Re: Re[2]: 2.9.1 release scope and dates
Yaroslav, lets add another bug fix https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13572 It's quite small fix, but bug is quite severe. ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 10:48, Yaroslav Molochkov : > Guys, > > can anyone grant me necessary permissions to create a wiki page with > release info, please? > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 12:58 PM Yaroslav Molochkov > wrote: > > > Hi! > > I see it's merged into 2.9.1 branch and master. > > > > I guess that's it for the issues, I will run nightly tests again just to > > be sure that everything is okay and we will proceed. > > > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 7:31 PM Zhenya Stanilovsky > > wrote: > > > >> > >> hello ! > >> seems it [1] need to be included too, if it`s not too late, of course. > >> May be you can bump reviewer somehow?) > >> > >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13765 > >> > >> >Ivan, it's added, thanks for pointing that out > >> > > >> >On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 5:44 PM Ivan Daschinsky < ivanda...@gmail.com > > > >> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Yaroslav, could you explain why you decided to remove from scope > >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13699 ? > >> >> This ticket also incorporate few fixes for metrics. Currently metrics > >> is a > >> >> little bit broken (JoinedCount shows invalid results for example) > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> пн, 30 нояб. 2020 г. в 17:26, Yaroslav Molochkov < > >> molochko...@gmail.com >: > >> >> > >> >> > Igniters, hello! > >> >> > > >> >> > First of all, sorry that the release process is taking so long. > >> >> > > >> >> > Secondly, the release build seems stable and no blockers were > >> introduced > >> >> > within that list > >> >> > < > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11312?jql=project%20%3D%20IGNITE%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.9.1%20and%20status%20%3D%20Resolved > >> >> > > > >> >> > (at > >> >> > least on RunAll compared to 2.9) > >> >> > > >> >> > I've also prepared release notes: > >> >> > > >> >> > Ignite Core: > >> >> > * Added support to graceful shutdown for ZookeeperDiscoverySpi > >> >> > * Added System view for binary metadata > >> >> > * Added System view for metastorage items > >> >> > * Added RebalancingPartitionsTotal metrics > >> >> > * Improved checkpoint concurrent behaviour > >> >> > * Fixed critical system error when unregister a JMX bean > >> >> > * Fixed IgniteCache#isClosed() returns false on server node even if > >> >> > the cache had been closed before > >> >> > * Fixed inability to eagerly remove expired cache entries > >> >> > * Fixed partial index rebuild issue in case indexed cache contains > >> >> > different datatypes > >> >> > * Fixed local metastorage system view error if unmarshallable > values > >> >> > present > >> >> > * Fixed deadlock between grid-timeout-worker and a thread opening a > >> >> > communication connection > >> >> > * Fixed deadlock in IgniteServiceProcessor > >> >> > * Fixed issue when rebalance future might hang in no final state > >> >> > though all partitions are owned > >> >> > * Fixed issue when scan query fails with an assertion error: > >> Unexpected > >> >> > row key > >> >> > * Fixed issue with archiving and enabled wal compaction setting on > >> >> > server restart > >> >> > * Fixed NPE during Cassandra Store initialization with PRIMITIVE > >> strategy > >> >> > * Fixed synchronization problems when different classloaders are > used > >> >> > for deployment of same class > >> >> > * Fixed exception on SQL caches when client reconnect > >> >> > * Fixed deadlock on multiple cache delete > >> >> > * Fixed NPE in IgniteServiceProcessor when destroying a cache > >> >> > * Fixed issue when DurableBackgroundTask can abandon incomplete > task > >> >> > * Fixed issue related to cache interceptor deserialization on > client > >> >> nodes > >> >> > * Fixed issue when control.sh doesn't start if JMX port was set > >> >> > * Fixed issue when ZookeeperDiscoverySpiMBeanImpl#getCoordinator > can > >> >> > return invalid node as coordinator > >> >> > * Fixed issue when valid blocking section in GridNioWorker and > >> >> > GridNioClientWorker leads to false positive blocking thread > detection > >> >> > * Fixed several logging issues > >> >> > * Fixed issue when exchange worker, waiting for new task from > queue, > >> >> > considered as blocked > >> >> > * Fixed incorrect topology snapshot logger output about coordinator > >> >> change > >> >> > * Fixed slowdown during node initialization > >> >> > * Fixed incorrect usage of Class.isAssignableFrom in > SystemViewLocal > >> >> > and SystemViewMBean classes > >> >> > * Removed unnecessary dependency to curator-client from and > improved > >> >> > ZookeeperDiscoverySpi > >> >> > * Removed unnecessary failure trace in IgnitionEx > >> >> > > >> >> > Java thin-client: > >> >> > * Fixed issue when thin client connect/disconnect during topology > >> >> > update may lead to partition divergence in ignite-sys-cache > >> >> > * Fixed issue when thin client silently closes channel after > >> inact
Re: Re[2]: 2.9.1 release scope and dates
Ivan, thanks, added to the list due to the severity of the issue. On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 12:13 PM Ivan Daschinsky wrote: > Yaroslav, lets add another bug fix > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13572 > It's quite small fix, but bug is quite severe. > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 10:48, Yaroslav Molochkov : > > > Guys, > > > > can anyone grant me necessary permissions to create a wiki page with > > release info, please? > > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 12:58 PM Yaroslav Molochkov < > molochko...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi! > > > I see it's merged into 2.9.1 branch and master. > > > > > > I guess that's it for the issues, I will run nightly tests again just > to > > > be sure that everything is okay and we will proceed. > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 7:31 PM Zhenya Stanilovsky > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> hello ! > > >> seems it [1] need to be included too, if it`s not too late, of course. > > >> May be you can bump reviewer somehow?) > > >> > > >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13765 > > >> > > >> >Ivan, it's added, thanks for pointing that out > > >> > > > >> >On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 5:44 PM Ivan Daschinsky < > ivanda...@gmail.com > > > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> Yaroslav, could you explain why you decided to remove from scope > > >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13699 ? > > >> >> This ticket also incorporate few fixes for metrics. Currently > metrics > > >> is a > > >> >> little bit broken (JoinedCount shows invalid results for example) > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> пн, 30 нояб. 2020 г. в 17:26, Yaroslav Molochkov < > > >> molochko...@gmail.com >: > > >> >> > > >> >> > Igniters, hello! > > >> >> > > > >> >> > First of all, sorry that the release process is taking so long. > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Secondly, the release build seems stable and no blockers were > > >> introduced > > >> >> > within that list > > >> >> > < > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11312?jql=project%20%3D%20IGNITE%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.9.1%20and%20status%20%3D%20Resolved > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > (at > > >> >> > least on RunAll compared to 2.9) > > >> >> > > > >> >> > I've also prepared release notes: > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Ignite Core: > > >> >> > * Added support to graceful shutdown for ZookeeperDiscoverySpi > > >> >> > * Added System view for binary metadata > > >> >> > * Added System view for metastorage items > > >> >> > * Added RebalancingPartitionsTotal metrics > > >> >> > * Improved checkpoint concurrent behaviour > > >> >> > * Fixed critical system error when unregister a JMX bean > > >> >> > * Fixed IgniteCache#isClosed() returns false on server node even > if > > >> >> > the cache had been closed before > > >> >> > * Fixed inability to eagerly remove expired cache entries > > >> >> > * Fixed partial index rebuild issue in case indexed cache > contains > > >> >> > different datatypes > > >> >> > * Fixed local metastorage system view error if unmarshallable > > values > > >> >> > present > > >> >> > * Fixed deadlock between grid-timeout-worker and a thread > opening a > > >> >> > communication connection > > >> >> > * Fixed deadlock in IgniteServiceProcessor > > >> >> > * Fixed issue when rebalance future might hang in no final state > > >> >> > though all partitions are owned > > >> >> > * Fixed issue when scan query fails with an assertion error: > > >> Unexpected > > >> >> > row key > > >> >> > * Fixed issue with archiving and enabled wal compaction setting > on > > >> >> > server restart > > >> >> > * Fixed NPE during Cassandra Store initialization with PRIMITIVE > > >> strategy > > >> >> > * Fixed synchronization problems when different classloaders are > > used > > >> >> > for deployment of same class > > >> >> > * Fixed exception on SQL caches when client reconnect > > >> >> > * Fixed deadlock on multiple cache delete > > >> >> > * Fixed NPE in IgniteServiceProcessor when destroying a cache > > >> >> > * Fixed issue when DurableBackgroundTask can abandon incomplete > > task > > >> >> > * Fixed issue related to cache interceptor deserialization on > > client > > >> >> nodes > > >> >> > * Fixed issue when control.sh doesn't start if JMX port was set > > >> >> > * Fixed issue when ZookeeperDiscoverySpiMBeanImpl#getCoordinator > > can > > >> >> > return invalid node as coordinator > > >> >> > * Fixed issue when valid blocking section in GridNioWorker and > > >> >> > GridNioClientWorker leads to false positive blocking thread > > detection > > >> >> > * Fixed several logging issues > > >> >> > * Fixed issue when exchange worker, waiting for new task from > > queue, > > >> >> > considered as blocked > > >> >> > * Fixed incorrect topology snapshot logger output about > coordinator > > >> >> change > > >> >> > * Fixed slowdown during node initialization > > >> >> > * Fixed incorrect usage of Class.isAssignableFrom in > > SystemViewLocal > > >> >> > and SystemViewMBean classes > > >> >> > * Removed unnecessary
Disable MVCC test suites
Hello Igniters, It looks like there is no activity related to maintaining or developing the MVCC feature. So, I see no reason to waste TeamCity resources. I propose to disable the corresponding test suites. This has already been discussed here as well [1]. [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html Thanks, S.
Re: Re[2]: 2.9.1 release scope and dates
Yaroslav, > can anyone grant me necessary permissions to create a wiki page with release > info, please? The edit permissions added to - slava_molochkov Can you please check? On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 12:19, Yaroslav Molochkov wrote: > > Ivan, > > thanks, added to the list due to the severity of the issue. > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 12:13 PM Ivan Daschinsky wrote: > > > Yaroslav, lets add another bug fix > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13572 > > It's quite small fix, but bug is quite severe. > > > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 10:48, Yaroslav Molochkov : > > > > > Guys, > > > > > > can anyone grant me necessary permissions to create a wiki page with > > > release info, please? > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 12:58 PM Yaroslav Molochkov < > > molochko...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi! > > > > I see it's merged into 2.9.1 branch and master. > > > > > > > > I guess that's it for the issues, I will run nightly tests again just > > to > > > > be sure that everything is okay and we will proceed. > > > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 7:31 PM Zhenya Stanilovsky > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > >> hello ! > > > >> seems it [1] need to be included too, if it`s not too late, of course. > > > >> May be you can bump reviewer somehow?) > > > >> > > > >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13765 > > > >> > > > >> >Ivan, it's added, thanks for pointing that out > > > >> > > > > >> >On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 5:44 PM Ivan Daschinsky < > > ivanda...@gmail.com > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> >> Yaroslav, could you explain why you decided to remove from scope > > > >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13699 ? > > > >> >> This ticket also incorporate few fixes for metrics. Currently > > metrics > > > >> is a > > > >> >> little bit broken (JoinedCount shows invalid results for example) > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> пн, 30 нояб. 2020 г. в 17:26, Yaroslav Molochkov < > > > >> molochko...@gmail.com >: > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Igniters, hello! > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > First of all, sorry that the release process is taking so long. > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > Secondly, the release build seems stable and no blockers were > > > >> introduced > > > >> >> > within that list > > > >> >> > < > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11312?jql=project%20%3D%20IGNITE%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.9.1%20and%20status%20%3D%20Resolved > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > (at > > > >> >> > least on RunAll compared to 2.9) > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > I've also prepared release notes: > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > Ignite Core: > > > >> >> > * Added support to graceful shutdown for ZookeeperDiscoverySpi > > > >> >> > * Added System view for binary metadata > > > >> >> > * Added System view for metastorage items > > > >> >> > * Added RebalancingPartitionsTotal metrics > > > >> >> > * Improved checkpoint concurrent behaviour > > > >> >> > * Fixed critical system error when unregister a JMX bean > > > >> >> > * Fixed IgniteCache#isClosed() returns false on server node even > > if > > > >> >> > the cache had been closed before > > > >> >> > * Fixed inability to eagerly remove expired cache entries > > > >> >> > * Fixed partial index rebuild issue in case indexed cache > > contains > > > >> >> > different datatypes > > > >> >> > * Fixed local metastorage system view error if unmarshallable > > > values > > > >> >> > present > > > >> >> > * Fixed deadlock between grid-timeout-worker and a thread > > opening a > > > >> >> > communication connection > > > >> >> > * Fixed deadlock in IgniteServiceProcessor > > > >> >> > * Fixed issue when rebalance future might hang in no final state > > > >> >> > though all partitions are owned > > > >> >> > * Fixed issue when scan query fails with an assertion error: > > > >> Unexpected > > > >> >> > row key > > > >> >> > * Fixed issue with archiving and enabled wal compaction setting > > on > > > >> >> > server restart > > > >> >> > * Fixed NPE during Cassandra Store initialization with PRIMITIVE > > > >> strategy > > > >> >> > * Fixed synchronization problems when different classloaders are > > > used > > > >> >> > for deployment of same class > > > >> >> > * Fixed exception on SQL caches when client reconnect > > > >> >> > * Fixed deadlock on multiple cache delete > > > >> >> > * Fixed NPE in IgniteServiceProcessor when destroying a cache > > > >> >> > * Fixed issue when DurableBackgroundTask can abandon incomplete > > > task > > > >> >> > * Fixed issue related to cache interceptor deserialization on > > > client > > > >> >> nodes > > > >> >> > * Fixed issue when control.sh doesn't start if JMX port was set > > > >> >> > * Fixed issue when ZookeeperDiscoverySpiMBeanImpl#getCoordinator > > > can > > > >> >> > return invalid node as coordinator > > > >> >> > * Fixed issue when valid blocking section in GridNioWorker and > > > >> >> > GridNioClientWorker leads to false positive blocking thread > > > det
Re: Disable MVCC test suites
Hello Slava, I think we should vote for MVCC termination of support. If the vote will be successful than remove it from the source code and disable MVCC suites. Only disabling tests from MVCC sounds not good. On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 12:32, Вячеслав Коптилин wrote: > > Hello Igniters, > > It looks like there is no activity related to maintaining or developing the > MVCC feature. > So, I see no reason to waste TeamCity resources. I propose to disable the > corresponding test suites. > This has already been discussed here as well [1]. > > [1] > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html > > Thanks, > S.
Re: Disable MVCC test suites
+1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. MVCC is a great feature but we should implement it as a first-class feature and not «something that pretends to be working» > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 12:53, Maxim Muzafarov написал(а): > > Hello Slava, > > I think we should vote for MVCC termination of support. If the vote > will be successful than remove it from the source code and disable > MVCC suites. > > Only disabling tests from MVCC sounds not good. > > On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 12:32, Вячеслав Коптилин > wrote: >> >> Hello Igniters, >> >> It looks like there is no activity related to maintaining or developing the >> MVCC feature. >> So, I see no reason to waste TeamCity resources. I propose to disable the >> corresponding test suites. >> This has already been discussed here as well [1]. >> >> [1] >> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html >> >> Thanks, >> S.
Re: 2.9.1 release scope and dates
Yaroslav, Hi. I propose [1] and [2] to pick up into 2.9.1. [1] is important. It fixes unexpected node failure slipped away from the Java test. Belatedly found in integration ducktape tests. [2] just disables soLinger in TcpDiscvoerySPI by default. Suggested in 2.10. But the documentation correction has already appeared in the documentation [3]. [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13705 (edb736dcd8d1d57c875ce7de2b2b2b786d1f8d51) [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13643 (cb7448eecf1ae05c2062e24d9c342d8ae9d92149) [3] https://ignite.apache.org/docs/latest/clustering/network-configuration#discovery 02.12.2020 12:19, Yaroslav Molochkov пишет: Ivan, thanks, added to the list due to the severity of the issue. On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 12:13 PM Ivan Daschinsky wrote: Yaroslav, lets add another bug fix https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13572 It's quite small fix, but bug is quite severe. ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 10:48, Yaroslav Molochkov : Guys, can anyone grant me necessary permissions to create a wiki page with release info, please? On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 12:58 PM Yaroslav Molochkov < molochko...@gmail.com> wrote: Hi! I see it's merged into 2.9.1 branch and master. I guess that's it for the issues, I will run nightly tests again just to be sure that everything is okay and we will proceed. On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 7:31 PM Zhenya Stanilovsky wrote: hello ! seems it [1] need to be included too, if it`s not too late, of course. May be you can bump reviewer somehow?) [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13765 Ivan, it's added, thanks for pointing that out On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 5:44 PM Ivan Daschinsky < ivanda...@gmail.com wrote: Yaroslav, could you explain why you decided to remove from scope https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13699 ? This ticket also incorporate few fixes for metrics. Currently metrics is a little bit broken (JoinedCount shows invalid results for example) пн, 30 нояб. 2020 г. в 17:26, Yaroslav Molochkov < molochko...@gmail.com >: Igniters, hello! First of all, sorry that the release process is taking so long. Secondly, the release build seems stable and no blockers were introduced within that list < https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11312?jql=project%20%3D%20IGNITE%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.9.1%20and%20status%20%3D%20Resolved (at least on RunAll compared to 2.9) I've also prepared release notes: Ignite Core: * Added support to graceful shutdown for ZookeeperDiscoverySpi * Added System view for binary metadata * Added System view for metastorage items * Added RebalancingPartitionsTotal metrics * Improved checkpoint concurrent behaviour * Fixed critical system error when unregister a JMX bean * Fixed IgniteCache#isClosed() returns false on server node even if the cache had been closed before * Fixed inability to eagerly remove expired cache entries * Fixed partial index rebuild issue in case indexed cache contains different datatypes * Fixed local metastorage system view error if unmarshallable values present * Fixed deadlock between grid-timeout-worker and a thread opening a communication connection * Fixed deadlock in IgniteServiceProcessor * Fixed issue when rebalance future might hang in no final state though all partitions are owned * Fixed issue when scan query fails with an assertion error: Unexpected row key * Fixed issue with archiving and enabled wal compaction setting on server restart * Fixed NPE during Cassandra Store initialization with PRIMITIVE strategy * Fixed synchronization problems when different classloaders are used for deployment of same class * Fixed exception on SQL caches when client reconnect * Fixed deadlock on multiple cache delete * Fixed NPE in IgniteServiceProcessor when destroying a cache * Fixed issue when DurableBackgroundTask can abandon incomplete task * Fixed issue related to cache interceptor deserialization on client nodes * Fixed issue when control.sh doesn't start if JMX port was set * Fixed issue when ZookeeperDiscoverySpiMBeanImpl#getCoordinator can return invalid node as coordinator * Fixed issue when valid blocking section in GridNioWorker and GridNioClientWorker leads to false positive blocking thread detection * Fixed several logging issues * Fixed issue when exchange worker, waiting for new task from queue, considered as blocked * Fixed incorrect topology snapshot logger output about coordinator change * Fixed slowdown during node initialization * Fixed incorrect usage of Class.isAssignableFrom in SystemViewLocal and SystemViewMBean classes * Removed unnecessary dependency to curator-client from and improved ZookeeperDiscoverySpi * Removed unnecessary failure trace in IgnitionEx Java thin-client: * Fixed issue when thin client connect/disconnect during topology update may lead to partition divergence in ignite-sys-cache * Fixed issue when thin client silently closes channel af
Re: 2.9.1 release scope and dates
Hello! I have scheduled a Run All (Nightly) build for ignite-2.9.1. I propose to also add https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13572 to scope since it seems to be both impactful and easy to fix. Regards, -- Ilya Kasnacheev ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:06, Steshin Vladimir : > Yaroslav, Hi. > > I propose [1] and [2] to pick up into 2.9.1. > > > [1] is important. It fixes unexpected node failure slipped away from the > Java test. Belatedly found in integration ducktape tests. > > > [2] just disables soLinger in TcpDiscvoerySPI by default. Suggested in > 2.10. But the documentation correction has already appeared in the > documentation [3]. > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13705 > (edb736dcd8d1d57c875ce7de2b2b2b786d1f8d51) > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13643 > (cb7448eecf1ae05c2062e24d9c342d8ae9d92149) > > [3] > > https://ignite.apache.org/docs/latest/clustering/network-configuration#discovery > > > 02.12.2020 12:19, Yaroslav Molochkov пишет: > > Ivan, > > > > thanks, added to the list due to the severity of the issue. > > > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 12:13 PM Ivan Daschinsky > wrote: > > > >> Yaroslav, lets add another bug fix > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13572 > >> It's quite small fix, but bug is quite severe. > >> > >> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 10:48, Yaroslav Molochkov : > >> > >>> Guys, > >>> > >>> can anyone grant me necessary permissions to create a wiki page with > >>> release info, please? > >>> > >>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 12:58 PM Yaroslav Molochkov < > >> molochko...@gmail.com> > >>> wrote: > >>> > Hi! > I see it's merged into 2.9.1 branch and master. > > I guess that's it for the issues, I will run nightly tests again just > >> to > be sure that everything is okay and we will proceed. > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 7:31 PM Zhenya Stanilovsky > wrote: > > > hello ! > > seems it [1] need to be included too, if it`s not too late, of > course. > > May be you can bump reviewer somehow?) > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13765 > > > >> Ivan, it's added, thanks for pointing that out > >> > >> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 5:44 PM Ivan Daschinsky < > >> ivanda...@gmail.com > > wrote: > >>> Yaroslav, could you explain why you decided to remove from scope > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13699 ? > >>> This ticket also incorporate few fixes for metrics. Currently > >> metrics > > is a > >>> little bit broken (JoinedCount shows invalid results for example) > >>> > >>> > >>> пн, 30 нояб. 2020 г. в 17:26, Yaroslav Molochkov < > > molochko...@gmail.com >: > Igniters, hello! > > First of all, sorry that the release process is taking so long. > > Secondly, the release build seems stable and no blockers were > > introduced > within that list > < > > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11312?jql=project%20%3D%20IGNITE%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.9.1%20and%20status%20%3D%20Resolved > (at > least on RunAll compared to 2.9) > > I've also prepared release notes: > > Ignite Core: > * Added support to graceful shutdown for ZookeeperDiscoverySpi > * Added System view for binary metadata > * Added System view for metastorage items > * Added RebalancingPartitionsTotal metrics > * Improved checkpoint concurrent behaviour > * Fixed critical system error when unregister a JMX bean > * Fixed IgniteCache#isClosed() returns false on server node even > >> if > the cache had been closed before > * Fixed inability to eagerly remove expired cache entries > * Fixed partial index rebuild issue in case indexed cache > >> contains > different datatypes > * Fixed local metastorage system view error if unmarshallable > >>> values > present > * Fixed deadlock between grid-timeout-worker and a thread > >> opening a > communication connection > * Fixed deadlock in IgniteServiceProcessor > * Fixed issue when rebalance future might hang in no final state > though all partitions are owned > * Fixed issue when scan query fails with an assertion error: > > Unexpected > row key > * Fixed issue with archiving and enabled wal compaction setting > >> on > server restart > * Fixed NPE during Cassandra Store initialization with PRIMITIVE > > strategy > * Fixed synchronization problems when different classloaders are > >>> used > for deployment of same class > * Fixed exception on SQL caches when client reconnect > * Fixed deadlock on multiple cache delete > * Fixed NPE in IgniteServiceProcessor when destroying a cache > >>
Re: Join to dev community
Hello! I have added this account to the Contributors role, you may now assign tickets to yourself. Please read https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Coding+Guidelines https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute and accustomize with MTCGA bot. As for the email problem, it seems that it's not fixable without using an external email client. Regards, -- Ilya Kasnacheev пн, 30 нояб. 2020 г. в 20:16, Aleksey Rostov : > Hello! > So, I found out that I have created an account in > https://cwiki.apache.org/ > . I thought that confluence and jira share accounts but this was not the > case. > I have created a jira account - arostov and checked it. My main email > address is alekse-ros...@ya.ru but I can't send emails from this account, > I > catch error every time > > : > ezmlm-reject: fatal: Sorry, I don't accept messages of MIME Content-Type > 'text/html' (#5.2.3) > > Therefore I send from secondary email address arostov.a...@gmail.com > > пт, 27 нояб. 2020 г. в 21:19, Aleksey Rostov : > > > Hello everyone! > > My name is Aleksey Rostov, I want to contribute to Ignite.NET. I am > > currently a senior .net developer in Luxoft company in Saint Petersburg. > > Please, help me to start contributing. > > I have created a jira account - arostov. > > >
Re: 2.9.1 release scope and dates
Hello again! Yaroslav, I have noticed that https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13388 has slipped through the cracks and was not committed to master properly. I have committed it to master now, can you please cherry-pick it and add to scope of 2.9.1 if it's not too late? It's an important packaging bugfix. I can cherry-pick it myself if you give a green light. Regards, -- Ilya Kasnacheev ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:09, Ilya Kasnacheev : > Hello! > > I have scheduled a Run All (Nightly) build for ignite-2.9.1. > > I propose to also add https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13572 > to scope since it seems to be both impactful and easy to fix. > > Regards, > -- > Ilya Kasnacheev > > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:06, Steshin Vladimir : > >> Yaroslav, Hi. >> >> I propose [1] and [2] to pick up into 2.9.1. >> >> >> [1] is important. It fixes unexpected node failure slipped away from the >> Java test. Belatedly found in integration ducktape tests. >> >> >> [2] just disables soLinger in TcpDiscvoerySPI by default. Suggested in >> 2.10. But the documentation correction has already appeared in the >> documentation [3]. >> >> >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13705 >> (edb736dcd8d1d57c875ce7de2b2b2b786d1f8d51) >> >> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13643 >> (cb7448eecf1ae05c2062e24d9c342d8ae9d92149) >> >> [3] >> >> https://ignite.apache.org/docs/latest/clustering/network-configuration#discovery >> >> >> 02.12.2020 12:19, Yaroslav Molochkov пишет: >> > Ivan, >> > >> > thanks, added to the list due to the severity of the issue. >> > >> > On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 12:13 PM Ivan Daschinsky >> wrote: >> > >> >> Yaroslav, lets add another bug fix >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13572 >> >> It's quite small fix, but bug is quite severe. >> >> >> >> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 10:48, Yaroslav Molochkov > >: >> >> >> >>> Guys, >> >>> >> >>> can anyone grant me necessary permissions to create a wiki page with >> >>> release info, please? >> >>> >> >>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 12:58 PM Yaroslav Molochkov < >> >> molochko...@gmail.com> >> >>> wrote: >> >>> >> Hi! >> I see it's merged into 2.9.1 branch and master. >> >> I guess that's it for the issues, I will run nightly tests again just >> >> to >> be sure that everything is okay and we will proceed. >> >> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 7:31 PM Zhenya Stanilovsky >> wrote: >> >> > hello ! >> > seems it [1] need to be included too, if it`s not too late, of >> course. >> > May be you can bump reviewer somehow?) >> > >> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13765 >> > >> >> Ivan, it's added, thanks for pointing that out >> >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 5:44 PM Ivan Daschinsky < >> >> ivanda...@gmail.com >> > wrote: >> >>> Yaroslav, could you explain why you decided to remove from scope >> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13699 ? >> >>> This ticket also incorporate few fixes for metrics. Currently >> >> metrics >> > is a >> >>> little bit broken (JoinedCount shows invalid results for example) >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> пн, 30 нояб. 2020 г. в 17:26, Yaroslav Molochkov < >> > molochko...@gmail.com >: >> Igniters, hello! >> >> First of all, sorry that the release process is taking so long. >> >> Secondly, the release build seems stable and no blockers were >> > introduced >> within that list >> < >> >> >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11312?jql=project%20%3D%20IGNITE%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.9.1%20and%20status%20%3D%20Resolved >> (at >> least on RunAll compared to 2.9) >> >> I've also prepared release notes: >> >> Ignite Core: >> * Added support to graceful shutdown for ZookeeperDiscoverySpi >> * Added System view for binary metadata >> * Added System view for metastorage items >> * Added RebalancingPartitionsTotal metrics >> * Improved checkpoint concurrent behaviour >> * Fixed critical system error when unregister a JMX bean >> * Fixed IgniteCache#isClosed() returns false on server node even >> >> if >> the cache had been closed before >> * Fixed inability to eagerly remove expired cache entries >> * Fixed partial index rebuild issue in case indexed cache >> >> contains >> different datatypes >> * Fixed local metastorage system view error if unmarshallable >> >>> values >> present >> * Fixed deadlock between grid-timeout-worker and a thread >> >> opening a >> communication connection >> * Fixed deadlock in IgniteServiceProcessor >> * Fixed issue when rebalance future might hang in no final state >> though all partitions are owned >> * Fixed issue when scan qu
Re: 2.9.1 release scope and dates
Hello once more! It would also be nice to include https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13770 since it is a nasty user-visible NPE in public API. Pls cherry-pick or greenlight me if it's not too late. Regards. -- Ilya Kasnacheev ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 14:14, Ilya Kasnacheev : > Hello again! > > Yaroslav, I have noticed that > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13388 has slipped > through the cracks and was not committed to master properly. > > I have committed it to master now, can you please cherry-pick it and add > to scope of 2.9.1 if it's not too late? It's an important packaging bugfix. > > I can cherry-pick it myself if you give a green light. > > Regards, > -- > Ilya Kasnacheev > > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:09, Ilya Kasnacheev : > >> Hello! >> >> I have scheduled a Run All (Nightly) build for ignite-2.9.1. >> >> I propose to also add https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13572 >> to scope since it seems to be both impactful and easy to fix. >> >> Regards, >> -- >> Ilya Kasnacheev >> >> >> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:06, Steshin Vladimir : >> >>> Yaroslav, Hi. >>> >>> I propose [1] and [2] to pick up into 2.9.1. >>> >>> >>> [1] is important. It fixes unexpected node failure slipped away from the >>> Java test. Belatedly found in integration ducktape tests. >>> >>> >>> [2] just disables soLinger in TcpDiscvoerySPI by default. Suggested in >>> 2.10. But the documentation correction has already appeared in the >>> documentation [3]. >>> >>> >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13705 >>> (edb736dcd8d1d57c875ce7de2b2b2b786d1f8d51) >>> >>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13643 >>> (cb7448eecf1ae05c2062e24d9c342d8ae9d92149) >>> >>> [3] >>> >>> https://ignite.apache.org/docs/latest/clustering/network-configuration#discovery >>> >>> >>> 02.12.2020 12:19, Yaroslav Molochkov пишет: >>> > Ivan, >>> > >>> > thanks, added to the list due to the severity of the issue. >>> > >>> > On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 12:13 PM Ivan Daschinsky >>> wrote: >>> > >>> >> Yaroslav, lets add another bug fix >>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13572 >>> >> It's quite small fix, but bug is quite severe. >>> >> >>> >> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 10:48, Yaroslav Molochkov >> >: >>> >> >>> >>> Guys, >>> >>> >>> >>> can anyone grant me necessary permissions to create a wiki page with >>> >>> release info, please? >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 12:58 PM Yaroslav Molochkov < >>> >> molochko...@gmail.com> >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Hi! >>> I see it's merged into 2.9.1 branch and master. >>> >>> I guess that's it for the issues, I will run nightly tests again >>> just >>> >> to >>> be sure that everything is okay and we will proceed. >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 7:31 PM Zhenya Stanilovsky >>> wrote: >>> >>> > hello ! >>> > seems it [1] need to be included too, if it`s not too late, of >>> course. >>> > May be you can bump reviewer somehow?) >>> > >>> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13765 >>> > >>> >> Ivan, it's added, thanks for pointing that out >>> >> >>> >> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 5:44 PM Ivan Daschinsky < >>> >> ivanda...@gmail.com >>> > wrote: >>> >>> Yaroslav, could you explain why you decided to remove from scope >>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13699 ? >>> >>> This ticket also incorporate few fixes for metrics. Currently >>> >> metrics >>> > is a >>> >>> little bit broken (JoinedCount shows invalid results for example) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> пн, 30 нояб. 2020 г. в 17:26, Yaroslav Molochkov < >>> > molochko...@gmail.com >: >>> Igniters, hello! >>> >>> First of all, sorry that the release process is taking so long. >>> >>> Secondly, the release build seems stable and no blockers were >>> > introduced >>> within that list >>> < >>> >>> >> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11312?jql=project%20%3D%20IGNITE%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.9.1%20and%20status%20%3D%20Resolved >>> (at >>> least on RunAll compared to 2.9) >>> >>> I've also prepared release notes: >>> >>> Ignite Core: >>> * Added support to graceful shutdown for ZookeeperDiscoverySpi >>> * Added System view for binary metadata >>> * Added System view for metastorage items >>> * Added RebalancingPartitionsTotal metrics >>> * Improved checkpoint concurrent behaviour >>> * Fixed critical system error when unregister a JMX bean >>> * Fixed IgniteCache#isClosed() returns false on server node even >>> >> if >>> the cache had been closed before >>> * Fixed inability to eagerly remove expired cache entries >>> * Fixed partial index rebuild issue in case indexed cache >>> >> contains >>> different datatypes
Re: Disable MVCC test suites
Hello Maxim, > I think we should vote for MVCC termination of support. Honestly, my goal is simple and not so ambitious. I just want to save the time required for getting TCBot's visa and TC resources. Thanks, S. ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 12:54, Maxim Muzafarov : > Hello Slava, > > I think we should vote for MVCC termination of support. If the vote > will be successful than remove it from the source code and disable > MVCC suites. > > Only disabling tests from MVCC sounds not good. > > On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 12:32, Вячеслав Коптилин > wrote: > > > > Hello Igniters, > > > > It looks like there is no activity related to maintaining or developing > the > > MVCC feature. > > So, I see no reason to waste TeamCity resources. I propose to disable the > > corresponding test suites. > > This has already been discussed here as well [1]. > > > > [1] > > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html > > > > Thanks, > > S. >
Re: Disable MVCC test suites
Hello Nikolay, > +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. It has already been discussed here [1] and, unfortunately, I have not seen an agreement on that. [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html Thanks, S. ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:05, Nikolay Izhikov : > +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. > > MVCC is a great feature but we should implement it as a first-class > feature and not «something that pretends to be working» > > > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 12:53, Maxim Muzafarov написал(а): > > > > Hello Slava, > > > > I think we should vote for MVCC termination of support. If the vote > > will be successful than remove it from the source code and disable > > MVCC suites. > > > > Only disabling tests from MVCC sounds not good. > > > > On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 12:32, Вячеслав Коптилин > wrote: > >> > >> Hello Igniters, > >> > >> It looks like there is no activity related to maintaining or developing > the > >> MVCC feature. > >> So, I see no reason to waste TeamCity resources. I propose to disable > the > >> corresponding test suites. > >> This has already been discussed here as well [1]. > >> > >> [1] > >> > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html > >> > >> Thanks, > >> S. > >
Re: Disable MVCC test suites
Hello, Slava! Yes, this topic comes to the top from time to time :) > . I just want to save the time required for getting TCBot's visa and TC > resources. Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:36, Вячеслав Коптилин > написал(а): > > Hello Nikolay, > >> +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. > It has already been discussed here [1] and, unfortunately, I have not seen > an agreement on that. > > [1] > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html > > > Thanks, > S. > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:05, Nikolay Izhikov : > >> +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. >> >> MVCC is a great feature but we should implement it as a first-class >> feature and not «something that pretends to be working» >> >>> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 12:53, Maxim Muzafarov написал(а): >>> >>> Hello Slava, >>> >>> I think we should vote for MVCC termination of support. If the vote >>> will be successful than remove it from the source code and disable >>> MVCC suites. >>> >>> Only disabling tests from MVCC sounds not good. >>> >>> On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 12:32, Вячеслав Коптилин >> wrote: Hello Igniters, It looks like there is no activity related to maintaining or developing >> the MVCC feature. So, I see no reason to waste TeamCity resources. I propose to disable >> the corresponding test suites. This has already been discussed here as well [1]. [1] >> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html Thanks, S. >> >>
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13793) ODBC: Implement SQLRowCount for select queries
Igor Sapego created IGNITE-13793: Summary: ODBC: Implement SQLRowCount for select queries Key: IGNITE-13793 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13793 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Improvement Components: odbc Affects Versions: 2.9 Reporter: Igor Sapego Assignee: Igor Sapego Fix For: 2.10 SQLRowCount() should return estimation of row count of the query. Currently, we can not provide any estimations of this kind, but we still need to implement this function as sometimes some third-party software uses it. It is proposed to use some kind of constant value, e.g. page size. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
Re: Disable MVCC test suites
Hi Nikolay, > Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? Fair enough. However, I am not an expert in this area (MVCC and SQL), so I cannot say how much effort it will take. I would say that the opinion of the rest of the community is needed here. Anyway, I think test suites can be disabled even today, while the fate of the MVCC feature can be (and should be) discussed separately. What do you think? Thanks, S. ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 15:38, Nikolay Izhikov : > Hello, Slava! > > Yes, this topic comes to the top from time to time :) > > > . I just want to save the time required for getting TCBot's visa and TC > resources. > > Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? > > > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:36, Вячеслав Коптилин > написал(а): > > > > Hello Nikolay, > > > >> +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. > > It has already been discussed here [1] and, unfortunately, I have not > seen > > an agreement on that. > > > > [1] > > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html > > > > > > Thanks, > > S. > > > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:05, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > >> +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. > >> > >> MVCC is a great feature but we should implement it as a first-class > >> feature and not «something that pretends to be working» > >> > >>> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 12:53, Maxim Muzafarov > написал(а): > >>> > >>> Hello Slava, > >>> > >>> I think we should vote for MVCC termination of support. If the vote > >>> will be successful than remove it from the source code and disable > >>> MVCC suites. > >>> > >>> Only disabling tests from MVCC sounds not good. > >>> > >>> On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 12:32, Вячеслав Коптилин < > slava.kopti...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > > Hello Igniters, > > It looks like there is no activity related to maintaining or > developing > >> the > MVCC feature. > So, I see no reason to waste TeamCity resources. I propose to disable > >> the > corresponding test suites. > This has already been discussed here as well [1]. > > [1] > > >> > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html > > Thanks, > S. > >> > >> > >
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13794) Add partition awareness to NodeJS client
Semyon Danilov created IGNITE-13794: --- Summary: Add partition awareness to NodeJS client Key: IGNITE-13794 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13794 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Task Reporter: Semyon Danilov Assignee: Semyon Danilov -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
Re: [DISCUSS] Missed (non-suited) tests
Hi, Ilya! I've checked testsuites. There is an issue. For example *IgniteBinaryCacheQueryTestSuite* suite is now in 2 modules: ignite-core, ignite-indexing. On TeamCity it runs by "Query 1" suite. Simplified maven command for the suite is mvn -DtestIgniteBinaryCacheQueryTestSuite -am -pl :ignite-indexing surefire:test Sequence of actions is: 1. Find modules dependencies (*-am* flag): ignite-tools, ignite-core; 2. Run the test command for every module. In this step the maven tries to find the specified test for every module. This is good news, so we don't need to create new TeamCity suites for such splitted suites. But the run performs within the current module classpath, so for the core module the test suite fails with error "Add module 'ignite-indexing' to the classpath of all Ignite nodes". Maven can't resolve it. The only way to work with it is to specify additional classpath elements for tests with setting *-Dmaven.test.additionalClasspath=/path/to/m2/jar*. I did it by filling MAVEN_OPTS with the setting. Please check the job parameters [1]. After that the core module part ran successfully. It means for every TC suite that runs such splitted suite we need to set the setting. What do you think, is it a valid way to handle the issue? If there are no objections, I will check other such suites. Also to mention there, the work directory contains a *repository/* folder with all required .jars. But usage of this path in the setting didn't help. I'm not sure, but I think it's an issue due to usage of Classworlds. So, using dependency from .m2 is the only way. [1] https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5770727&buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_Queries1&tab=buildParameters On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 3:55 PM Max Timonin wrote: > Sure, I'll do that. > > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 2:00 PM Ilya Kasnacheev > wrote: > >> Hello! >> >> You can override these values (module, suites) values when running a suite >> on TC. Can you please run these ones which need to be changed individually >> on TC, make sure they run without errors and contain all the needed tests, >> and link to these runs in the ticket? Then I can modify the suites to fit >> those. >> >> I'm not sure that class shadowing will work as we want it to work, e.g., >> we >> now have two IgniteCacheQuerySelfTestSuite6 with the same FQDN, I'm not >> sure if maven/TC is going to pick both or just one. >> Maybe they should go to a different package, e.g., testsuites/core for >> every suite already present in indexing/spring/etc. Maybe you can rename >> them just now? This will mean a lot less of work reconfiguring suites. >> In TC configurations, suite names are simple class names, not FQ, so no >> changes may be needed at all. >> >> Regards, >> -- >> Ilya Kasnacheev >> >> >> пт, 27 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:03, Max Timonin : >> >> > Hi, sorry for the misleading. I mean "adding ignite-core module >> *suites* to >> > the TeamCity Queries* suite" >> > >> > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 12:44 PM Ilya Kasnacheev < >> > ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Hello! >> > > >> > > What do you mean by "adding ignite-core to suite"? ignite-core is a >> top >> > > dependency and its tests are also included in all other modules' tests >> > > classpath since it provides GridAbstractTest. >> > > >> > > Regards, >> > > -- >> > > Ilya Kasnacheev >> > > >> > > >> > > пт, 27 нояб. 2020 г. в 01:24, Max Timonin : >> > > >> > > > Hi, Ilya! >> > > > >> > > > So, I've updated PR, fixed comments and removed Core* prefixes. >> MTCGA >> > > shows >> > > > no blockers, but it was 2 weeks ago, so I've started it again. >> > > > >> > > > If PR is OK then there are some suites that should be updated on TC. >> > > Could >> > > > you please tell me how we can do it? >> > > > >> > > > 1. Add ignite-cassandra-serializers suite: >> > > > >> > > >1. org.apache.ignite.tests.SerializerSuite >> > > > >> > > > 2. Add ignite-core to Queries* TC suite: >> > > > >> > > >1. org.apache.ignite.client.IgniteClientTestSuite >> > > >2. org.apache.ignite.suites.IgniteBinaryCacheQueryTestSuite >> > > >3. org.apache.ignite.suites.IgniteBinaryCacheQueryTestSuite2 >> > > >4. org.apache.ignite.suites.IgniteCacheQuerySelfTestSuite3 >> > > >5. org.apache.ignite.suites.IgniteCacheQuerySelfTestSuite4 >> > > >6. org.apache.ignite.suites.IgniteCacheQuerySelfTestSuite5 >> > > >7. org.apache.ignite.suites.IgniteCacheQuerySelfTestSuite6 >> > > >8. org.apache.ignite.suites.IgnitePdsWithIndexingCoreTestSuite >> > > >9. org.apache.ignite.suites.IgniteCacheMvccSqlTestSuite >> > > > >> > > > 3. Remove ignite-indexing from TC suites: >> > > > >> > > >1. org.apache.ignite.testsuites.IgniteCacheQuerySelfTestSuite3 >> > > >2. org.apache.ignite.testsuites.IgniteCacheQuerySelfTestSuite4 >> > > >3. org.apache.ignite.testsuites.IgniteCacheQuerySelfTestSuite5 >> > > > >> > > > 4. Add ignite-core to Spring* TC suite: >> > > > >> > > >1. org.apache.ignite.testsuites.Ignit
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13795) java.nio.file.InvalidPathException: Illegal char <:> at lock page on windows
Ivan Bessonov created IGNITE-13795:
--
Summary: java.nio.file.InvalidPathException: Illegal char <:> at
lock page on windows
Key: IGNITE-13795
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13795
Project: Ignite
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Ivan Bessonov
Assignee: Ivan Bessonov
{code:java}
Exception in thread "Thread-1" java.nio.file.InvalidPathException: Illegal char
<:> at index 109:
C:\BuildAgent\work\d501ae8146bd8253\i2test\var\suite-thin_clients\art-gg-ult\work\diagnostic\page_lock_dump_0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1,127.0.0.1,172.23.240.1,172.25.2.217:47500_2020_06_22_17_24_06_377
at sun.nio.fs.WindowsPathParser.normalize(WindowsPathParser.java:182)
at sun.nio.fs.WindowsPathParser.parse(WindowsPathParser.java:153)
at sun.nio.fs.WindowsPathParser.parse(WindowsPathParser.java:77)
at sun.nio.fs.WindowsPath.parse(WindowsPath.java:94)
at sun.nio.fs.WindowsFileSystem.getPath(WindowsFileSystem.java:255)
at java.io.File.toPath(File.java:2234)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.persistence.diagnostic.pagelocktracker.dumpprocessors.ToFileDumpProcessor.saveToFile(ToFileDumpProcessor.java:69)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.persistence.diagnostic.pagelocktracker.dumpprocessors.ToFileDumpProcessor.toFileDump(ToFileDumpProcessor.java:53)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.persistence.diagnostic.pagelocktracker.PageLockTrackerManager.onHangThreads(PageLockTrackerManager.java:123)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.persistence.diagnostic.pagelocktracker.SharedPageLockTracker$TimeOutWorker.run(SharedPageLockTracker.java:385)
{code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
Re: Disable MVCC test suites
> I think test suites can be disabled even today I’m -1 to disable tests without complete removal. It will be even worse if our users will face NPE or things like that in the basic MVCC scenarios just because we don’t tests it. > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:50, Вячеслав Коптилин > написал(а): > > Hi Nikolay, > >> Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? > Fair enough. However, I am not an expert in this area (MVCC and SQL), so I > cannot say how much effort it will take. > I would say that the opinion of the rest of the community is needed here. > > Anyway, I think test suites can be disabled even today, while the fate of > the MVCC feature can be (and should be) discussed separately. > What do you think? > > Thanks, > S. > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 15:38, Nikolay Izhikov : > >> Hello, Slava! >> >> Yes, this topic comes to the top from time to time :) >> >>> . I just want to save the time required for getting TCBot's visa and TC >> resources. >> >> Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? >> >>> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:36, Вячеслав Коптилин >> написал(а): >>> >>> Hello Nikolay, >>> +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. >>> It has already been discussed here [1] and, unfortunately, I have not >> seen >>> an agreement on that. >>> >>> [1] >>> >> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> S. >>> >>> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:05, Nikolay Izhikov : >>> +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. MVCC is a great feature but we should implement it as a first-class feature and not «something that pretends to be working» > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 12:53, Maxim Muzafarov >> написал(а): > > Hello Slava, > > I think we should vote for MVCC termination of support. If the vote > will be successful than remove it from the source code and disable > MVCC suites. > > Only disabling tests from MVCC sounds not good. > > On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 12:32, Вячеслав Коптилин < >> slava.kopti...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hello Igniters, >> >> It looks like there is no activity related to maintaining or >> developing the >> MVCC feature. >> So, I see no reason to waste TeamCity resources. I propose to disable the >> corresponding test suites. >> This has already been discussed here as well [1]. >> >> [1] >> >> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html >> >> Thanks, >> S. >> >>
Re: Disable MVCC test suites
How about: 1. Disable MVCC with some patch. 2. Turn off tests. 3. Plan full code removal. ? > On 2 Dec 2020, at 16:01, Nikolay Izhikov wrote: > >> I think test suites can be disabled even today > > I’m -1 to disable tests without complete removal. > It will be even worse if our users will face NPE or things like that in the > basic MVCC scenarios just because we don’t tests it. > > >> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:50, Вячеслав Коптилин >> написал(а): >> >> Hi Nikolay, >> >>> Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? >> Fair enough. However, I am not an expert in this area (MVCC and SQL), so I >> cannot say how much effort it will take. >> I would say that the opinion of the rest of the community is needed here. >> >> Anyway, I think test suites can be disabled even today, while the fate of >> the MVCC feature can be (and should be) discussed separately. >> What do you think? >> >> Thanks, >> S. >> >> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 15:38, Nikolay Izhikov : >> >>> Hello, Slava! >>> >>> Yes, this topic comes to the top from time to time :) >>> . I just want to save the time required for getting TCBot's visa and TC >>> resources. >>> >>> Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? >>> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:36, Вячеслав Коптилин >>> написал(а): Hello Nikolay, > +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. It has already been discussed here [1] and, unfortunately, I have not >>> seen an agreement on that. [1] >>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html Thanks, S. ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:05, Nikolay Izhikov : > +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. > > MVCC is a great feature but we should implement it as a first-class > feature and not «something that pretends to be working» > >> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 12:53, Maxim Muzafarov >>> написал(а): >> >> Hello Slava, >> >> I think we should vote for MVCC termination of support. If the vote >> will be successful than remove it from the source code and disable >> MVCC suites. >> >> Only disabling tests from MVCC sounds not good. >> >> On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 12:32, Вячеслав Коптилин < >>> slava.kopti...@gmail.com> > wrote: >>> >>> Hello Igniters, >>> >>> It looks like there is no activity related to maintaining or >>> developing > the >>> MVCC feature. >>> So, I see no reason to waste TeamCity resources. I propose to disable > the >>> corresponding test suites. >>> This has already been discussed here as well [1]. >>> >>> [1] >>> > >>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html >>> >>> Thanks, >>> S. > > >>> >>> >
[GitHub] [ignite-nodejs-thin-client] SammyVimes opened a new pull request #2: IGNITE-13794 Partition awareness for Node.js
SammyVimes opened a new pull request #2: URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-nodejs-thin-client/pull/2 This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13796) Update docs for the kubernetes module)
Maksim Timonin created IGNITE-13796: --- Summary: Update docs for the kubernetes module) Key: IGNITE-13796 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13796 Project: Ignite Issue Type: New Feature Reporter: Maksim Timonin -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13797) Calcite bug. CREATE TABLE with WHERE SELECT 1;
Stanilovsky Evgeny created IGNITE-13797:
---
Summary: Calcite bug. CREATE TABLE with WHERE SELECT 1;
Key: IGNITE-13797
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13797
Project: Ignite
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: sql
Reporter: Stanilovsky Evgeny
CREATE TABLE TABLE_E061_09_01_04 ( A INT PRIMARY KEY, CC INTEGER ); SELECT A
FROM TABLE_E061_09_01_04 WHERE A = ( SELECT 1 );
fires:
{noformat}
java.lang.AssertionError: RelSubset
[rel#4121:RelSubset#7.IGNITE.[].single.rewindable.uncorrelated] has wrong best
cost 1021.13999. Correct cost is 1057.0
at org.apache.calcite.util.Litmus$1.fail(Litmus.java:31)
at
org.apache.calcite.plan.volcano.VolcanoPlanner.isValid(VolcanoPlanner.java:647)
at
org.apache.calcite.plan.volcano.VolcanoPlanner.ensureRegistered(VolcanoPlanner.java:610)
at
org.apache.calcite.plan.volcano.VolcanoRuleCall.transformTo(VolcanoRuleCall.java:148)
at
org.apache.calcite.plan.RelOptRuleCall.transformTo(RelOptRuleCall.java:268)
at
org.apache.calcite.plan.RelOptRuleCall.transformTo(RelOptRuleCall.java:283)
at
org.apache.calcite.rel.convert.ConverterRule.onMatch(ConverterRule.java:169)
at
org.apache.calcite.plan.volcano.VolcanoRuleCall.onMatch(VolcanoRuleCall.java:229)
at
org.apache.calcite.plan.volcano.TopDownRuleDriver.applyGenerator(TopDownRuleDriver.java:142)
at
org.apache.calcite.plan.volcano.TopDownRuleDriver.access$600(TopDownRuleDriver.java:47)
at
org.apache.calcite.plan.volcano.TopDownRuleDriver$ApplyRule.perform(TopDownRuleDriver.java:519)
at
org.apache.calcite.plan.volcano.TopDownRuleDriver.drive(TopDownRuleDriver.java:101)
at
org.apache.calcite.plan.volcano.VolcanoPlanner.findBestExp(VolcanoPlanner.java:510)
at
org.apache.calcite.tools.Programs$RuleSetProgram.run(Programs.java:312)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.query.calcite.prepare.IgnitePlanner.transform(IgnitePlanner.java:258)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.query.calcite.exec.ExecutionServiceImpl.optimize(ExecutionServiceImpl.java:616)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.query.calcite.exec.ExecutionServiceImpl.prepareQuery(ExecutionServiceImpl.java:568)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.query.calcite.exec.ExecutionServiceImpl.prepareSingle(ExecutionServiceImpl.java:542)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.query.calcite.exec.ExecutionServiceImpl.prepareQuery(ExecutionServiceImpl.java:501)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.query.calcite.prepare.QueryPlanCacheImpl.queryPlan(QueryPlanCacheImpl.java:84)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.query.calcite.exec.ExecutionServiceImpl.executeQuery(ExecutionServiceImpl.java:378)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.query.calcite.CalciteQueryProcessor.query(CalciteQueryProcessor.java:240)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.query.GridQueryProcessor.querySqlFields(GridQueryProcessor.java:2787)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.query.GridQueryProcessor.querySqlFields(GridQueryProcessor.java:2743)
{noformat}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13798) Prototype Raft implementation port to a separate zero-dependency Ignite module
Alexey Goncharuk created IGNITE-13798: - Summary: Prototype Raft implementation port to a separate zero-dependency Ignite module Key: IGNITE-13798 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13798 Project: Ignite Issue Type: New Feature Reporter: Alexey Goncharuk Assignee: Alexey Goncharuk We need to check whether it is reasonable and feasible to port the etcd Raft implementation [1] to Java, maintaining the same API interaction model: * Raft instance is a single-threaded state machine with methods to accept messages, return progress to be processed by a raft client, and tick callback * Raft instance does not actively send messages, not does it actively write to persistent log or the state machine The implementation should demonstrate how the module will be used with omitted components: Raft Log, State Machine, Messaging, Timer. The implementation must cover: * Ability to provide leader/follower callbacks * Ability to read linearizable and relaxed commit indexes The implementation may cover: * Replication group reconfiguration The implementation prototype does not cover: * Multi-raft groups * Asynchronous state machine mutation -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
Re: Disable MVCC test suites
Pert, I think we should start with the vote. So, the plan can be: 1. Vote for MVCC removal (if success then next steps) 2. Disable MVCC with some patch. 3. Turn off tests on TC. 4. Create issues with full code removal. On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 16:03, Petr Ivanov wrote: > > How about: > > > 1. Disable MVCC with some patch. > 2. Turn off tests. > 3. Plan full code removal. > > ? > > > On 2 Dec 2020, at 16:01, Nikolay Izhikov wrote: > > > >> I think test suites can be disabled even today > > > > I’m -1 to disable tests without complete removal. > > It will be even worse if our users will face NPE or things like that in the > > basic MVCC scenarios just because we don’t tests it. > > > > > >> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:50, Вячеслав Коптилин > >> написал(а): > >> > >> Hi Nikolay, > >> > >>> Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? > >> Fair enough. However, I am not an expert in this area (MVCC and SQL), so I > >> cannot say how much effort it will take. > >> I would say that the opinion of the rest of the community is needed here. > >> > >> Anyway, I think test suites can be disabled even today, while the fate of > >> the MVCC feature can be (and should be) discussed separately. > >> What do you think? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> S. > >> > >> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 15:38, Nikolay Izhikov : > >> > >>> Hello, Slava! > >>> > >>> Yes, this topic comes to the top from time to time :) > >>> > . I just want to save the time required for getting TCBot's visa and TC > >>> resources. > >>> > >>> Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? > >>> > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:36, Вячеслав Коптилин > >>> написал(а): > > Hello Nikolay, > > > +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. > It has already been discussed here [1] and, unfortunately, I have not > >>> seen > an agreement on that. > > [1] > > >>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html > > > Thanks, > S. > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:05, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. > > > > MVCC is a great feature but we should implement it as a first-class > > feature and not «something that pretends to be working» > > > >> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 12:53, Maxim Muzafarov > >>> написал(а): > >> > >> Hello Slava, > >> > >> I think we should vote for MVCC termination of support. If the vote > >> will be successful than remove it from the source code and disable > >> MVCC suites. > >> > >> Only disabling tests from MVCC sounds not good. > >> > >> On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 12:32, Вячеслав Коптилин < > >>> slava.kopti...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >>> > >>> Hello Igniters, > >>> > >>> It looks like there is no activity related to maintaining or > >>> developing > > the > >>> MVCC feature. > >>> So, I see no reason to waste TeamCity resources. I propose to disable > > the > >>> corresponding test suites. > >>> This has already been discussed here as well [1]. > >>> > >>> [1] > >>> > > > >>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> S. > > > > > >>> > >>> > > >
Re: Disable MVCC test suites
+1 for the plan > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 16:21, Maxim Muzafarov написал(а): > > Pert, > > I think we should start with the vote. > So, the plan can be: > > 1. Vote for MVCC removal (if success then next steps) > 2. Disable MVCC with some patch. > 3. Turn off tests on TC. > 4. Create issues with full code removal. > > On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 16:03, Petr Ivanov wrote: >> >> How about: >> >> >> 1. Disable MVCC with some patch. >> 2. Turn off tests. >> 3. Plan full code removal. >> >> ? >> >>> On 2 Dec 2020, at 16:01, Nikolay Izhikov wrote: >>> I think test suites can be disabled even today >>> >>> I’m -1 to disable tests without complete removal. >>> It will be even worse if our users will face NPE or things like that in the >>> basic MVCC scenarios just because we don’t tests it. >>> >>> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:50, Вячеслав Коптилин написал(а): Hi Nikolay, > Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? Fair enough. However, I am not an expert in this area (MVCC and SQL), so I cannot say how much effort it will take. I would say that the opinion of the rest of the community is needed here. Anyway, I think test suites can be disabled even today, while the fate of the MVCC feature can be (and should be) discussed separately. What do you think? Thanks, S. ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 15:38, Nikolay Izhikov : > Hello, Slava! > > Yes, this topic comes to the top from time to time :) > >> . I just want to save the time required for getting TCBot's visa and TC > resources. > > Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? > >> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:36, Вячеслав Коптилин > написал(а): >> >> Hello Nikolay, >> >>> +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. >> It has already been discussed here [1] and, unfortunately, I have not > seen >> an agreement on that. >> >> [1] >> > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html >> >> >> Thanks, >> S. >> >> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:05, Nikolay Izhikov : >> >>> +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. >>> >>> MVCC is a great feature but we should implement it as a first-class >>> feature and not «something that pretends to be working» >>> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 12:53, Maxim Muzafarov > написал(а): Hello Slava, I think we should vote for MVCC termination of support. If the vote will be successful than remove it from the source code and disable MVCC suites. Only disabling tests from MVCC sounds not good. On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 12:32, Вячеслав Коптилин < > slava.kopti...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: > > Hello Igniters, > > It looks like there is no activity related to maintaining or > developing >>> the > MVCC feature. > So, I see no reason to waste TeamCity resources. I propose to disable >>> the > corresponding test suites. > This has already been discussed here as well [1]. > > [1] > >>> > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html > > Thanks, > S. >>> >>> > > >>> >>
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13799) Provide a required storage interface for metastorage and partitions for replication protocol
Alexey Goncharuk created IGNITE-13799: - Summary: Provide a required storage interface for metastorage and partitions for replication protocol Key: IGNITE-13799 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13799 Project: Ignite Issue Type: New Feature Reporter: Alexey Goncharuk We need to identify two storage interfaces that will be interacting with the replication protocol: * Distributed metastorage persistent state machine * Partition persistent state machine The interfaces for the said storages most likely will be quite different, but still will have some common ground. Need to define them so that we can start moving the page memory infrastructure to Ignite-3 -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13800) Provide distributed metastorage interface
Alexey Goncharuk created IGNITE-13800: - Summary: Provide distributed metastorage interface Key: IGNITE-13800 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13800 Project: Ignite Issue Type: New Feature Reporter: Alexey Goncharuk We need to crystallize the metastorage interface prototype from the IEP to understand how it will be integrated with other system components. Need to cover: * Asynchrony aspects * Possible error codes (connection failure -> unknown result vs Raft failure -> known result, etc) * Complex multi-updates (aka transactions) * Watchers. Each node can watch all updates and filter locally or adjust the watched ranges dynamically (consistency is important here) These interfaces are considered "client" interfaces as they will be available on all nodes in the cluster -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
Re: Disable MVCC test suites
> It will be even worse if our users will face NPE or things like that in the basic MVCC scenarios just because we don’t tests it. The feature is not production-ready, and I don't think it is used at all. Moreover, MVCC Cache 7, 8, 8, MVCC PDS 1, 2, 4 are already broken (execution timeouts, flaky test, etc) and I haven't seen anyone who would like to fix this. Why should we waste every contributor's time? IMHO, MVCC suites are useless and everyone just pushes "re-run possible blockers" button and doesn't care about MVCC tests at all. Thanks, S. ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 16:01, Nikolay Izhikov : > > I think test suites can be disabled even today > > I’m -1 to disable tests without complete removal. > It will be even worse if our users will face NPE or things like that in > the basic MVCC scenarios just because we don’t tests it. > > > > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:50, Вячеслав Коптилин > написал(а): > > > > Hi Nikolay, > > > >> Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? > > Fair enough. However, I am not an expert in this area (MVCC and SQL), so > I > > cannot say how much effort it will take. > > I would say that the opinion of the rest of the community is needed here. > > > > Anyway, I think test suites can be disabled even today, while the fate of > > the MVCC feature can be (and should be) discussed separately. > > What do you think? > > > > Thanks, > > S. > > > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 15:38, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > >> Hello, Slava! > >> > >> Yes, this topic comes to the top from time to time :) > >> > >>> . I just want to save the time required for getting TCBot's visa and TC > >> resources. > >> > >> Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? > >> > >>> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:36, Вячеслав Коптилин > >> написал(а): > >>> > >>> Hello Nikolay, > >>> > +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. > >>> It has already been discussed here [1] and, unfortunately, I have not > >> seen > >>> an agreement on that. > >>> > >>> [1] > >>> > >> > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html > >>> > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> S. > >>> > >>> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:05, Nikolay Izhikov : > >>> > +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. > > MVCC is a great feature but we should implement it as a first-class > feature and not «something that pretends to be working» > > > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 12:53, Maxim Muzafarov > >> написал(а): > > > > Hello Slava, > > > > I think we should vote for MVCC termination of support. If the vote > > will be successful than remove it from the source code and disable > > MVCC suites. > > > > Only disabling tests from MVCC sounds not good. > > > > On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 12:32, Вячеслав Коптилин < > >> slava.kopti...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> Hello Igniters, > >> > >> It looks like there is no activity related to maintaining or > >> developing > the > >> MVCC feature. > >> So, I see no reason to waste TeamCity resources. I propose to > disable > the > >> corresponding test suites. > >> This has already been discussed here as well [1]. > >> > >> [1] > >> > > >> > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html > >> > >> Thanks, > >> S. > > > >> > >> > >
Join to dev community
Hello everyone! My name is Aleksey Rostov, I want to contribute to Ignite.NET. I am currently a senior .net developer in Saint Petersburg. Please, help me to start contributing. I have created a jira account - arostov.
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13801) ODBC: Check ODBC driver with Ab Initio and fix all issues
Igor Sapego created IGNITE-13801: Summary: ODBC: Check ODBC driver with Ab Initio and fix all issues Key: IGNITE-13801 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13801 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Improvement Components: odbc Affects Versions: 2.9 Reporter: Igor Sapego Assignee: Igor Sapego Fix For: 2.10 I want to check our ODBC driver with Ab Initio and fix issues if there are any. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
Re: Disable MVCC test suites
> Why should we waste every contributor's time? IMHO, MVCC suites are useless > and everyone just pushes "re-run possible blockers" button and doesn't care > about MVCC tests at all. +1. > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 16:39, Вячеслав Коптилин > написал(а): > >> It will be even worse if our users will face NPE or things like that in > the basic MVCC scenarios just because we don’t tests it. > The feature is not production-ready, and I don't think it is used at all. > Moreover, MVCC Cache 7, 8, 8, MVCC PDS 1, 2, 4 are already broken > (execution timeouts, flaky test, etc) and I haven't seen anyone who would > like to fix this. > Why should we waste every contributor's time? IMHO, MVCC suites are useless > and everyone just pushes "re-run possible blockers" button and doesn't care > about MVCC tests at all. > > Thanks, > S. > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 16:01, Nikolay Izhikov : > >>> I think test suites can be disabled even today >> >> I’m -1 to disable tests without complete removal. >> It will be even worse if our users will face NPE or things like that in >> the basic MVCC scenarios just because we don’t tests it. >> >> >>> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:50, Вячеслав Коптилин >> написал(а): >>> >>> Hi Nikolay, >>> Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? >>> Fair enough. However, I am not an expert in this area (MVCC and SQL), so >> I >>> cannot say how much effort it will take. >>> I would say that the opinion of the rest of the community is needed here. >>> >>> Anyway, I think test suites can be disabled even today, while the fate of >>> the MVCC feature can be (and should be) discussed separately. >>> What do you think? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> S. >>> >>> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 15:38, Nikolay Izhikov : >>> Hello, Slava! Yes, this topic comes to the top from time to time :) > . I just want to save the time required for getting TCBot's visa and TC resources. Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:36, Вячеслав Коптилин написал(а): > > Hello Nikolay, > >> +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. > It has already been discussed here [1] and, unfortunately, I have not seen > an agreement on that. > > [1] > >> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html > > > Thanks, > S. > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:05, Nikolay Izhikov : > >> +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. >> >> MVCC is a great feature but we should implement it as a first-class >> feature and not «something that pretends to be working» >> >>> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 12:53, Maxim Muzafarov написал(а): >>> >>> Hello Slava, >>> >>> I think we should vote for MVCC termination of support. If the vote >>> will be successful than remove it from the source code and disable >>> MVCC suites. >>> >>> Only disabling tests from MVCC sounds not good. >>> >>> On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 12:32, Вячеслав Коптилин < slava.kopti...@gmail.com> >> wrote: Hello Igniters, It looks like there is no activity related to maintaining or developing >> the MVCC feature. So, I see no reason to waste TeamCity resources. I propose to >> disable >> the corresponding test suites. This has already been discussed here as well [1]. [1] >> >> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html Thanks, S. >> >> >> >>
Re: Disable MVCC test suites
Slava, Can you start the vote? It's strange turning off here the whole MVCC tests just because something in the master branch was broken when in the second thread Community decide to continue MVCC support. Let's start the vote and see what happens. On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 16:39, Вячеслав Коптилин wrote: > > > It will be even worse if our users will face NPE or things like that in > the basic MVCC scenarios just because we don’t tests it. > The feature is not production-ready, and I don't think it is used at all. > Moreover, MVCC Cache 7, 8, 8, MVCC PDS 1, 2, 4 are already broken > (execution timeouts, flaky test, etc) and I haven't seen anyone who would > like to fix this. > Why should we waste every contributor's time? IMHO, MVCC suites are useless > and everyone just pushes "re-run possible blockers" button and doesn't care > about MVCC tests at all. > > Thanks, > S. > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 16:01, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > > I think test suites can be disabled even today > > > > I’m -1 to disable tests without complete removal. > > It will be even worse if our users will face NPE or things like that in > > the basic MVCC scenarios just because we don’t tests it. > > > > > > > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:50, Вячеслав Коптилин > > написал(а): > > > > > > Hi Nikolay, > > > > > >> Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? > > > Fair enough. However, I am not an expert in this area (MVCC and SQL), so > > I > > > cannot say how much effort it will take. > > > I would say that the opinion of the rest of the community is needed here. > > > > > > Anyway, I think test suites can be disabled even today, while the fate of > > > the MVCC feature can be (and should be) discussed separately. > > > What do you think? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > S. > > > > > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 15:38, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > > > >> Hello, Slava! > > >> > > >> Yes, this topic comes to the top from time to time :) > > >> > > >>> . I just want to save the time required for getting TCBot's visa and TC > > >> resources. > > >> > > >> Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? > > >> > > >>> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:36, Вячеслав Коптилин > > >> написал(а): > > >>> > > >>> Hello Nikolay, > > >>> > > +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. > > >>> It has already been discussed here [1] and, unfortunately, I have not > > >> seen > > >>> an agreement on that. > > >>> > > >>> [1] > > >>> > > >> > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Thanks, > > >>> S. > > >>> > > >>> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:05, Nikolay Izhikov : > > >>> > > +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. > > > > MVCC is a great feature but we should implement it as a first-class > > feature and not «something that pretends to be working» > > > > > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 12:53, Maxim Muzafarov > > >> написал(а): > > > > > > Hello Slava, > > > > > > I think we should vote for MVCC termination of support. If the vote > > > will be successful than remove it from the source code and disable > > > MVCC suites. > > > > > > Only disabling tests from MVCC sounds not good. > > > > > > On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 12:32, Вячеслав Коптилин < > > >> slava.kopti...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > >> > > >> Hello Igniters, > > >> > > >> It looks like there is no activity related to maintaining or > > >> developing > > the > > >> MVCC feature. > > >> So, I see no reason to waste TeamCity resources. I propose to > > disable > > the > > >> corresponding test suites. > > >> This has already been discussed here as well [1]. > > >> > > >> [1] > > >> > > > > >> > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > >> S. > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > >
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13802) GridCacheOffheapManager#addPartitions ignores candidate pages count for index partition
Ivan Bessonov created IGNITE-13802: -- Summary: GridCacheOffheapManager#addPartitions ignores candidate pages count for index partition Key: IGNITE-13802 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13802 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Bug Reporter: Ivan Bessonov Assignee: Ivan Bessonov It also marks page as dirty despite doing nothing with it. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
Re: Disable MVCC test suites
+1 02.12.2020, 16:47, "Nikolay Izhikov" : >> Why should we waste every contributor's time? IMHO, MVCC suites are useless >> and everyone just pushes "re-run possible blockers" button and doesn't care >> about MVCC tests at all. > > +1. > >> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 16:39, Вячеслав Коптилин >> написал(а): >> >>> It will be even worse if our users will face NPE or things like that in >> the basic MVCC scenarios just because we don’t tests it. >> The feature is not production-ready, and I don't think it is used at all. >> Moreover, MVCC Cache 7, 8, 8, MVCC PDS 1, 2, 4 are already broken >> (execution timeouts, flaky test, etc) and I haven't seen anyone who would >> like to fix this. >> Why should we waste every contributor's time? IMHO, MVCC suites are useless >> and everyone just pushes "re-run possible blockers" button and doesn't care >> about MVCC tests at all. >> >> Thanks, >> S. >> >> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 16:01, Nikolay Izhikov : >> I think test suites can be disabled even today >>> >>> I’m -1 to disable tests without complete removal. >>> It will be even worse if our users will face NPE or things like that in >>> the basic MVCC scenarios just because we don’t tests it. >>> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:50, Вячеслав Коптилин >>> написал(а): Hi Nikolay, > Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? Fair enough. However, I am not an expert in this area (MVCC and SQL), so >>> I cannot say how much effort it will take. I would say that the opinion of the rest of the community is needed here. Anyway, I think test suites can be disabled even today, while the fate of the MVCC feature can be (and should be) discussed separately. What do you think? Thanks, S. ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 15:38, Nikolay Izhikov : > Hello, Slava! > > Yes, this topic comes to the top from time to time :) > >> . I just want to save the time required for getting TCBot's visa and TC > resources. > > Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? > >> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:36, Вячеслав Коптилин > написал(а): >> Hello Nikolay, >> >>> +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. >> It has already been discussed here [1] and, unfortunately, I have not > seen >> an agreement on that. >> >> [1] >>> >>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html >> Thanks, >> S. >> >> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:05, Nikolay Izhikov : >> >>> +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. >>> >>> MVCC is a great feature but we should implement it as a first-class >>> feature and not «something that pretends to be working» >>> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 12:53, Maxim Muzafarov > написал(а): Hello Slava, I think we should vote for MVCC termination of support. If the vote will be successful than remove it from the source code and disable MVCC suites. Only disabling tests from MVCC sounds not good. On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 12:32, Вячеслав Коптилин < > slava.kopti...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: > Hello Igniters, > > It looks like there is no activity related to maintaining or > developing >>> the > MVCC feature. > So, I see no reason to waste TeamCity resources. I propose to >>> disable >>> the > corresponding test suites. > This has already been discussed here as well [1]. > > [1] >>> >>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html > Thanks, > S.
Re: Disable MVCC test suites
Sounds good! > On 2 Dec 2020, at 16:21, Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > > Pert, > > I think we should start with the vote. > So, the plan can be: > > 1. Vote for MVCC removal (if success then next steps) > 2. Disable MVCC with some patch. > 3. Turn off tests on TC. > 4. Create issues with full code removal. > > On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 16:03, Petr Ivanov wrote: >> >> How about: >> >> >> 1. Disable MVCC with some patch. >> 2. Turn off tests. >> 3. Plan full code removal. >> >> ? >> >>> On 2 Dec 2020, at 16:01, Nikolay Izhikov wrote: >>> I think test suites can be disabled even today >>> >>> I’m -1 to disable tests without complete removal. >>> It will be even worse if our users will face NPE or things like that in the >>> basic MVCC scenarios just because we don’t tests it. >>> >>> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:50, Вячеслав Коптилин написал(а): Hi Nikolay, > Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? Fair enough. However, I am not an expert in this area (MVCC and SQL), so I cannot say how much effort it will take. I would say that the opinion of the rest of the community is needed here. Anyway, I think test suites can be disabled even today, while the fate of the MVCC feature can be (and should be) discussed separately. What do you think? Thanks, S. ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 15:38, Nikolay Izhikov : > Hello, Slava! > > Yes, this topic comes to the top from time to time :) > >> . I just want to save the time required for getting TCBot's visa and TC > resources. > > Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested regularly? > >> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:36, Вячеслав Коптилин > написал(а): >> >> Hello Nikolay, >> >>> +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. >> It has already been discussed here [1] and, unfortunately, I have not > seen >> an agreement on that. >> >> [1] >> > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html >> >> >> Thanks, >> S. >> >> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:05, Nikolay Izhikov : >> >>> +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. >>> >>> MVCC is a great feature but we should implement it as a first-class >>> feature and not «something that pretends to be working» >>> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 12:53, Maxim Muzafarov > написал(а): Hello Slava, I think we should vote for MVCC termination of support. If the vote will be successful than remove it from the source code and disable MVCC suites. Only disabling tests from MVCC sounds not good. On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 12:32, Вячеслав Коптилин < > slava.kopti...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: > > Hello Igniters, > > It looks like there is no activity related to maintaining or > developing >>> the > MVCC feature. > So, I see no reason to waste TeamCity resources. I propose to disable >>> the > corresponding test suites. > This has already been discussed here as well [1]. > > [1] > >>> > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html > > Thanks, > S. >>> >>> > > >>> >>
Re: Disable MVCC test suites
> Can you start the vote? Yes, it can be done. However, I don't think that we will get an agreement on that (I just recall the previous discussion). And so, we will not remove the MVCC code; on the other hand, nobody will support it in the future. We already at this point. This is just my humble opinion. > It's strange turning off here the whole MVCC tests just because something in the master branch was broken when in the second thread On one side, it looks weird, I agree. On the other hand, nobody cares about that and wants to fix tests. This is a stalemate, I think. Thanks, S. ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 16:47, Maxim Muzafarov : > Slava, > > Can you start the vote? > > It's strange turning off here the whole MVCC tests just because > something in the master branch was broken when in the second thread > Community decide to continue MVCC support. Let's start the vote and > see what happens. > > On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 16:39, Вячеслав Коптилин > wrote: > > > > > It will be even worse if our users will face NPE or things like that > in > > the basic MVCC scenarios just because we don’t tests it. > > The feature is not production-ready, and I don't think it is used at all. > > Moreover, MVCC Cache 7, 8, 8, MVCC PDS 1, 2, 4 are already broken > > (execution timeouts, flaky test, etc) and I haven't seen anyone who would > > like to fix this. > > Why should we waste every contributor's time? IMHO, MVCC suites are > useless > > and everyone just pushes "re-run possible blockers" button and doesn't > care > > about MVCC tests at all. > > > > Thanks, > > S. > > > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 16:01, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > > > > I think test suites can be disabled even today > > > > > > I’m -1 to disable tests without complete removal. > > > It will be even worse if our users will face NPE or things like that in > > > the basic MVCC scenarios just because we don’t tests it. > > > > > > > > > > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:50, Вячеслав Коптилин > > > > написал(а): > > > > > > > > Hi Nikolay, > > > > > > > >> Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested > regularly? > > > > Fair enough. However, I am not an expert in this area (MVCC and > SQL), so > > > I > > > > cannot say how much effort it will take. > > > > I would say that the opinion of the rest of the community is needed > here. > > > > > > > > Anyway, I think test suites can be disabled even today, while the > fate of > > > > the MVCC feature can be (and should be) discussed separately. > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > S. > > > > > > > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 15:38, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > > > > > >> Hello, Slava! > > > >> > > > >> Yes, this topic comes to the top from time to time :) > > > >> > > > >>> . I just want to save the time required for getting TCBot's visa > and TC > > > >> resources. > > > >> > > > >> Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested > regularly? > > > >> > > > >>> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:36, Вячеслав Коптилин < > slava.kopti...@gmail.com> > > > >> написал(а): > > > >>> > > > >>> Hello Nikolay, > > > >>> > > > +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. > > > >>> It has already been discussed here [1] and, unfortunately, I have > not > > > >> seen > > > >>> an agreement on that. > > > >>> > > > >>> [1] > > > >>> > > > >> > > > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> Thanks, > > > >>> S. > > > >>> > > > >>> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:05, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > >>> > > > +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. > > > > > > MVCC is a great feature but we should implement it as a > first-class > > > feature and not «something that pretends to be working» > > > > > > > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 12:53, Maxim Muzafarov > > > >> написал(а): > > > > > > > > Hello Slava, > > > > > > > > I think we should vote for MVCC termination of support. If the > vote > > > > will be successful than remove it from the source code and > disable > > > > MVCC suites. > > > > > > > > Only disabling tests from MVCC sounds not good. > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 12:32, Вячеслав Коптилин < > > > >> slava.kopti...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Hello Igniters, > > > >> > > > >> It looks like there is no activity related to maintaining or > > > >> developing > > > the > > > >> MVCC feature. > > > >> So, I see no reason to waste TeamCity resources. I propose to > > > disable > > > the > > > >> corresponding test suites. > > > >> This has already been discussed here as well [1]. > > > >> > > > >> [1] > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html > > > >> > > > >> Thanks, > > > >> S. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >
Re: Disable MVCC test suites
> Yes, it can be done. However, I don't think that we will get an agreement on > that Let’s give it a try and see what happens :) > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 17:23, Вячеслав Коптилин > написал(а): > >> Can you start the vote? > Yes, it can be done. However, I don't think that we will get an agreement > on that (I just recall the previous discussion). > And so, we will not remove the MVCC code; on the other hand, nobody will > support it in the future. We already at this point. This is just my humble > opinion. > >> It's strange turning off here the whole MVCC tests just because something > in the master branch was broken when in the second thread > On one side, it looks weird, I agree. On the other hand, nobody cares about > that and wants to fix tests. This is a stalemate, I think. > > Thanks, > S. > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 16:47, Maxim Muzafarov : > >> Slava, >> >> Can you start the vote? >> >> It's strange turning off here the whole MVCC tests just because >> something in the master branch was broken when in the second thread >> Community decide to continue MVCC support. Let's start the vote and >> see what happens. >> >> On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 16:39, Вячеслав Коптилин >> wrote: >>> It will be even worse if our users will face NPE or things like that >> in >>> the basic MVCC scenarios just because we don’t tests it. >>> The feature is not production-ready, and I don't think it is used at all. >>> Moreover, MVCC Cache 7, 8, 8, MVCC PDS 1, 2, 4 are already broken >>> (execution timeouts, flaky test, etc) and I haven't seen anyone who would >>> like to fix this. >>> Why should we waste every contributor's time? IMHO, MVCC suites are >> useless >>> and everyone just pushes "re-run possible blockers" button and doesn't >> care >>> about MVCC tests at all. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> S. >>> >>> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 16:01, Nikolay Izhikov : >>> > I think test suites can be disabled even today I’m -1 to disable tests without complete removal. It will be even worse if our users will face NPE or things like that in the basic MVCC scenarios just because we don’t tests it. > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:50, Вячеслав Коптилин >> написал(а): > > Hi Nikolay, > >> Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested >> regularly? > Fair enough. However, I am not an expert in this area (MVCC and >> SQL), so I > cannot say how much effort it will take. > I would say that the opinion of the rest of the community is needed >> here. > > Anyway, I think test suites can be disabled even today, while the >> fate of > the MVCC feature can be (and should be) discussed separately. > What do you think? > > Thanks, > S. > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 15:38, Nikolay Izhikov : > >> Hello, Slava! >> >> Yes, this topic comes to the top from time to time :) >> >>> . I just want to save the time required for getting TCBot's visa >> and TC >> resources. >> >> Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested >> regularly? >> >>> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:36, Вячеслав Коптилин < >> slava.kopti...@gmail.com> >> написал(а): >>> >>> Hello Nikolay, >>> +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. >>> It has already been discussed here [1] and, unfortunately, I have >> not >> seen >>> an agreement on that. >>> >>> [1] >>> >> >> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> S. >>> >>> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:05, Nikolay Izhikov : >>> +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. MVCC is a great feature but we should implement it as a >> first-class feature and not «something that pretends to be working» > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 12:53, Maxim Muzafarov >> написал(а): > > Hello Slava, > > I think we should vote for MVCC termination of support. If the >> vote > will be successful than remove it from the source code and >> disable > MVCC suites. > > Only disabling tests from MVCC sounds not good. > > On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 12:32, Вячеслав Коптилин < >> slava.kopti...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hello Igniters, >> >> It looks like there is no activity related to maintaining or >> developing the >> MVCC feature. >> So, I see no reason to waste TeamCity resources. I propose to disable the >> corresponding test suites. >> This has already been discussed here as well [1]. >> >> [1] >> >> >> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html >> >> Thanks, >> S.
Re: [DISCUSS] Missed (non-suited) tests
Hello! I think this means that we should abandon the plan of moving tests between suites, and that your tool has to understand the dependency graph between modules' tests when assessing what's included and what's not. Regards, -- Ilya Kasnacheev ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 15:56, Max Timonin : > Hi, Ilya! > > I've checked testsuites. There is an issue. For example > *IgniteBinaryCacheQueryTestSuite* suite is now in 2 modules: ignite-core, > ignite-indexing. On TeamCity it runs by "Query 1" suite. Simplified maven > command for the suite is > > mvn -DtestIgniteBinaryCacheQueryTestSuite -am -pl :ignite-indexing > surefire:test > > Sequence of actions is: > 1. Find modules dependencies (*-am* flag): ignite-tools, ignite-core; > 2. Run the test command for every module. In this step the maven tries to > find the specified test for every module. This is good news, so we don't > need to create new TeamCity suites for such splitted suites. > > But the run performs within the current module classpath, so for the core > module the test suite fails with error "Add module 'ignite-indexing' to the > classpath of all Ignite nodes". Maven can't resolve it. > > The only way to work with it is to specify additional classpath elements > for tests with setting *-Dmaven.test.additionalClasspath=/path/to/m2/jar*. > I did it by filling MAVEN_OPTS with the setting. Please check the job > parameters [1]. After that the core module part ran successfully. It means > for every TC suite that runs such splitted suite we need to set the > setting. What do you think, is it a valid way to handle the issue? If there > are no objections, I will check other such suites. > > Also to mention there, the work directory contains a *repository/* folder > with all required .jars. But usage of this path in the setting didn't help. > I'm not sure, but I think it's an issue due to usage of Classworlds. So, > using dependency from .m2 is the only way. > > [1] > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5770727&buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_Queries1&tab=buildParameters > > > > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 3:55 PM Max Timonin > wrote: > > > Sure, I'll do that. > > > > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 2:00 PM Ilya Kasnacheev < > ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Hello! > >> > >> You can override these values (module, suites) values when running a > suite > >> on TC. Can you please run these ones which need to be changed > individually > >> on TC, make sure they run without errors and contain all the needed > tests, > >> and link to these runs in the ticket? Then I can modify the suites to > fit > >> those. > >> > >> I'm not sure that class shadowing will work as we want it to work, e.g., > >> we > >> now have two IgniteCacheQuerySelfTestSuite6 with the same FQDN, I'm not > >> sure if maven/TC is going to pick both or just one. > >> Maybe they should go to a different package, e.g., testsuites/core for > >> every suite already present in indexing/spring/etc. Maybe you can rename > >> them just now? This will mean a lot less of work reconfiguring suites. > >> In TC configurations, suite names are simple class names, not FQ, so no > >> changes may be needed at all. > >> > >> Regards, > >> -- > >> Ilya Kasnacheev > >> > >> > >> пт, 27 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:03, Max Timonin : > >> > >> > Hi, sorry for the misleading. I mean "adding ignite-core module > >> *suites* to > >> > the TeamCity Queries* suite" > >> > > >> > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 12:44 PM Ilya Kasnacheev < > >> > ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > Hello! > >> > > > >> > > What do you mean by "adding ignite-core to suite"? ignite-core is a > >> top > >> > > dependency and its tests are also included in all other modules' > tests > >> > > classpath since it provides GridAbstractTest. > >> > > > >> > > Regards, > >> > > -- > >> > > Ilya Kasnacheev > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > пт, 27 нояб. 2020 г. в 01:24, Max Timonin >: > >> > > > >> > > > Hi, Ilya! > >> > > > > >> > > > So, I've updated PR, fixed comments and removed Core* prefixes. > >> MTCGA > >> > > shows > >> > > > no blockers, but it was 2 weeks ago, so I've started it again. > >> > > > > >> > > > If PR is OK then there are some suites that should be updated on > TC. > >> > > Could > >> > > > you please tell me how we can do it? > >> > > > > >> > > > 1. Add ignite-cassandra-serializers suite: > >> > > > > >> > > >1. org.apache.ignite.tests.SerializerSuite > >> > > > > >> > > > 2. Add ignite-core to Queries* TC suite: > >> > > > > >> > > >1. org.apache.ignite.client.IgniteClientTestSuite > >> > > >2. org.apache.ignite.suites.IgniteBinaryCacheQueryTestSuite > >> > > >3. org.apache.ignite.suites.IgniteBinaryCacheQueryTestSuite2 > >> > > >4. org.apache.ignite.suites.IgniteCacheQuerySelfTestSuite3 > >> > > >5. org.apache.ignite.suites.IgniteCacheQuerySelfTestSuite4 > >> > > >6. org.apache.ignite.suites.IgniteCacheQuerySelfTestSuite5 > >> > > >7. org.apache.ignite.suites.IgniteCacheQuerySelfT
Re: [DISCUSS] Missed (non-suited) tests
Hi, I don't think so. It looks like a bug that tests fail if one runs them within their module (actually, what is the goal of this test?). The check showed us this problem, there is no need to fix the check. Currently I see two ways: 1. Find the right module for every misplaced test. There are 104 tests, maybe just move them all to the target module? If TeamCity runs them within the indexing module only is there a reason to have a test in the core module at all? 2. Back to my previous proposal - create fake suites within a module, then replace test classes in a target suite with the single class of the fake suite. On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 5:38 PM Ilya Kasnacheev wrote: > Hello! > > I think this means that we should abandon the plan of moving tests between > suites, and that your tool has to understand the dependency graph > between modules' tests when assessing what's included and what's not. > > Regards, > -- > Ilya Kasnacheev > > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 15:56, Max Timonin : > > > Hi, Ilya! > > > > I've checked testsuites. There is an issue. For example > > *IgniteBinaryCacheQueryTestSuite* suite is now in 2 modules: ignite-core, > > ignite-indexing. On TeamCity it runs by "Query 1" suite. Simplified maven > > command for the suite is > > > > mvn -DtestIgniteBinaryCacheQueryTestSuite -am -pl :ignite-indexing > > surefire:test > > > > Sequence of actions is: > > 1. Find modules dependencies (*-am* flag): ignite-tools, ignite-core; > > 2. Run the test command for every module. In this step the maven tries to > > find the specified test for every module. This is good news, so we don't > > need to create new TeamCity suites for such splitted suites. > > > > But the run performs within the current module classpath, so for the core > > module the test suite fails with error "Add module 'ignite-indexing' to > the > > classpath of all Ignite nodes". Maven can't resolve it. > > > > The only way to work with it is to specify additional classpath elements > > for tests with setting > *-Dmaven.test.additionalClasspath=/path/to/m2/jar*. > > I did it by filling MAVEN_OPTS with the setting. Please check the job > > parameters [1]. After that the core module part ran successfully. It > means > > for every TC suite that runs such splitted suite we need to set the > > setting. What do you think, is it a valid way to handle the issue? If > there > > are no objections, I will check other such suites. > > > > Also to mention there, the work directory contains a *repository/* folder > > with all required .jars. But usage of this path in the setting didn't > help. > > I'm not sure, but I think it's an issue due to usage of Classworlds. So, > > using dependency from .m2 is the only way. > > > > [1] > > > > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5770727&buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_Queries1&tab=buildParameters > > > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 3:55 PM Max Timonin > > wrote: > > > > > Sure, I'll do that. > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 2:00 PM Ilya Kasnacheev < > > ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Hello! > > >> > > >> You can override these values (module, suites) values when running a > > suite > > >> on TC. Can you please run these ones which need to be changed > > individually > > >> on TC, make sure they run without errors and contain all the needed > > tests, > > >> and link to these runs in the ticket? Then I can modify the suites to > > fit > > >> those. > > >> > > >> I'm not sure that class shadowing will work as we want it to work, > e.g., > > >> we > > >> now have two IgniteCacheQuerySelfTestSuite6 with the same FQDN, I'm > not > > >> sure if maven/TC is going to pick both or just one. > > >> Maybe they should go to a different package, e.g., testsuites/core for > > >> every suite already present in indexing/spring/etc. Maybe you can > rename > > >> them just now? This will mean a lot less of work reconfiguring suites. > > >> In TC configurations, suite names are simple class names, not FQ, so > no > > >> changes may be needed at all. > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> -- > > >> Ilya Kasnacheev > > >> > > >> > > >> пт, 27 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:03, Max Timonin : > > >> > > >> > Hi, sorry for the misleading. I mean "adding ignite-core module > > >> *suites* to > > >> > the TeamCity Queries* suite" > > >> > > > >> > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 12:44 PM Ilya Kasnacheev < > > >> > ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com> > > >> > wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > Hello! > > >> > > > > >> > > What do you mean by "adding ignite-core to suite"? ignite-core is > a > > >> top > > >> > > dependency and its tests are also included in all other modules' > > tests > > >> > > classpath since it provides GridAbstractTest. > > >> > > > > >> > > Regards, > > >> > > -- > > >> > > Ilya Kasnacheev > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > пт, 27 нояб. 2020 г. в 01:24, Max Timonin < > timonin.ma...@gmail.com > > >: > > >> > > > > >> > > > Hi, Ilya! > > >> > > > > > >> > > > So, I've updated PR, fixed comments and removed Core* prefix
Re: Disable MVCC test suites
-1 for disabling test without removing the code. Current tests give us at least "something works" status for the feature available to users, without these tests, we can smoothly move to "totally unusable" status. Complete removal of MVCC can be resource-consuming, but if we want to disable tests at least we should hide the public MVCC API or totally prohibit MVCC usage. Also, it can't be done in 2.x release due to backward compatibility. ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 17:28, Nikolay Izhikov : > > Yes, it can be done. However, I don't think that we will get an > agreement on that > > Let’s give it a try and see what happens :) > > > > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 17:23, Вячеслав Коптилин > написал(а): > > > >> Can you start the vote? > > Yes, it can be done. However, I don't think that we will get an agreement > > on that (I just recall the previous discussion). > > And so, we will not remove the MVCC code; on the other hand, nobody will > > support it in the future. We already at this point. This is just my > humble > > opinion. > > > >> It's strange turning off here the whole MVCC tests just because > something > > in the master branch was broken when in the second thread > > On one side, it looks weird, I agree. On the other hand, nobody cares > about > > that and wants to fix tests. This is a stalemate, I think. > > > > Thanks, > > S. > > > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 16:47, Maxim Muzafarov : > > > >> Slava, > >> > >> Can you start the vote? > >> > >> It's strange turning off here the whole MVCC tests just because > >> something in the master branch was broken when in the second thread > >> Community decide to continue MVCC support. Let's start the vote and > >> see what happens. > >> > >> On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 16:39, Вячеслав Коптилин < > slava.kopti...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >>> > It will be even worse if our users will face NPE or things like that > >> in > >>> the basic MVCC scenarios just because we don’t tests it. > >>> The feature is not production-ready, and I don't think it is used at > all. > >>> Moreover, MVCC Cache 7, 8, 8, MVCC PDS 1, 2, 4 are already broken > >>> (execution timeouts, flaky test, etc) and I haven't seen anyone who > would > >>> like to fix this. > >>> Why should we waste every contributor's time? IMHO, MVCC suites are > >> useless > >>> and everyone just pushes "re-run possible blockers" button and doesn't > >> care > >>> about MVCC tests at all. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> S. > >>> > >>> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 16:01, Nikolay Izhikov : > >>> > > I think test suites can be disabled even today > > I’m -1 to disable tests without complete removal. > It will be even worse if our users will face NPE or things like that > in > the basic MVCC scenarios just because we don’t tests it. > > > > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:50, Вячеслав Коптилин >>> > написал(а): > > > > Hi Nikolay, > > > >> Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested > >> regularly? > > Fair enough. However, I am not an expert in this area (MVCC and > >> SQL), so > I > > cannot say how much effort it will take. > > I would say that the opinion of the rest of the community is needed > >> here. > > > > Anyway, I think test suites can be disabled even today, while the > >> fate of > > the MVCC feature can be (and should be) discussed separately. > > What do you think? > > > > Thanks, > > S. > > > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 15:38, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > >> Hello, Slava! > >> > >> Yes, this topic comes to the top from time to time :) > >> > >>> . I just want to save the time required for getting TCBot's visa > >> and TC > >> resources. > >> > >> Why do we need feature in the project that not even tested > >> regularly? > >> > >>> 2 дек. 2020 г., в 15:36, Вячеслав Коптилин < > >> slava.kopti...@gmail.com> > >> написал(а): > >>> > >>> Hello Nikolay, > >>> > +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. > >>> It has already been discussed here [1] and, unfortunately, I have > >> not > >> seen > >>> an agreement on that. > >>> > >>> [1] > >>> > >> > > >> > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html > >>> > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> S. > >>> > >>> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:05, Nikolay Izhikov : > >>> > +1 to vote for complete MVCC removal. > > MVCC is a great feature but we should implement it as a > >> first-class > feature and not «something that pretends to be working» > > > 2 дек. 2020 г., в 12:53, Maxim Muzafarov > >> написал(а): > > > > Hello Slava, > > > > I think we should vote for MVCC termination of support. If the > >> vote > > will be successful than remove it from the source code and > >> disable > > MVCC suites. > > > > Only
Re: 2.9.1 release scope and dates
Ilya, Vladimir hello! I've added them all. Nightly run should be triggered on my PR (#8508) instead of 2.9.1 branch, if it's not added directly, of course. Guys, I think that's enough issues for a minor release, I will proceed with the final testing and building the RC. On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 3:10 PM Ilya Kasnacheev wrote: > Hello once more! > > It would also be nice to include > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13770 since it is a nasty > user-visible NPE in public API. > > Pls cherry-pick or greenlight me if it's not too late. > > Regards. > -- > Ilya Kasnacheev > > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 14:14, Ilya Kasnacheev : > > > Hello again! > > > > Yaroslav, I have noticed that > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13388 has slipped > > through the cracks and was not committed to master properly. > > > > I have committed it to master now, can you please cherry-pick it and add > > to scope of 2.9.1 if it's not too late? It's an important packaging > bugfix. > > > > I can cherry-pick it myself if you give a green light. > > > > Regards, > > -- > > Ilya Kasnacheev > > > > > > ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:09, Ilya Kasnacheev : > > > >> Hello! > >> > >> I have scheduled a Run All (Nightly) build for ignite-2.9.1. > >> > >> I propose to also add > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13572 > >> to scope since it seems to be both impactful and easy to fix. > >> > >> Regards, > >> -- > >> Ilya Kasnacheev > >> > >> > >> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 13:06, Steshin Vladimir : > >> > >>> Yaroslav, Hi. > >>> > >>> I propose [1] and [2] to pick up into 2.9.1. > >>> > >>> > >>> [1] is important. It fixes unexpected node failure slipped away from > the > >>> Java test. Belatedly found in integration ducktape tests. > >>> > >>> > >>> [2] just disables soLinger in TcpDiscvoerySPI by default. Suggested in > >>> 2.10. But the documentation correction has already appeared in the > >>> documentation [3]. > >>> > >>> > >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13705 > >>> (edb736dcd8d1d57c875ce7de2b2b2b786d1f8d51) > >>> > >>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13643 > >>> (cb7448eecf1ae05c2062e24d9c342d8ae9d92149) > >>> > >>> [3] > >>> > >>> > https://ignite.apache.org/docs/latest/clustering/network-configuration#discovery > >>> > >>> > >>> 02.12.2020 12:19, Yaroslav Molochkov пишет: > >>> > Ivan, > >>> > > >>> > thanks, added to the list due to the severity of the issue. > >>> > > >>> > On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 12:13 PM Ivan Daschinsky > > >>> wrote: > >>> > > >>> >> Yaroslav, lets add another bug fix > >>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13572 > >>> >> It's quite small fix, but bug is quite severe. > >>> >> > >>> >> ср, 2 дек. 2020 г. в 10:48, Yaroslav Molochkov < > molochko...@gmail.com > >>> >: > >>> >> > >>> >>> Guys, > >>> >>> > >>> >>> can anyone grant me necessary permissions to create a wiki page > with > >>> >>> release info, please? > >>> >>> > >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 12:58 PM Yaroslav Molochkov < > >>> >> molochko...@gmail.com> > >>> >>> wrote: > >>> >>> > >>> Hi! > >>> I see it's merged into 2.9.1 branch and master. > >>> > >>> I guess that's it for the issues, I will run nightly tests again > >>> just > >>> >> to > >>> be sure that everything is okay and we will proceed. > >>> > >>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 7:31 PM Zhenya Stanilovsky > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> > hello ! > >>> > seems it [1] need to be included too, if it`s not too late, of > >>> course. > >>> > May be you can bump reviewer somehow?) > >>> > > >>> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13765 > >>> > > >>> >> Ivan, it's added, thanks for pointing that out > >>> >> > >>> >> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 5:44 PM Ivan Daschinsky < > >>> >> ivanda...@gmail.com > >>> > wrote: > >>> >>> Yaroslav, could you explain why you decided to remove from > scope > >>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13699 ? > >>> >>> This ticket also incorporate few fixes for metrics. Currently > >>> >> metrics > >>> > is a > >>> >>> little bit broken (JoinedCount shows invalid results for > example) > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> пн, 30 нояб. 2020 г. в 17:26, Yaroslav Molochkov < > >>> > molochko...@gmail.com >: > >>> Igniters, hello! > >>> > >>> First of all, sorry that the release process is taking so > long. > >>> > >>> Secondly, the release build seems stable and no blockers were > >>> > introduced > >>> within that list > >>> < > >>> > >>> >> > >>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11312?jql=project%20%3D%20IGNITE%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.9.1%20and%20status%20%3D%20Resolved > >>> (at > >>> least on RunAll compared to 2.9) > >>> > >>> I've also prepared release notes: > >>> > >>> Ignite Core: > >>> * Added sup
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13803) Scalar test failed due to incorrect Jackson dependency
Alexey Zinoviev created IGNITE-13803: Summary: Scalar test failed due to incorrect Jackson dependency Key: IGNITE-13803 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13803 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Bug Components: ml Affects Versions: 2.10 Reporter: Alexey Zinoviev Assignee: Alexey Zinoviev Fix For: 2.10 It's failed with ``` java.lang.ExceptionInInitializerError Caused by: com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.JsonMappingException: Incompatible Jackson version: 2.10.3``` https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_ScalaExamples?branch=%3Cdefault%3E&buildTypeTab=overview&mode=builds# -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13804) Java thin: avoid buffer copies in synchronous operations
Pavel Tupitsyn created IGNITE-13804:
---
Summary: Java thin: avoid buffer copies in synchronous operations
Key: IGNITE-13804
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13804
Project: Ignite
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: thin client
Reporter: Pavel Tupitsyn
{{org.apache.ignite.internal.client.thin.TcpClientChannel#send}} creates a
buffer copy, because the buffer will be returned to the pool upon leaving the
scope, but we need it to survive longer while NIO framework processes it.
However, for synchronous requests we block the thread anyway, so an extra copy
can be avoided. See discussion in
[#8483|https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/8483#discussion_r533915757]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13805) Add support for cache group restore from a snapshot on the same topology (inactive cluster)
Pavel Pereslegin created IGNITE-13805: - Summary: Add support for cache group restore from a snapshot on the same topology (inactive cluster) Key: IGNITE-13805 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13805 Project: Ignite Issue Type: New Feature Reporter: Pavel Pereslegin Assignee: Pavel Pereslegin Add a CLI command (and public API?) to restore a cache group from a snapshot. Limitations: - inactive cluster - partition distribution has not changed -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
[MTCGA]: new failures in builds [5768636] needs to be handled
Hi Igniters, I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are more than welcomed to help. If your changes can lead to this failure(s): We're grateful that you were a volunteer to make the contribution to this project, but things change and you may no longer be able to finalize your contribution. Could you respond to this email and indicate if you wish to continue and fix test failures or step down and some committer may revert you commit. *New test failure in master SystemViewComputeJobTest.testCancelComputeTask https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8&testNameId=5721846765596792578&branch=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=testDetails Changes may lead to failure were done by - denis mekhanikov https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=910621 - andrew v. mashenkov https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=910665 - korlov42 https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=910662 - Here's a reminder of what contributors were agreed to do https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute - Should you have any questions please contact dev@ignite.apache.org Best Regards, Apache Ignite TeamCity Bot https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot Notification generated at 21:25:08 02-12-2020
[MTCGA]: new failures in builds [5770868] needs to be handled
Hi Igniters, I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are more than welcomed to help. If your changes can lead to this failure(s): We're grateful that you were a volunteer to make the contribution to this project, but things change and you may no longer be able to finalize your contribution. Could you respond to this email and indicate if you wish to continue and fix test failures or step down and some committer may revert you commit. *Recently contributed test failed in master EncryptedCacheNodeJoinTest.testClientNodeJoinInactiveClusterWithNewStaticCacheConfig https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8&testNameId=7152655757726316499&branch=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=testDetails *Recently contributed test failed in master EncryptedCacheNodeJoinTest.testClientNodeJoinActiveClusterWithNewStaticCacheConfig https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8&testNameId=8958193129012710967&branch=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=testDetails Changes may lead to failure were done by - pavel pereslegin https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=910747 - Here's a reminder of what contributors were agreed to do https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute - Should you have any questions please contact dev@ignite.apache.org Best Regards, Apache Ignite TeamCity Bot https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot Notification generated at 21:40:09 02-12-2020
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13806) Merge release notes for 2.9.1 into master
Yaroslav Molochkov created IGNITE-13806: --- Summary: Merge release notes for 2.9.1 into master Key: IGNITE-13806 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13806 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Task Reporter: Yaroslav Molochkov Assignee: Yaroslav Molochkov -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-13807) testClientNodeJoinInactiveClusterWithNewStaticCacheConfig and testClientNodeJoinActiveClusterWithNewStaticCacheConfig fails in master
Pavel Pereslegin created IGNITE-13807: - Summary: testClientNodeJoinInactiveClusterWithNewStaticCacheConfig and testClientNodeJoinActiveClusterWithNewStaticCacheConfig fails in master Key: IGNITE-13807 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13807 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Bug Reporter: Pavel Pereslegin Assignee: Pavel Pereslegin Tests EncryptedCacheNodeJoinTest.testClientNodeJoinInactiveClusterWithNewStaticCacheConfig and EncryptedCacheNodeJoinTest.testClientNodeJoinActiveClusterWithNewStaticCacheConfig fails in master. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
[MTCGA]: new failures in builds [5768602] needs to be handled
Hi Igniters, I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are more than welcomed to help. If your changes can lead to this failure(s): We're grateful that you were a volunteer to make the contribution to this project, but things change and you may no longer be able to finalize your contribution. Could you respond to this email and indicate if you wish to continue and fix test failures or step down and some committer may revert you commit. *New test failure in master SystemViewComputeJobTest.testCancelComputeTask https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8&testNameId=-3690894643143219813&branch=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=testDetails Changes may lead to failure were done by - denis mekhanikov https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=910621 - andrew v. mashenkov https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=910665 - korlov42 https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=910662 - Here's a reminder of what contributors were agreed to do https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute - Should you have any questions please contact dev@ignite.apache.org Best Regards, Apache Ignite TeamCity Bot https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot Notification generated at 22:25:08 02-12-2020
