Pavel Konstantinov created IGNITE-1338:
--
Summary: SQL engine doesn't convert query fields name in upper
case before using
Key: IGNITE-1338
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1338
P
I've updated '{ignite_folder}/idea/ignite_codeStyle.xml' to reflect the
changes.
--
Denis
On 8/31/2015 5:48 PM, Sergi Vladykin wrote:
Guys,
As discussed, I changed all the imports in master to explicit ones.
Settings for Idea you can see here:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment
Ken,
I left a comment in https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/44/. Please take
a look.
Thanks!
-Val
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 6:51 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ken,
>
> I have also provided some feedback regarding the IGNTIE-1226 ticket (sorry
> it took a long tim
Ken,
I have also provided some feedback regarding the IGNTIE-1226 ticket (sorry
it took a long time to respond to your previous email).
2015-08-31 18:48 GMT-07:00 Valentin Kulichenko <
valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com>:
> Hi Ken,
>
> I was just in process of reviewing them :) Please give me couple
Hi Ken,
I was just in process of reviewing them :) Please give me couple more hours
and I will provide feedback.
-Val
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 6:47 PM, Ken Cheng wrote:
> Hi Valentin Kulichenko* & *Alexey Kuznetsov
>
> Can you help to do the code review for the newbie bugs
>
> Jira:
> https:/
Hi Valentin Kulichenko* & *Alexey Kuznetsov
Can you help to do the code review for the newbie bugs
Jira:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1226
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1153
PR:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/35
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/44
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 5:57 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As far as I understood Yakov's point, even this message indicating that no
> change happened is redundant because we have message delivery guarantees on
> communication level and no messages can be lost. If a
As far as I understood Yakov's point, even this message indicating that no
change happened is redundant because we have message delivery guarantees on
communication level and no messages can be lost. If a node is waiting for a
message and receives a message indicating that no change had happened, I
Hi Charles,
Welcome you to the Ignite community!
First of all, please properly subscribe to the dev list (it seems that you
still are not subscribed). You should send an email to
dev-subscr...@ignite.apache.org and follow instructions in the reply.
There are several features in Ignite that you c
Hi all,
My name is CJ, and I'm very interested in Apache Ignite. In fact, I'm a
senior at UPenn and am looking for a year long project to work on. Is there
any larger portion of Apache Ignite that is not implemented or minimally
implemented that I and a few other people could work on for a year? I
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Gianfranco,
>
> What do you mean by 'local cache' here?
>
> If you are talking about the local partition map, I do not think we have
> such a method. The background exchange that is described in the ticket is
Gianfranco,
What do you mean by 'local cache' here?
If you are talking about the local partition map, I do not think we have
such a method. The background exchange that is described in the ticket is
handled in controlled by the ResendTimeoutObject inner class in
GridCachePartitionExchangeManager.
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> I just fixed an issue in Bigtop's toolchain installation caused by this
> change. The format of new script got changed, so if there is any reliance
> on
> the content of the page - it better be checked.
>
Thanks Cos! Does anyone have e
I just fixed an issue in Bigtop's toolchain installation caused by this
change. The format of new script got changed, so if there is any reliance on
the content of the page - it better be checked.
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 03:42PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Konstant
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> If we are using the CGI version then yes.
>
Well, the original email said that existing CGI scripts should continue to
work. I have no experience with CGI, so I thought I would ask.
>
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 01:53PM, Dmitriy Setrak
If we are using the CGI version then yes.
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 01:53PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> Brane,
>
> Will this affect our mirror selecting CGI script on the download page?
>
> D.
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Daniel Gruno
> Date: Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 1:31 PM
>
Brane,
Will this affect our mirror selecting CGI script on the download page?
D.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Daniel Gruno
Date: Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 1:31 PM
Subject: Distributed Denial of Service attack on Apache's servers today:
Please be advised of changes enacted
To: infras
GitHub user ashutakGG opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/53
Fix for update notifier.
Fix for update notifier.
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/ashutakGG/incubator-ignite
upd-notif-demon-th
Yes, I agree. Please file a ticket.
--
Yakov Zhdanov, Director R&D
*GridGain Systems*
www.gridgain.com
2015-08-31 21:29 GMT+03:00 Vladimir Ozerov :
> Yes, this is what I am talking about. Actually, for "busy" lock semantics
> we need only 3 methods in regular RW lock terms: tryReadLock(),
> read
Yes, this is what I am talking about. Actually, for "busy" lock semantics
we need only 3 methods in regular RW lock terms: tryReadLock(),
readUnlock() and writeLock(). No need for reentrancy, write unlocks, etc..
This makes potential implementation very simple: read lock/unlock() methods
are simpl
Vova, can you please share your benchmark? That was long time ago and I
recall that I got better results in more complex benchmarks than jmh one.
However, I am quiet excited with your idea to change implementation to
striped RW locks:
* busy state - we do tryLock() on random read lock
* blocked s
And done.
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 11:10AM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> I will update the report list for the incubator to reflect the graduation.
>
> Cos
>
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 02:15PM, Marvin wrote:
> >
> >
> > Dear podling,
> >
> > This email was sent by an automated system on behalf o
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 08:08PM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 31.08.2015 20:06, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> > Submitting for vote and releasing are two different events. The release date
> > is when the vote is closed and its tally is counted.
>
> Heh, actually, the release date is when the release is
I will update the report list for the incubator to reflect the graduation.
Cos
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 02:15PM, Marvin wrote:
>
>
> Dear podling,
>
> This email was sent by an automated system on behalf of the Apache Incubator
> PMC.
> It is an initial reminder to give you plenty of time to p
On 31.08.2015 20:06, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> Submitting for vote and releasing are two different events. The release date
> is when the vote is closed and its tally is counted.
Heh, actually, the release date is when the release is announced. :)
Which is typically after it's on all the mirrors
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Vladimir Ozerov
wrote:
> Exactly, we use it primarily as "busy" lock, i.e. lots of concurrent
> readers with writer blocking everything on node stop. But it doesn't
> outperform regular ReentrantReadWriteLock actually.
>
I don't think this use-case is about perf
Submitting for vote and releasing are two different events. The release date
is when the vote is closed and its tally is counted.
Cos
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 02:29PM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
> Guys,
>
> Here is the correct link to jira issues that should work for everyone -
> https://issues.apache.
Exactly, we use it primarily as "busy" lock, i.e. lots of concurrent
readers with writer blocking everything on node stop. But it doesn't
outperform regular ReentrantReadWriteLock actually.
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 6:41 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
wrote:
> I don't recall exactly, but from what I rememb
I don't recall exactly, but from what I remember, there were other benefits
to the spin-lock approach. Don't we use some characteristics of this lock
to properly shut down the system?
D.
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 5:24 AM, Vladimir Ozerov
wrote:
> Igniters,
>
> We have two pretty strange construct
Awesome, thanks!
On 31 Aug 2015 15:49, "Sergi Vladykin" wrote:
> Guys,
>
> As discussed, I changed all the imports in master to explicit ones.
>
> Settings for Idea you can see here:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12753298/Screen%20Shot%202015-08-31%20at%202.18.27%20PM.png
>
Vladimir Ozerov created IGNITE-1337:
---
Summary: Platforms CPP: Move "common" module to Ignite.
Key: IGNITE-1337
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1337
Project: Ignite
Issue T
Guys,
As discussed, I changed all the imports in master to explicit ones.
Settings for Idea you can see here:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12753298/Screen%20Shot%202015-08-31%20at%202.18.27%20PM.png
Coding guidelines will be updated soon.
Sergi
Hi Nick!
Please take a look
https://ignite.apache.org/community/contribute.html#contribute
Download Ignite, read docs, run examples, select an issue you like to
implement / fix (you could start from simple ones).
Ask questions here.
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 9:02 PM, Nick Pavlov wrote:
> Hi eve
Vladimir Ozerov created IGNITE-1336:
---
Summary: Platforms: Create JNI callback extensions.
Key: IGNITE-1336
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1336
Project: Ignite
Issue Type:
Dear podling,
This email was sent by an automated system on behalf of the Apache Incubator
PMC.
It is an initial reminder to give you plenty of time to prepare your quarterly
board report.
The board meeting is scheduled for Wed, 16 September 2015, 10:30 am PST. The
report
for your podling wi
Hi everyone.
I will be happy to help)
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 4:29 AM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
> Guys,
>
> Here is the correct link to jira issues that should work for everyone -
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20IGNITE%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20ignite-1.4%20AND%20(status%20%3D%20resolved%20or%20status%20%3
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 4:56 AM, Anton Vinogradov
wrote:
> Dmitriy,
> I've fixed sources and made test release.
> Result can be checked here
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/ignite/2.2.2-test/
>
>
Thanks for quick turn around!
>
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Yakov Zhdanov
> wr
Github user dmagda closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/43
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabl
Igniters,
We have two pretty strange constructs: GridSpinReadWriteLock and base on it
GridSpinBusyLock.
As I understand it was an effort to create more performant RWLock than
ReentrantReadWriteLock
for cases when wrtie locks are very unlikely.
As busy lock concept is also used in some sensitive p
Since no one has responded yet I've implemented what I suppose a proper
behavior is.
Modifications for arrays of any kind returned from
PortableBuilder.getField() method are reflected.
Under these modifications I mean an ability to change an array's content
in a way that when a portable object i
Dmitriy,
I've fixed sources and made test release.
Result can be checked here
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/ignite/2.2.2-test/
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
> Guys,
>
> Here is the correct link to jira issues that should work for everyone -
>
> https://issue
Guys,
Here is the correct link to jira issues that should work for everyone -
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20IGNITE%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20ignite-1.4%20AND%20(status%20%3D%20resolved%20or%20status%20%3D%20closed)%20ORDER%20BY%20due%20ASC%2C%20priority%20DESC%2C%20cr
Agree with Brane, let's always release on Monday.
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 4:33 PM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 31.08.2015 08:14, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 01:29AM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
> >> Igniters,
> >>
> >> I think we have got to the point to start finalization of 1.4
Pavel Tupitsyn created IGNITE-1335:
---
Summary: Platforms .Net: Move Grid to Ignite
Key: IGNITE-1335
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1335
Project: Ignite
Issue Type: Sub-ta
GitHub user ntikhonov opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/52
IGNITE-426 Implemented sending partition counter to backups node for â¦
â¦transaction caches. Added tests.
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https:
GitHub user sboikov opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/51
ignite-1334 Fixed concurrent destroyCache/node stop. Check initFut reâ¦
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/sboikov/incubator-ignite
On 31.08.2015 08:14, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 01:29AM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
>> Igniters,
>>
>> I think we have got to the point to start finalization of 1.4 release.
>>
>> It contains many important fixes and several new features (e.g. secure
>> communication). One more p
Semen Boikov created IGNITE-1334:
Summary: Issues with concurrent node stop and cache stop
Key: IGNITE-1334
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1334
Project: Ignite
Issue Type:
GitHub user svladykin opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/50
IGNITE-1333 - fixed
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/svladykin/ignite ignite-1333
Alternatively you can review and apply these
Sergi Vladykin created IGNITE-1333:
--
Summary: SQL Group index can return wrong restult in half-bounded
conditions
Key: IGNITE-1333
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1333
Project: Igni
Vladimir Ozerov created IGNITE-1332:
---
Summary: Platforms: review all TODOs in Java code.
Key: IGNITE-1332
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1332
Project: Ignite
Issue Type:
Vladimir Ozerov created IGNITE-1331:
---
Summary: Platforms: consistent naming for "op" methods.
Key: IGNITE-1331
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1331
Project: Ignite
Issue T
Guys,
One immediate post-graduation change is removing the word "incubating" from
the produced source, maven, and binary artifacts.
I filed a ticket for it here:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1330
Anton, given that you are an expert in the build, would be great if you
could pick i
Dmitriy Setrakyan created IGNITE-1330:
-
Summary: Need to remove "incubating" from source, maven, and
binary artifacts.
Key: IGNITE-1330
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1330
Proje
55 matches
Mail list logo
