Ignite 3.0, am I right? > >>> > > > >>> > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 1:46 PM Anton Kalashnikov < > kaa@yandex.ru> > >>> > > wrote: > >>> > > > >>> > > > Hi everyone, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > The task of removal IGFS and Hadoop accelerator is ready to > review.( > >>> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11942) > >>> > > > I've already asked some guys to take a look at it but if > somebody > >>> > > familiar > >>> > > > with this part of code, feel free to take a look at the changes > >>> > > > too(especially scripts changes). > >>> > > > > >>> > > > I also think it is good to decide which release it should be > planned > >>> > on. > >>> > > > This task planned for 2.9 right now but I should notice that > first of > >>> > all > >>> > > > there are a lot of changes and secondly there are some changes > in > >>> > public > >>> > > > API(removed some methods from configuration). So maybe it > makes sense > >>> > to > >>> > > > move this ticket to the next release. What do you think? > >>> > > > > >>> > > > -- > >>> > > > Best regards, > >>> > > > Anton Kalashnikov > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 10.02.2020, 15:45, "Alexey Zinoviev" : > >>> > > > >
Re: [DISCUSSION] Complete Discontinuation of IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator
The removal of these methods will not impact anybody during migration to 2.9. Unless you use the Hadoop Accelerator or IGFS in your application. In the latter scenario, well, the integration has already been discontinued and you need to clean your application code before moving forward to 2.9. Anyway, it's highly unlikely that we have any users of the integrations, otherwise, they would show up throughout the year after learning that the integration is no longer supported and discontinued. Pavel, do you still prefer us merging the changes in Ignite 3.0 or agree to do that in 2.9? - Denis On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 8:56 AM Anton Kalashnikov wrote: > Hi, > > All of these methods are from IgniteConfiguration: > Hadoop configuration: > - HadoopConfiguration getHadoopConfiguration() > - IgniteConfiguration setHadoopConfiguration(HadoopConfiguration hadoopCfg) > > IGFS (Ignite In-Memory File System) configurations: > - FileSystemConfiguration[] getFileSystemConfiguration > - IgniteConfiguration > setFileSystemConfiguration(FileSystemConfiguration... igfsCfg) > > thread pool size that will be used to process outgoing IGFS messages: > - IgniteConfiguration setIgfsThreadPoolSize(int poolSize) > - int getIgfsThreadPoolSize() > > > Of course, I can leave these methods intact but they will be doing nothing > so API formally wouldn't be changed but, in fact, features would be > removed. Does it make sense? I don't think so and in my opinion, perhaps it > is ok to remove these methods right now if we are ready to remove these > features right now. (but again, if there are some concerns about it, I can > easily to leave these methods with empty implementation) > > -- > Best regards, > Anton Kalashnikov > > > > 22.07.2020, 17:47, "Denis Magda" : > > Hi Alex, > > > > It's been a year since we voted to discontinue this integration [1] and > it > > wasn't removed from the source code earlier only because of the internal > > dependencies with the ML component. Now all the dependencies are gone and > > Ignite 2.9 is the right version to finish the discontinuation process. It > > would make sense to wait for Ignite 3.0 only there are some breaking > > changes in the APIs that will stay in Ignite. > > > > @Anton Kalashnikov , you mentioned that you > > removed some methods from the configuration. Could you please list them > > here? Are they Hadoop-specific or generic? > > > > [1] > > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-Complete-Discontinuation-of-IGFS-and-Hadoop-Accelerator-td42405.html > > > > - > > Denis > > > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 1:52 AM Alex Plehanov > > wrote: > > > >> Guys, > >> > >> Any updates here? Looks like we still don't have a consensus about > release > >> version for this patch (already mention it in the release thread). > >> Currently, the ticket is still targeted to 2.9. > >> > >> ср, 15 июл. 2020 г. в 00:40, Denis Magda : > >> > >> > I don't think it's required to wait until Ignite 3.0 to make this > happen. > >> > If I'm not mistaken, we stopped releasing Hadoop binaries and > sources a > >> > long time ago (at least you can't longer find them on the downloads > >> page). > >> > Also, we removed all the mentioning from the documentation and > website. > >> > Nobody complained or requested for a maintenance release since that > time. > >> > Thus, I would remove the integration in 2.9. If anybody shows up > later > >> then > >> > they can use the sources in the 2.8 branch and do whatever they want. > >> > > >> > - > >> > Denis > >> > > >> > > >> > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 3:52 AM Pavel Tupitsyn > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > We are breaking backwards compatibility, > >> > > so this can be only done for Ignite 3.0, am I right? > >> > > > >> > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 1:46 PM Anton Kalashnikov < > kaa@yandex.ru> > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > Hi everyone, > >> > > > > >> > > > The task of removal IGFS and Hadoop accelerator is ready to > review.( > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11942) > >> > > > I've already asked some guys to take a look at it but if somebody > >> > > familiar > >> > > > with this part of code, feel free to take a look at the changes > >> > > > too(especially scripts changes). > >> > > > > >> > > > I also think it is good to decide which release it should be > planned > >> > on. > >> > > > This task planned for 2.9 right now but I should notice that > first of > >> > all > >> > > > there are a lot of changes and secondly there are some changes in > >> > public > >> > > > API(removed some methods from configuration). So maybe it makes > sense > >> > to > >> > > > move this ticket to the next release. What do you think? > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > Best regards, > >> > > > Anton Kalashnikov > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > 10.02.2020, 15:45, "Alexey Zinoviev" : > >> > > > > Thank you so you much! Will wait:) > >> > > > > > >> > > > > пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 15:13, Alexey
Re: [DISCUSSION] Complete Discontinuation of IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator
Hi, Send an email to this address: dev-unsubscr...@ignite.apache.org - Denis On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 9:28 AM C Ravikiran wrote: > Hi, > > Could you please help me to unsubscribe all these ignite mails. > > I have unsubscribed it, but still I am getting lot of emails > Could you please help me.. > > On Wed, 22 Jul, 2020, 9:45 pm Anton Kalashnikov, > wrote: > > > Sorry, I was mistaken, we can not leave these methods because at least > > FileSystemConfiguration and HadoopConfiguration require corresponded > > classes that were deleted. So I think we should just remove it right now. > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Anton Kalashnikov > > > > > > > > 22.07.2020, 18:56, "Anton Kalashnikov" : > > > Hi, > > > > > > All of these methods are from IgniteConfiguration: > > > Hadoop configuration: > > > - HadoopConfiguration getHadoopConfiguration() > > > - IgniteConfiguration setHadoopConfiguration(HadoopConfiguration > > hadoopCfg) > > > > > > IGFS (Ignite In-Memory File System) configurations: > > > - FileSystemConfiguration[] getFileSystemConfiguration > > > - IgniteConfiguration > > setFileSystemConfiguration(FileSystemConfiguration... igfsCfg) > > > > > > thread pool size that will be used to process outgoing IGFS messages: > > > - IgniteConfiguration setIgfsThreadPoolSize(int poolSize) > > > - int getIgfsThreadPoolSize() > > > > > > Of course, I can leave these methods intact but they will be doing > > nothing so API formally wouldn't be changed but, in fact, features would > be > > removed. Does it make sense? I don't think so and in my opinion, perhaps > it > > is ok to remove these methods right now if we are ready to remove these > > features right now. (but again, if there are some concerns about it, I > can > > easily to leave these methods with empty implementation) > > > > > > -- > > > Best regards, > > > Anton Kalashnikov > > > > > > 22.07.2020, 17:47, "Denis Magda" : > > >> Hi Alex, > > >> > > >> It's been a year since we voted to discontinue this integration [1] > > and it > > >> wasn't removed from the source code earlier only because of the > > internal > > >> dependencies with the ML component. Now all the dependencies are gone > > and > > >> Ignite 2.9 is the right version to finish the discontinuation > process. > > It > > >> would make sense to wait for Ignite 3.0 only there are some breaking > > >> changes in the APIs that will stay in Ignite. > > >> > > >> @Anton Kalashnikov , you mentioned that > > you > > >> removed some methods from the configuration. Could you please list > them > > >> here? Are they Hadoop-specific or generic? > > >> > > >> [1] > > >> > > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-Complete-Discontinuation-of-IGFS-and-Hadoop-Accelerator-td42405.html > > >> > > >> - > > >> Denis > > >> > > >> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 1:52 AM Alex Plehanov < > plehanov.a...@gmail.com > > > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Guys, > > >>> > > >>> Any updates here? Looks like we still don't have a consensus about > > release > > >>> version for this patch (already mention it in the release thread). > > >>> Currently, the ticket is still targeted to 2.9. > > >>> > > >>> ср, 15 июл. 2020 г. в 00:40, Denis Magda : > > >>> > > >>> > I don't think it's required to wait until Ignite 3.0 to make this > > happen. > > >>> > If I'm not mistaken, we stopped releasing Hadoop binaries and > > sources a > > >>> > long time ago (at least you can't longer find them on the > downloads > > >>> page). > > >>> > Also, we removed all the mentioning from the documentation and > > website. > > >>> > Nobody complained or requested for a maintenance release since > > that time. > > >>> > Thus, I would remove the integration in 2.9. If anybody shows up > > later > > >>> then > > >>> > they can use the sources in the 2.8 branch and do whatever they > > want. > > >>> > > > >>> > - > > >>> > Denis > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 3:52 AM Pavel Tupitsyn < > > ptupit...@apache.org> > > >>> > wrote: > > >>> > > > >>> > > We are breaking backwards compatibility, > > >>> > > so this can be only done for Ignite 3.0, am I right? > > >>> > > > > >>> > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 1:46 PM Anton Kalashnikov < > > kaa@yandex.ru> > > >>> > > wrote: > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Hi everyone, > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > The task of removal IGFS and Hadoop accelerator is ready to > > review.( > > >>> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11942) > > >>> > > > I've already asked some guys to take a look at it but if > > somebody > > >>> > > familiar > > >>> > > > with this part of code, feel free to take a look at the > changes > > >>> > > > too(especially scripts changes). > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > I also think it is good to decide which release it should be > > planned > > >>> > on. > > >>> > > > This task planned for 2.9 right now but I should notice that > > first of > > >>> > all > > >>>
Re: [jira] [Updated] (IGNITE-10279) Control.sh utility unify options naming format
How to unsubscribe these jira emails.
Please help me..
On Wed, 15 Jul, 2020, 4:05 pm Ilya Kasnacheev (Jira),
wrote:
>
> [
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10279?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
> ]
>
> Ilya Kasnacheev updated IGNITE-10279:
> -
> Component/s: control.sh
>
> > Control.sh utility unify options naming format
> > --
> >
> > Key: IGNITE-10279
> > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10279
> > Project: Ignite
> > Issue Type: Improvement
> > Components: control.sh
> >Affects Versions: 2.6
> >Reporter: Sergey Antonov
> >Assignee: Sergey Antonov
> >Priority: Major
> > Fix For: 2.8
> >
> >
> > Now we have options in several styles:
> > {noformat}
> > --ping-interval
> > {noformat}
> > {noformat}
> > --skipZeros
> > {noformat}
> > I think, we must unify options naming format and we should use linux
> like format, i.e. {{--word1-word2}}
> >
>
>
>
> --
> This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
> (v8.3.4#803005)
>
Re: [jira] [Updated] (IGNITE-12033) Callbacks from striped pool due to async/await may hang cluster
Hi Ravikiran C,
Could you please provide all "To:" addresses from a particular JIRA
notification email?
Might it be the case that you are subscribed to
iss...@ignite.apache.org? If so you should unsubscribe from it as
well.
2020-07-22 16:42 GMT+03:00, C Ravikiran :
> I have not participated any of the jira issues.
> I am getting lot emails related to jira.
>
> How to unsubscribe all.
>
> On Wed, 22 Jul, 2020, 3:37 pm Ivan Pavlukhin, wrote:
>
>> Hi Ravikiran C,
>>
>> JIRA sends emails about issue updates to participants. I guess
>> clicking "Stop watching this issue" on a particular issue in JIRA can
>> help here.
>>
>> 2020-07-22 12:41 GMT+03:00, C Ravikiran :
>> > HI Team,
>> >
>> > I have unsubscribed ignite users, still i am getting below emails.
>> >
>> > Could you please help me to unsubscribe all these emails?
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Ravikiran C
>> >
>> > On Wed, 22 Jul, 2020, 12:04 pm Aleksey Plekhanov (Jira), <
>> j...@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> [
>> >>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12033?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
>> >> ]
>> >>
>> >> Aleksey Plekhanov updated IGNITE-12033:
>> >> ---
>> >> Fix Version/s: (was: 2.9)
>> >>2.10
>> >>
>> >> > Callbacks from striped pool due to async/await may hang cluster
>> >> > ---
>> >> >
>> >> > Key: IGNITE-12033
>> >> > URL:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12033
>> >> > Project: Ignite
>> >> > Issue Type: Bug
>> >> > Components: cache, platforms
>> >> >Affects Versions: 2.7.5
>> >> >Reporter: Ilya Kasnacheev
>> >> >Priority: Critical
>> >> > Fix For: 2.10
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Discussed on dev-list:
>> >> >
>> >>
>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Re-EXTERNAL-Re-Replace-or-Put-after-PutAsync-causes-Ignite-to-hang-td42921.html
>> >> > *Must use the public pool for callbacks as the most obvious step.*
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Replace-or-Put-after-PutAsync-causes-Ignite-to-hang-td27871.html#a28051
>> >> > There's a reproducer project. Long story short, .Net can invoke
>> >> > cache
>> >> operations with future callbacks, which will be invoked from striped
>> >> pool.
>> >> If such callbacks are to use cache operations, those will be possibly
>> >> sheduled to the same stripe and cause a deadlock.
>> >> > The code is very simple:
>> >> > {code}
>> >> > Console.WriteLine("PutAsync");
>> >> > await cache.PutAsync(1, "Test");
>> >> > Console.WriteLine("Replace");
>> >> > cache.Replace(1, "Testing"); // Hangs here
>> >> > Console.WriteLine("Wait");
>> >> > await Task.Delay(Timeout.Infinite);
>> >> > {code}
>> >> > async/await should absolutely not allow any client code to be run
>> >> > from
>> >> stripes.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
>> >> (v8.3.4#803005)
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Ivan Pavlukhin
>>
>
--
Best regards,
Ivan Pavlukhin
Re: [jira] [Updated] (IGNITE-12033) Callbacks from striped pool due to async/await may hang cluster
Thank you for your email.
Could me help me, how to unsubscribe from iss...@ignite.apache.org
On Wed, 22 Jul, 2020, 10:40 pm Ivan Pavlukhin, wrote:
> Hi Ravikiran C,
>
> Could you please provide all "To:" addresses from a particular JIRA
> notification email?
>
> Might it be the case that you are subscribed to
> iss...@ignite.apache.org? If so you should unsubscribe from it as
> well.
>
> 2020-07-22 16:42 GMT+03:00, C Ravikiran :
> > I have not participated any of the jira issues.
> > I am getting lot emails related to jira.
> >
> > How to unsubscribe all.
> >
> > On Wed, 22 Jul, 2020, 3:37 pm Ivan Pavlukhin,
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Ravikiran C,
> >>
> >> JIRA sends emails about issue updates to participants. I guess
> >> clicking "Stop watching this issue" on a particular issue in JIRA can
> >> help here.
> >>
> >> 2020-07-22 12:41 GMT+03:00, C Ravikiran :
> >> > HI Team,
> >> >
> >> > I have unsubscribed ignite users, still i am getting below emails.
> >> >
> >> > Could you please help me to unsubscribe all these emails?
> >> >
> >> > Regards,
> >> > Ravikiran C
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, 22 Jul, 2020, 12:04 pm Aleksey Plekhanov (Jira), <
> >> j...@apache.org>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> [
> >> >>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12033?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
> >> >> ]
> >> >>
> >> >> Aleksey Plekhanov updated IGNITE-12033:
> >> >> ---
> >> >> Fix Version/s: (was: 2.9)
> >> >>2.10
> >> >>
> >> >> > Callbacks from striped pool due to async/await may hang cluster
> >> >> > ---
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Key: IGNITE-12033
> >> >> > URL:
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12033
> >> >> > Project: Ignite
> >> >> > Issue Type: Bug
> >> >> > Components: cache, platforms
> >> >> >Affects Versions: 2.7.5
> >> >> >Reporter: Ilya Kasnacheev
> >> >> >Priority: Critical
> >> >> > Fix For: 2.10
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Discussed on dev-list:
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Re-EXTERNAL-Re-Replace-or-Put-after-PutAsync-causes-Ignite-to-hang-td42921.html
> >> >> > *Must use the public pool for callbacks as the most obvious step.*
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
> http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Replace-or-Put-after-PutAsync-causes-Ignite-to-hang-td27871.html#a28051
> >> >> > There's a reproducer project. Long story short, .Net can invoke
> >> >> > cache
> >> >> operations with future callbacks, which will be invoked from striped
> >> >> pool.
> >> >> If such callbacks are to use cache operations, those will be possibly
> >> >> sheduled to the same stripe and cause a deadlock.
> >> >> > The code is very simple:
> >> >> > {code}
> >> >> > Console.WriteLine("PutAsync");
> >> >> > await cache.PutAsync(1, "Test");
> >> >> > Console.WriteLine("Replace");
> >> >> > cache.Replace(1, "Testing"); // Hangs here
> >> >> > Console.WriteLine("Wait");
> >> >> > await Task.Delay(Timeout.Infinite);
> >> >> > {code}
> >> >> > async/await should absolutely not allow any client code to be run
> >> >> > from
> >> >> stripes.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
> >> >> (v8.3.4#803005)
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Ivan Pavlukhin
> >>
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
> Ivan Pavlukhin
>
Re: [jira] [Updated] (IGNITE-12033) Callbacks from striped pool due to async/await may hang cluster
To unsubscribe you need to send any message to
issues-unsubscr...@ignite.apache.org address and follow instructions
sent in a response.
2020-07-22 20:25 GMT+03:00, C Ravikiran :
> Thank you for your email.
> Could me help me, how to unsubscribe from iss...@ignite.apache.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 22 Jul, 2020, 10:40 pm Ivan Pavlukhin, wrote:
>
>> Hi Ravikiran C,
>>
>> Could you please provide all "To:" addresses from a particular JIRA
>> notification email?
>>
>> Might it be the case that you are subscribed to
>> iss...@ignite.apache.org? If so you should unsubscribe from it as
>> well.
>>
>> 2020-07-22 16:42 GMT+03:00, C Ravikiran :
>> > I have not participated any of the jira issues.
>> > I am getting lot emails related to jira.
>> >
>> > How to unsubscribe all.
>> >
>> > On Wed, 22 Jul, 2020, 3:37 pm Ivan Pavlukhin,
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Ravikiran C,
>> >>
>> >> JIRA sends emails about issue updates to participants. I guess
>> >> clicking "Stop watching this issue" on a particular issue in JIRA can
>> >> help here.
>> >>
>> >> 2020-07-22 12:41 GMT+03:00, C Ravikiran :
>> >> > HI Team,
>> >> >
>> >> > I have unsubscribed ignite users, still i am getting below emails.
>> >> >
>> >> > Could you please help me to unsubscribe all these emails?
>> >> >
>> >> > Regards,
>> >> > Ravikiran C
>> >> >
>> >> > On Wed, 22 Jul, 2020, 12:04 pm Aleksey Plekhanov (Jira), <
>> >> j...@apache.org>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> [
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12033?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
>> >> >> ]
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Aleksey Plekhanov updated IGNITE-12033:
>> >> >> ---
>> >> >> Fix Version/s: (was: 2.9)
>> >> >>2.10
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Callbacks from striped pool due to async/await may hang cluster
>> >> >> > ---
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Key: IGNITE-12033
>> >> >> > URL:
>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12033
>> >> >> > Project: Ignite
>> >> >> > Issue Type: Bug
>> >> >> > Components: cache, platforms
>> >> >> >Affects Versions: 2.7.5
>> >> >> >Reporter: Ilya Kasnacheev
>> >> >> >Priority: Critical
>> >> >> > Fix For: 2.10
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Discussed on dev-list:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Re-EXTERNAL-Re-Replace-or-Put-after-PutAsync-causes-Ignite-to-hang-td42921.html
>> >> >> > *Must use the public pool for callbacks as the most obvious
>> >> >> > step.*
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Replace-or-Put-after-PutAsync-causes-Ignite-to-hang-td27871.html#a28051
>> >> >> > There's a reproducer project. Long story short, .Net can invoke
>> >> >> > cache
>> >> >> operations with future callbacks, which will be invoked from
>> >> >> striped
>> >> >> pool.
>> >> >> If such callbacks are to use cache operations, those will be
>> >> >> possibly
>> >> >> sheduled to the same stripe and cause a deadlock.
>> >> >> > The code is very simple:
>> >> >> > {code}
>> >> >> > Console.WriteLine("PutAsync");
>> >> >> > await cache.PutAsync(1, "Test");
>> >> >> > Console.WriteLine("Replace");
>> >> >> > cache.Replace(1, "Testing"); // Hangs here
>> >> >> > Console.WriteLine("Wait");
>> >> >> > await Task.Delay(Timeout.Infinite);
>> >> >> > {code}
>> >> >> > async/await should absolutely not allow any client code to be run
>> >> >> > from
>> >> >> stripes.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
>> >> >> (v8.3.4#803005)
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >>
>> >> Best regards,
>> >> Ivan Pavlukhin
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Ivan Pavlukhin
>>
>
--
Best regards,
Ivan Pavlukhin
Re: [jira] [Updated] (IGNITE-12033) Callbacks from striped pool due to async/await may hang cluster
mailto:notifications-unsubscr...@ignite.apache.org?subject=Unsubscribe&body=Please%20unsubscribe%20me.
2020-07-22 21:39 GMT+03:00, Ivan Pavlukhin :
> To unsubscribe you need to send any message to
> issues-unsubscr...@ignite.apache.org address and follow instructions
> sent in a response.
>
> 2020-07-22 20:25 GMT+03:00, C Ravikiran :
>> Thank you for your email.
>> Could me help me, how to unsubscribe from iss...@ignite.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 22 Jul, 2020, 10:40 pm Ivan Pavlukhin,
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Ravikiran C,
>>>
>>> Could you please provide all "To:" addresses from a particular JIRA
>>> notification email?
>>>
>>> Might it be the case that you are subscribed to
>>> iss...@ignite.apache.org? If so you should unsubscribe from it as
>>> well.
>>>
>>> 2020-07-22 16:42 GMT+03:00, C Ravikiran :
>>> > I have not participated any of the jira issues.
>>> > I am getting lot emails related to jira.
>>> >
>>> > How to unsubscribe all.
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, 22 Jul, 2020, 3:37 pm Ivan Pavlukhin,
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Hi Ravikiran C,
>>> >>
>>> >> JIRA sends emails about issue updates to participants. I guess
>>> >> clicking "Stop watching this issue" on a particular issue in JIRA can
>>> >> help here.
>>> >>
>>> >> 2020-07-22 12:41 GMT+03:00, C Ravikiran :
>>> >> > HI Team,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I have unsubscribed ignite users, still i am getting below emails.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Could you please help me to unsubscribe all these emails?
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Regards,
>>> >> > Ravikiran C
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Wed, 22 Jul, 2020, 12:04 pm Aleksey Plekhanov (Jira), <
>>> >> j...@apache.org>
>>> >> > wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> [
>>> >> >>
>>> >>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12033?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
>>> >> >> ]
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Aleksey Plekhanov updated IGNITE-12033:
>>> >> >> ---
>>> >> >> Fix Version/s: (was: 2.9)
>>> >> >>2.10
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> > Callbacks from striped pool due to async/await may hang cluster
>>> >> >> > ---
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > Key: IGNITE-12033
>>> >> >> > URL:
>>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12033
>>> >> >> > Project: Ignite
>>> >> >> > Issue Type: Bug
>>> >> >> > Components: cache, platforms
>>> >> >> >Affects Versions: 2.7.5
>>> >> >> >Reporter: Ilya Kasnacheev
>>> >> >> >Priority: Critical
>>> >> >> > Fix For: 2.10
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > Discussed on dev-list:
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >>
>>> >>
>>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Re-EXTERNAL-Re-Replace-or-Put-after-PutAsync-causes-Ignite-to-hang-td42921.html
>>> >> >> > *Must use the public pool for callbacks as the most obvious
>>> >> >> > step.*
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >>
>>> >>
>>> http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Replace-or-Put-after-PutAsync-causes-Ignite-to-hang-td27871.html#a28051
>>> >> >> > There's a reproducer project. Long story short, .Net can invoke
>>> >> >> > cache
>>> >> >> operations with future callbacks, which will be invoked from
>>> >> >> striped
>>> >> >> pool.
>>> >> >> If such callbacks are to use cache operations, those will be
>>> >> >> possibly
>>> >> >> sheduled to the same stripe and cause a deadlock.
>>> >> >> > The code is very simple:
>>> >> >> > {code}
>>> >> >> > Console.WriteLine("PutAsync");
>>> >> >> > await cache.PutAsync(1, "Test");
>>> >> >> > Console.WriteLine("Replace");
>>> >> >> > cache.Replace(1, "Testing"); // Hangs here
>>> >> >> > Console.WriteLine("Wait");
>>> >> >> > await Task.Delay(Timeout.Infinite);
>>> >> >> > {code}
>>> >> >> > async/await should absolutely not allow any client code to be
>>> >> >> > run
>>> >> >> > from
>>> >> >> stripes.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> --
>>> >> >> This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
>>> >> >> (v8.3.4#803005)
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >>
>>> >> Best regards,
>>> >> Ivan Pavlukhin
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Ivan Pavlukhin
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
> Ivan Pavlukhin
>
--
Best regards,
Ivan Pavlukhin
Community over Code: What it Meant for Ignite community and project
Igniters, It's my fifth year with the ASF and our community. I joined it soon after it graduated from the Incubator. Bluntly speaking, I was hired to contribute to Ignite, but the opportunity to join a young and growing community was the most appealing to me. Since that time, our community evolved dramatically. There were many bumpy roads, exciting as well as ugly moments. However, these days I can confidently say that the community roots are strong and should keep strengthening. Overall, I decided to present at DevRelCon Earth and share how the "Community over Code" motto of the ASF is helping us not to forget about the importance of a community spirit. Join if you have time or interested and I'll be glad to hear your after-talk feedback (July 28th, 9:10am PDT): https://2020.devrel.net/speaker/denis-magda/ - Denis
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13290) SpringTransactionManager adds support for nested transactions
YuJue Li created IGNITE-13290: - Summary: SpringTransactionManager adds support for nested transactions Key: IGNITE-13290 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13290 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Bug Components: spring Affects Versions: 2.8.1 Reporter: YuJue Li Fix For: 2.10 If the transaction propagation of the outer method is REQUIRED, the transaction propagation of the inner method is REQUIRES_NEW, the following error will be prompted: org.springframework.transaction.TransactionSuspensionNotSupportedException: Transaction manager [org.apache.ignite.transactions.spring.SpringTransactionManager] does not support transaction suspension But we see, Ignite's org.apache.ignite.transactions.Transaction, there are suspend() and resume() methods, and the function is normal, so SpringTransactionManager should support similar functions. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
Re: Re[2]: Apache Ignite 2.9.0 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]
Hi guys,
considering Denis's question: [1] ("inverse TCP connection establishment")
is
already in master. I think we should port it in 2.9, would be a good thing.
"Serverless functions" [2] support is code complete in a private branch,
it's safe
to say that the issue will be completed next week (I need to run all tests
and
pass the review, it'll take some time). If we're not in a hurry then it
might be worth
waiting. Are you ok with this estimation?
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12438
[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13013
ср, 22 июл. 2020 г. в 18:19, Denis Magda :
> Sharing a correct link for the Web Console task:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13038
>
> -
> Denis
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 7:59 AM Denis Magda wrote:
>
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > Thanks for wrapping this up and sharing the progress.
> >
> > I've continued the discussion in the Hadoop thread. Let's take a couple
> of
> > days to solve all open questions. Personally, I don't see any reason to
> put
> > the merge off to Ignite 3.0.
> >
> > Also, I would try to deliver the following two changes in Ignite 2.9:
> >
> >- Communication SPI changes [1] and serverless functions support.
> @Ivan
> >Bessonov , the first is completed but no
> >merged. The second should be already solved too. Could you please
> shed some
> >light on this?
> >- Phasing out Web Console [3]. It's ready for the review and I believe
> >that it can be merged quickly. @Alexey Kuznetsov
> >, could you please share your thoughts?
> >
> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12438
> > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13013
> > [3] https://ggsystems.atlassian.net/browse/IGN-15304
> >
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 12:22 AM Alex Plehanov
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Guys,
> >>
> >> We are in code-freeze phase now. I've moved almost all non-blocker
> >> unresolved tickets from 2.9 to the next release. If you think that
> >> some ticket is a blocker and should be included into 2.9 release, please
> >> write a note in this thread.
> >>
> >> There are some tickets with "blocker" priority targeted to 2.9, some of
> >> them in "open" state and still unassigned, and I'm not sure we need all
> of
> >> these tickets in 2.9:
> >>
> >> IGNITE-13006 [1] (Apache Ignite spring libs upgrade from version 4x to
> >> spring 5.2 version or later) - Is it really a blocker for 2.9 release?
> If
> >> yes, can somebody help with resolving this ticket?
> >>
> >> IGNITE-11942 [2] (IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator Discontinuation) - ticket
> in
> >> "Patch available" state. There is a thread on dev-list related to this
> >> ticket ([6]), but as far as I understand we still don't have consensus
> >> about version for this patch (2.9, 2.10, 3.0).
> >>
> >> IGNITE-12489 [3] (Error during purges by expiration: Unknown page type)
> -
> >> perhaps issue is already resolved by some related tickets, there is
> still
> >> no reproducer, no additional details and no work in progress. I propose
> to
> >> move this ticket to the next release.
> >>
> >> IGNITE-12911 [4] (B+Tree Corrupted exception when using a key extracted
> >> from a BinaryObject value object --- and SQL enabled) - ticket in "Patch
> >> available" state, but there is no activity since May 2020. Anton
> >> Kalashnikov, Ilya Kasnacheev, do we have any updates on this ticket? Is
> it
> >> still in progress?
> >>
> >> IGNITE-12553 [5] ([IEP-35] public Java metric API) - since the new
> metrics
> >> framework is already released in 2.8 and it's still marked with
> >> @IgniteExperemental annotation, I think this ticket is not a blocker. I
> >> propose to change the ticket priority and move it to the next release.
> >>
> >>
> >> [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13006
> >> [2]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11942
> >> [3]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12489
> >> [4]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12911
> >> [5]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12553
> >> [6]:
> >>
> >>
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSSION-Complete-Discontinuation-of-IGFS-and-Hadoop-Accelerator-td42282.html
> >>
> >> пт, 17 июл. 2020 г. в 11:50, Alex Plehanov :
> >>
> >> > Ivan,
> >> >
> >> > Merged to 2.9.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks
> >> >
> >> > пт, 17 июл. 2020 г. в 01:35, Ivan Rakov :
> >> >
> >> >> Alex,
> >> >>
> >> >> Tracing is merged to master:
> >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13060
> >> >>
> >> >> Can you please port it to 2.9?
> >> >> For you convenience, there's PR versus 2.9 with conflicts resolved:
> >> >> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/8046/files
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Best Regards,
> >> >> Ivan Rakov
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 5:33 PM Alex Plehanov <
> plehanov.a...@gmail.com
> >> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Ivan,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Looks like master is broken after IGNITE-13246 (but everything is ok
> >> in
> >> >>
