Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.10.0 RC1
Ilya,
I hear you about confusing .NET build procedure,
there is a ticket for that [1]
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13859
On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 1:37 PM Igor Sapego wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Checked C++ compilation, C++ examples
>
> Best Regards,
> Igor
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 12:32 AM Denis Magda wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Downloaded the binary package and started a 2-node cluster on MacOS with
> > ignite.sh.
> >
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 1:03 PM Maxim Muzafarov
> wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Community,
> > >
> > > The release candidate is ready. The rest of the documentation pages
> > > will be completed prior to the release announcement message. Please,
> > > see the links below.
> > >
> > >
> > > I have uploaded a release candidate to:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/2.10.0-rc1/
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/packages_2.10.0-rc1/
> > >
> > > The following staging can be used for testing:
> > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheignite-1506
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.myget.org/feed/apache-ignite-staging/package/nuget/Apache.Ignite
> > >
> > > Tag name is 2.10.0-rc1:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=commit;h=refs/tags/2.10.0-rc1
> > >
> > > RELEASE_NOTES:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob_plain;f=RELEASE_NOTES.txt;hb=ignite-2.10
> > >
> > > Complete list of resolved issues:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=(project%20%3D%20'Ignite'%20AND%20fixVersion%20is%20not%20empty%20AND%20fixVersion%20in%20('2.10'))
> > >
> > > DEVNOTES:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob_plain;f=DEVNOTES.txt;hb=ignite-2.10
> > >
> > >
> > > Additional checks have been performed (available for users included
> into
> > > the release group on TeamCity).
> > >
> > > TC [Check RC: Licenses, compile, chksum]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5901349&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote4CheckRcLicensesChecksum
> > >
> > > TC [3] Build & Upload Nuget Staging Packages
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5901347&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote3BuildNuGetPackages
> > >
> > > TC [2] Compare w/ Previous Release
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5901351&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_IgniteRelease72CheckFileConsistency&tab=artifacts&branch_Releases_ApacheIgniteMain=ignite-2.9.1#%2Fresults
> > >
> > >
> > > The vote is formal, see voting guidelines
> > > https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> > >
> > > +1 - to accept Apache Ignite 2.10.0-rc1
> > > 0 - don't care either way
> > > -1 - DO NOT accept Apache Ignite Ignite 2.10.0-rc1 (explain why)
> > >
> > > See notes on how to verify release here
> > > https://www.apache.org/info/verification.html
> > > and
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-P5.VotingonReleaseandReleaseVerification
> > >
> > > This vote will be open until Mon Mar 8, 15:00 UTC.
> > > Please, write me down the thread if you need additional time to check
> > > the release.
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/vote?iso=20210308T18&p0=166&msg=VOTE+on+the+Apache+Ignite+Release+2.10.0+RC1&font=sanserif
> > >
> >
>
Review Request: IGNITE-8635: Add a Method to Inspect BinaryObject Size
Hi All, I have raised a PR for the above mentioned issue. Please see and help review: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/8868 Regards, Atri -- Regards, Atri Apache Concerted
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.10.0 RC2
+1 (binding)
Downloaded binary packages, started nodes, .NET examples, .NET nodes.
Downloaded source package, built Java and .NET parts.
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 4:24 AM Maxim Muzafarov wrote:
> Dear Community,
>
> I have uploaded a release candidate to:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/2.10.0-rc2/
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/packages_2.10.0-rc2/
>
> The following staging can be used for testing:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheignite-1507/
>
> https://www.myget.org/feed/apache-ignite-staging/package/nuget/Apache.Ignite
>
> Tag name is 2.10.0-rc2:
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/2.10.0-rc2
>
> RELEASE_NOTES:
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob_plain;f=RELEASE_NOTES.txt;hb=ignite-2.10
>
> Complete list of resolved issues:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=(project%20%3D%20'Ignite'%20AND%20fixVersion%20is%20not%20empty%20AND%20fixVersion%20in%20('2.10'))
>
> DEVNOTES:
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob_plain;f=DEVNOTES.txt;hb=ignite-2.10
>
>
> Additional checks have been performed (available for users included into
> the release group on TeamCity).
>
> TC [Check RC: Licenses, compile, chksum]
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5909007&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote4CheckRcLicensesChecksum
>
> TC [3] Build & Upload Nuget Staging Packages
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5909005&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote3BuildNuGetPackages&tab=artifacts
>
> TC [2] Compare w/ Previous Release
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5909003&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_IgniteRelease72CheckFileConsistency&tab=artifacts#
>
>
> The vote is formal, see voting guidelines
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
> +1 - to accept Apache Ignite 2.10.0-rc2
> 0 - don't care either way
> -1 - DO NOT accept Apache Ignite Ignite 2.10.0-rc2 (explain why)
>
> See notes on how to verify release here
> https://www.apache.org/info/verification.html
> and
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-P5.VotingonReleaseandReleaseVerification
>
> This vote will be open until Sun Mar 14, 09:00 UTC.
> Please, write down the thread if you need additional time to check
> the release.
>
> https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/vote?iso=20210314T12&p0=166&msg=Vote+for+the+Apache+Ignite+2.10.0+RC2&font=slab
>
Re[2]: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.10.0 RC2
Build from sources, run .net tests, looks good. +1
>+1 (binding)
>
>Downloaded binary packages, started nodes, .NET examples, .NET nodes.
>Downloaded source package, built Java and .NET parts.
>
>On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 4:24 AM Maxim Muzafarov < mmu...@apache.org > wrote:
>
>> Dear Community,
>>
>> I have uploaded a release candidate to:
>>
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/2.10.0-rc2/
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/packages_2.10.0-rc2/
>>
>> The following staging can be used for testing:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheignite-1507/
>>
>> https://www.myget.org/feed/apache-ignite-staging/package/nuget/Apache.Ignite
>>
>> Tag name is 2.10.0-rc2:
>>
>>
>> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/2.10.0-rc2
>>
>> RELEASE_NOTES:
>>
>>
>> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob_plain;f=RELEASE_NOTES.txt;hb=ignite-2.10
>>
>> Complete list of resolved issues:
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=(project%20%3D%20
>> 'Ignite'%20AND%20fixVersion%20is%20not%20empty%20AND%20fixVersion%20in%20('2.10'))
>>
>> DEVNOTES:
>>
>>
>> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob_plain;f=DEVNOTES.txt;hb=ignite-2.10
>>
>>
>> Additional checks have been performed (available for users included into
>> the release group on TeamCity).
>>
>> TC [Check RC: Licenses, compile, chksum]
>>
>>
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5909007&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote4CheckRcLicensesChecksum
>>
>> TC [3] Build & Upload Nuget Staging Packages
>>
>>
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5909005&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote3BuildNuGetPackages&tab=artifacts
>>
>> TC [2] Compare w/ Previous Release
>>
>>
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5909003&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_IgniteRelease72CheckFileConsistency&tab=artifacts#
>>
>>
>> The vote is formal, see voting guidelines
>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>>
>> +1 - to accept Apache Ignite 2.10.0-rc2
>> 0 - don't care either way
>> -1 - DO NOT accept Apache Ignite Ignite 2.10.0-rc2 (explain why)
>>
>> See notes on how to verify release here
>> https://www.apache.org/info/verification.html
>> and
>>
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-P5.VotingonReleaseandReleaseVerification
>>
>> This vote will be open until Sun Mar 14, 09:00 UTC.
>> Please, write down the thread if you need additional time to check
>> the release.
>>
>>
>> https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/vote?iso=20210314T12&p0=166&msg=Vote+for+the+Apache+Ignite+2.10.0+RC2&font=slab
>>
Re: Re[2]: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.10.0 RC2
+1 (non binding)
Built from source, ran tests and tried the Java client
On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, 16:13 Zhenya Stanilovsky,
wrote:
>
>
> Build from sources, run .net tests, looks good. +1
>
>
>
> >+1 (binding)
> >
> >Downloaded binary packages, started nodes, .NET examples, .NET nodes.
> >Downloaded source package, built Java and .NET parts.
> >
> >On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 4:24 AM Maxim Muzafarov < mmu...@apache.org >
> wrote:
> >
> >> Dear Community,
> >>
> >> I have uploaded a release candidate to:
> >>
> >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/2.10.0-rc2/
> >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/packages_2.10.0-rc2/
> >>
> >> The following staging can be used for testing:
> >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheignite-1507/
> >>
> >>
> https://www.myget.org/feed/apache-ignite-staging/package/nuget/Apache.Ignite
> >>
> >> Tag name is 2.10.0-rc2:
> >>
> >>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/2.10.0-rc2
> >>
> >> RELEASE_NOTES:
> >>
> >>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob_plain;f=RELEASE_NOTES.txt;hb=ignite-2.10
> >>
> >> Complete list of resolved issues:
> >>
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=(project%20%3D%20
> 'Ignite'%20AND%20fixVersion%20is%20not%20empty%20AND%20fixVersion%20in%20('2.10'))
> >>
> >> DEVNOTES:
> >>
> >>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob_plain;f=DEVNOTES.txt;hb=ignite-2.10
> >>
> >>
> >> Additional checks have been performed (available for users included into
> >> the release group on TeamCity).
> >>
> >> TC [Check RC: Licenses, compile, chksum]
> >>
> >>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5909007&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote4CheckRcLicensesChecksum
> >>
> >> TC [3] Build & Upload Nuget Staging Packages
> >>
> >>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5909005&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote3BuildNuGetPackages&tab=artifacts
> >>
> >> TC [2] Compare w/ Previous Release
> >>
> >>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5909003&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_IgniteRelease72CheckFileConsistency&tab=artifacts#
> >>
> >>
> >> The vote is formal, see voting guidelines
> >> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> >>
> >> +1 - to accept Apache Ignite 2.10.0-rc2
> >> 0 - don't care either way
> >> -1 - DO NOT accept Apache Ignite Ignite 2.10.0-rc2 (explain why)
> >>
> >> See notes on how to verify release here
> >> https://www.apache.org/info/verification.html
> >> and
> >>
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-P5.VotingonReleaseandReleaseVerification
> >>
> >> This vote will be open until Sun Mar 14, 09:00 UTC.
> >> Please, write down the thread if you need additional time to check
> >> the release.
> >>
> >>
> https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/vote?iso=20210314T12&p0=166&msg=Vote+for+the+Apache+Ignite+2.10.0+RC2&font=slab
> >>
>
>
>
>
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-14304) .NET Examples: Thick/Misc/ClienReconnect/client_reconnect_without_server_nodes ran into a timeout on windows + java 11
Fedor Malchikov created IGNITE-14304:
-
Summary: .NET Examples:
Thick/Misc/ClienReconnect/client_reconnect_without_server_nodes ran into a
timeout on windows + java 11
Key: IGNITE-14304
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14304
Project: Ignite
Issue Type: Bug
Components: examples
Affects Versions: 2.9.1
Reporter: Fedor Malchikov
Attachments: dotnet_example.log
Problem reproduced only on windows server with java 11.
>From the unusual here are these 2 warnings:
{code:java}
[15:18:17] [Warn]
[org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxManager]
Transaction wal logging is disabled, because point-in-time recovery is disabled.
[15:18:23] [Warn] [org.apache.ignite.spi.discovery.tcp.TcpDiscoverySpi] Failed
to connect to any address from IP finder (will retry to join topology every
2000 ms; change 'reconnectDelay' to configure the frequency of retries):
[/127.0.0.1:47500, /127.0.0.1:47501, /127.0.0.1:47502]
{code}
full log in attach.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
Re: Re[2]: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.10.0 RC2
Hello!
+0.5 (binding)
Built .Net from sources, ran a node successfully, though the process is not
documented, hope that we work on it under
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13859
Also from the slim distribution built C++ source, ran C++ node, connected
to it via JDBC & sqlline. Sqlline now works reasonably well.
Regards,
--
Ilya Kasnacheev
чт, 11 мар. 2021 г. в 13:48, Atri Sharma :
> +1 (non binding)
>
> Built from source, ran tests and tried the Java client
>
> On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, 16:13 Zhenya Stanilovsky, >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Build from sources, run .net tests, looks good. +1
> >
> >
> >
> > >+1 (binding)
> > >
> > >Downloaded binary packages, started nodes, .NET examples, .NET nodes.
> > >Downloaded source package, built Java and .NET parts.
> > >
> > >On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 4:24 AM Maxim Muzafarov < mmu...@apache.org >
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Dear Community,
> > >>
> > >> I have uploaded a release candidate to:
> > >>
> > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/2.10.0-rc2/
> > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/packages_2.10.0-rc2/
> > >>
> > >> The following staging can be used for testing:
> > >>
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheignite-1507/
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://www.myget.org/feed/apache-ignite-staging/package/nuget/Apache.Ignite
> > >>
> > >> Tag name is 2.10.0-rc2:
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/2.10.0-rc2
> > >>
> > >> RELEASE_NOTES:
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob_plain;f=RELEASE_NOTES.txt;hb=ignite-2.10
> > >>
> > >> Complete list of resolved issues:
> > >>
> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=(project%20%3D%20
> >
> 'Ignite'%20AND%20fixVersion%20is%20not%20empty%20AND%20fixVersion%20in%20('2.10'))
> > >>
> > >> DEVNOTES:
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob_plain;f=DEVNOTES.txt;hb=ignite-2.10
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Additional checks have been performed (available for users included
> into
> > >> the release group on TeamCity).
> > >>
> > >> TC [Check RC: Licenses, compile, chksum]
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5909007&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote4CheckRcLicensesChecksum
> > >>
> > >> TC [3] Build & Upload Nuget Staging Packages
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5909005&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote3BuildNuGetPackages&tab=artifacts
> > >>
> > >> TC [2] Compare w/ Previous Release
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5909003&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_IgniteRelease72CheckFileConsistency&tab=artifacts#
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> The vote is formal, see voting guidelines
> > >> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> > >>
> > >> +1 - to accept Apache Ignite 2.10.0-rc2
> > >> 0 - don't care either way
> > >> -1 - DO NOT accept Apache Ignite Ignite 2.10.0-rc2 (explain why)
> > >>
> > >> See notes on how to verify release here
> > >> https://www.apache.org/info/verification.html
> > >> and
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-P5.VotingonReleaseandReleaseVerification
> > >>
> > >> This vote will be open until Sun Mar 14, 09:00 UTC.
> > >> Please, write down the thread if you need additional time to check
> > >> the release.
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/vote?iso=20210314T12&p0=166&msg=Vote+for+the+Apache+Ignite+2.10.0+RC2&font=slab
> > >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-14305) Snapshot check command for indexed cache ends with exceptions.
Pavel Pereslegin created IGNITE-14305:
-
Summary: Snapshot check command for indexed cache ends with
exceptions.
Key: IGNITE-14305
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14305
Project: Ignite
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Pavel Pereslegin
Fix For: 2.11
The snapshot validation command fails with exceptions when executed on an
indexed cache snapshot.
Reproducer
{code:java}
import org.apache.ignite.cache.QueryEntity;
import org.apache.ignite.configuration.CacheConfiguration;
import org.apache.ignite.internal.IgniteEx;
import org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.verify.IdleVerifyResultV2;
import org.apache.ignite.internal.util.typedef.F;
import org.junit.Test;
import static java.util.Collections.singletonList;
public class IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest extends
AbstractSnapshotSelfTest {
private final CacheConfiguration indexedCcfg =
txCacheConfig(new CacheConfiguration("indexed"))
.setQueryEntities(singletonList(new
QueryEntity(Integer.class.getName(), Account.class.getName(;
@Test
public void testClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexes() throws Exception {
IgniteEx ignite = startGridsWithCache(3, CACHE_KEYS_RANGE, key -> new
Account(key, key), indexedCcfg);
ignite.snapshot().createSnapshot(SNAPSHOT_NAME).get();
IdleVerifyResultV2 res =
ignite.context().cache().context().snapshotMgr().checkSnapshot(SNAPSHOT_NAME).get();
if (!F.isEmpty(res.exceptions())) {
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
res.print(sb::append, true);
fail(sb.toString());
}
}
}
{code}
Stderr output
{noformat}
java.lang.AssertionError: The check procedure failed on 3 nodes.
The check procedure has finished, no conflicts have been found.
The check procedure failed on nodes:
Node ID: 1db72a3a-a1d8-48d7-9d25-96769312 [127.0.0.1]
Consistent ID: snapshot.IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest2
Exception: org.apache.ignite.IgniteException
Snapshot data doesn't contain required cache group partition [grpId=1943292145,
snpName=testSnapshot,
consId=snapshot.IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest2, missed=[65535],
meta=SnapshotMetadata [rqId=7d5af20a-3247-41b4-a2d6-ed50bb63b249,
snpName=testSnapshot,
consId=snapshot.IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest2,
folderName=snapshot_IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest2, pageSize=4096,
grpIds=ArrayList [1943292145], bltNodes=HashSet
[snapshot.IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest2,
snapshot.IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest1,
snapshot.IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest0], locParts=HashMap
{1943292145=HashSet [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 65535]}]]
Node ID: e49c924f-3fae-40ca-bb7c-c6905281 [127.0.0.1]
Consistent ID: snapshot.IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest1
Exception: org.apache.ignite.IgniteException
Snapshot data doesn't contain required cache group partition [grpId=1943292145,
snpName=testSnapshot,
consId=snapshot.IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest1, missed=[65535],
meta=SnapshotMetadata [rqId=7d5af20a-3247-41b4-a2d6-ed50bb63b249,
snpName=testSnapshot,
consId=snapshot.IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest1,
folderName=snapshot_IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest1, pageSize=4096,
grpIds=ArrayList [1943292145], bltNodes=HashSet
[snapshot.IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest2,
snapshot.IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest1,
snapshot.IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest0], locParts=HashMap
{1943292145=HashSet [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 65535]}]]
Node ID: dba1b3fa-e37a-4b79-878d-018bfc40 [127.0.0.1]
Consistent ID: snapshot.IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest0
Exception: org.apache.ignite.IgniteException
Snapshot data doesn't contain required cache group partition [grpId=1943292145,
snpName=testSnapshot,
consId=snapshot.IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest0, missed=[65535],
meta=SnapshotMetadata [rqId=7d5af20a-3247-41b4-a2d6-ed50bb63b249,
snpName=testSnapshot,
consId=snapshot.IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest0,
folderName=snapshot_IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest0, pageSize=4096,
grpIds=ArrayList [1943292145], bltNodes=HashSet
[snapshot.IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest2,
snapshot.IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest1,
snapshot.IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest0], locParts=HashMap
{1943292145=HashSet [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 65535]}]]
at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:88)
at
org.apache.ignite.testframework.junits.JUnitAssertAware.fail(JUnitAssertAware.java:49)
at
org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.persistence.snapshot.IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest.testClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexes(IgniteClusterSnapshotCheckWithIndexesTest.java:34)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
a
Re: IEP-54: Schema-first approach for 3.0
Hi Igniters. I've created a PR for Table access API [1]. This is an initial version. So, any suggestions\objections are welcomed. Please, do not hesitate to write your comments and\or examples to the PR. Ignite-api module contains API classes, e.g. TableView classes as projections for a table for different purposes. Ignite-table contains dummy implementation and Example class explained how it is supposed to be used. Also, I'm still waiting for any feedback for Schema configuration public API PR [2]. [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/33 [2] https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/2 On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 6:05 PM Andrey Mashenkov wrote: > > I've updated a PR regarding your feedback [1]. > > [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/2 > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 10:58 AM Alexey Goncharuk < > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Folks, >> >> I updated the IEP to contain the missing pieces; actually, most of the >> questions here were covered by the text. Please let me know if there is >> something still missing or unclear. >> >> чт, 31 дек. 2020 г. в 12:48, Alexey Goncharuk > >: >> >> > Mikhail and Igniters, >> > >> > Thanks for your comments. The questions are reasonable, though I think >> all >> > concerns are addressed by the IEP as Val mentioned. I will update the >> > document according to your questions in the following week or so, so we >> can >> > have a constructive discussion further. >> > >> > ср, 30 дек. 2020 г. в 11:45, Michael Cherkasov < >> > michael.cherka...@gmail.com>: >> > >> >> Hi Val, Andrey, >> >> >> >> thank you for clarifying. >> >> >> >> I still have a few comments. >> >> >> >> 1. one table == one schema. KV vs SQL: >> >> Looks like all agreed that KV is just a special case of a regular table >> >> with (blob,blob) schema. >> >> I worry about the case when the user starts from KV case and later will >> >> try >> >> to expand it and try to leverage SQL for the existing KV table it >> won't be >> >> able to do so and will require to reload data. which isn't convenient >> and >> >> sometimes not even possible. Is it possible to extract a new field from >> >> (blob, blob) schema and apply index on it? >> >> >> >> 2. Could you please also list all ways of schema definition in the >> IEP? It >> >> significant change and I bet the main point of this IEP, everyone hates >> >> QueryEntities, they are difficult to manage and in general, it's very >> >> confusing to have a data model(schemas) and node/cluster configuration >> in >> >> one place. >> >> >> >> So there will be SchemaBuilder and SQL to define schemas, but Andrey >> also >> >> mentioned annotations. >> >> >> >> I personally against configuration via annotations, while it's >> convenient >> >> for development, it difficult to manage because different classes can >> be >> >> deployed on different clients/servers nodes and it can lead to >> >> unpredictable results. >> >> >> >> 3. IEP doesn't mention field type changes, only drop/add fields. Field >> >> type >> >> changes are extremely painful right now(if even possible), so it would >> be >> >> nice if some scenarios would be supported(like int8->int16, or >> >> int8->String). >> >> >> >> 4. got it, I thought IEP will have more details about the >> implementation. >> >> I've seen Andrey even sent benchmark results for a new serialization, >> will >> >> ping him about this. >> >> >> >> 5. Thanks for the clarification. I had a wrong understanding of strick >> >> mode. >> >> >> >> >> >> вт, 29 дек. 2020 г. в 19:32, Valentin Kulichenko < >> >> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com>: >> >> >> >> > Hi Mike, >> >> > >> >> > Thanks for providing your feedback. Please see my comments below. >> >> > >> >> > I would also encourage you to go through the IEP-54 [1] - it has a >> lot >> >> of >> >> > detail on the topic. >> >> > >> >> > [1] >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-54%3A+Schema-first+Approach >> >> > >> >> > -Val >> >> > >> >> > On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 11:22 PM Michael Cherkasov < >> >> > michael.cherka...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > Hi all, >> >> > > >> >> > > I reviewed the mail thread and proposal page and I still don't >> fully >> >> > > understand what is going to be changed, I would really appreciate >> it >> >> if >> >> > you >> >> > > will answer a few questions: >> >> > > >> >> > > 1. Are you going to leave only one schema per cache? if so, will be >> >> there >> >> > > an option to have a table with arbitrary objects(pure KV case)? >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > My opinion is that KV case should be natively supported. I think this >> >> still >> >> > needs to be thought over, my current view on this is that we should >> have >> >> > separate APIs for KV and more generic storages. KV storage can be >> >> > implemented as a "table" with two BLOB fields where we will store >> >> > serialized key-value pairs. That would imply deserialization on read, >> >> but I >> >> > believe this is OK for KV use cases. I'm happy to he
Re: [DISCUSSION] IEP-69 The evolutionary release process
Val, I'm sorry if anything from what I've said sounded disrespectful. All of you are examples for me to follow :-) Have you checked the `motivation` [1] topic on the IEP-69 page? Should I add more details to it prior to the call? I want to make Ignite better and also think that the current 2.x version with all the advantages and disadvantages is far from exhausted its capabilities. I'm pretty sure the same motivation page exists for 3.0 version describing the advantages and disadvantages of developing mentioned IEPs. It will be good to share it prior to the cal also. [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-69%3A+The+evolutionary+release+process#IEP69:Theevolutionaryreleaseprocess-Motivation On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 01:21, Valentin Kulichenko wrote: > > Ksenya, thanks for scheduling this so quickly! > > Guys, I hope we can make this discussion constructive. Please keep in mind > that Ignite 3 is an ongoing project supported by multiple contributors, > committers, and PMC members. Neglecting 6+ months of effort and suggesting > that it's just "prototyping some cool features and nothing more" is really > bizarre, and, quite frankly, sounds disrespectful to fellow developers > (although I'm 100% sure it was not intended this way). > > Maxim, one of the biggest issues I have with your IEP is that I don't > understand the motivation behind it. If you don't mind, I would like to > suggest that you kick off the meeting with a detailed explanation > of exactly that. The first step is to achieve a mutual understanding of > each other's goals. Once we do that, I'm sure we will easily find a > solution. > > -Val > > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 8:55 AM Kseniya Romanova > wrote: > > > Let's make a quick call next week and try to find a compromise which can > > get the process moving: > > https://www.meetup.com/Moscow-Apache-Ignite-Meetup/events/276851588/ > > > > ср, 10 мар. 2021 г. в 16:27, Maxim Muzafarov : > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > > > > Agree, the discussion may be endless without compromises on all sides. > > > I always think that if there is no consensus (and I see from the > > > thread [1] that it's was no found) for such important decisions like > > > product future development and releases AFS provides the voting > > > procedure. Without fixing the results of the discussion [1] it sounds > > > like prototyping some cool features and nothing more. > > > > > > So, back to Denis suggestion can you share - what would be the best > > > time for all of us (considering different time zones) to have a call? > > > > > > I also think that we should start a vote about the future releases on > > > our Apache Ignite web-site and user-list, thus all who are using the > > > Apache Ignite may choose the best option they like. > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Ignite-3-0-development-approach-td49922.html > > > > > > On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 at 03:57, Valentin Kulichenko > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Maxim, > > > > > > > > I disagree with the suggestions. Several community members have already > > > > pointed out the discussion about Ignite 3.0 [1]. During that > > discussion, > > > we > > > > did agree on the scope of the changes for 3.0, as well as the general > > > > direction for the product. The new repo was created not to "develop > > from > > > > scratch", but to provide an opportunity for the community members to > > > > actively work on Ignite 3 without killing the Ignite 2.x. No > > alternative > > > > solution for this was presented, so we went ahead with the process -- I > > > > consider that to be an example of the silent consensus. > > > > > > > > I also want to emphasize that Ignite 3 is active and is moving forward. > > > If > > > > you look at the ignite-3 repo, commits and PRs are coming in on regular > > > > basis. We also had the first alpha release early in the year. I do > > agree > > > > with you, however, that there is not too much activity on the dev list. > > > As > > > > far as I can tell, the main reason for this is that communication moved > > > to > > > > IEPs and GitHub PRs, for better or worse. This is something we all can > > > talk > > > > about -- I personally would like to see more discussions on the dev > > list. > > > > > > > > And finally, I agree with Denis. This whole situation is > > > > counter-productive. I'm happy to jump on a Discord or any other voice > > > chat > > > > to discuss in more detail. > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Ignite-3-0-development-approach-td49922.html > > > > > > > > -Val > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 11:09 AM Maxim Muzafarov > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Ignites, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've created the IEP-69 [1] which describes the evolutionary release > > > > > process for the Apache Ignite 2.x version. You can find all the > > > > > details of my suggestion there, but here you can find the cr
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.10.0 RC2
+1 (binding)
Downloaded the binary package and started a 2-node cluster with the
ignite.sh script.
-
Denis
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 7:23 PM Maxim Muzafarov wrote:
> Dear Community,
>
> I have uploaded a release candidate to:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/2.10.0-rc2/
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/packages_2.10.0-rc2/
>
> The following staging can be used for testing:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheignite-1507/
>
> https://www.myget.org/feed/apache-ignite-staging/package/nuget/Apache.Ignite
>
> Tag name is 2.10.0-rc2:
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/2.10.0-rc2
>
> RELEASE_NOTES:
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob_plain;f=RELEASE_NOTES.txt;hb=ignite-2.10
>
> Complete list of resolved issues:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=(project%20%3D%20'Ignite'%20AND%20fixVersion%20is%20not%20empty%20AND%20fixVersion%20in%20('2.10'))
>
> DEVNOTES:
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob_plain;f=DEVNOTES.txt;hb=ignite-2.10
>
>
> Additional checks have been performed (available for users included into
> the release group on TeamCity).
>
> TC [Check RC: Licenses, compile, chksum]
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5909007&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote4CheckRcLicensesChecksum
>
> TC [3] Build & Upload Nuget Staging Packages
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5909005&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote3BuildNuGetPackages&tab=artifacts
>
> TC [2] Compare w/ Previous Release
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5909003&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_IgniteRelease72CheckFileConsistency&tab=artifacts#
>
>
> The vote is formal, see voting guidelines
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
> +1 - to accept Apache Ignite 2.10.0-rc2
> 0 - don't care either way
> -1 - DO NOT accept Apache Ignite Ignite 2.10.0-rc2 (explain why)
>
> See notes on how to verify release here
> https://www.apache.org/info/verification.html
> and
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-P5.VotingonReleaseandReleaseVerification
>
> This vote will be open until Sun Mar 14, 09:00 UTC.
> Please, write down the thread if you need additional time to check
> the release.
>
> https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/vote?iso=20210314T12&p0=166&msg=Vote+for+the+Apache+Ignite+2.10.0+RC2&font=slab
>
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-14306) Calcite. Hints support
Yury Gerzhedovich created IGNITE-14306: -- Summary: Calcite. Hints support Key: IGNITE-14306 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14306 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Improvement Components: sql Reporter: Yury Gerzhedovich We need to introduce hints for the new SQL engine. At least it could be planner hints, like an ENFORCE JOIN ORDER, Algorithm of join, switch on/off some planer rules. Maybe we could pass as a hint the whole execution plan, or modify some parameters, like costs. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-14307) Calcite. Use statistics in cost model.
Yury Gerzhedovich created IGNITE-14307: -- Summary: Calcite. Use statistics in cost model. Key: IGNITE-14307 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14307 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Improvement Components: sql Reporter: Yury Gerzhedovich Currently, we use only table size for the cost model, however as [IEP-58|https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-58%3A+Statistics+for+SQL+query+optimization] will be implemented we could use it to improve our cost model, -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
