Re: Rights to Ignite wiki.

I've granted admin rights to Denis and editing rights to Ivan. -Prachi On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 12:18 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > Here's the list of the admins > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/spaces/viewspacesummary.action?key= > IGNITE&showAllAdmins=true > -- > Take care, > Konsta

Re: IGNITE-4847: upgrade log4j to version 2.8.1 - ready for review

Michael, the changes have been reviewed and merged. Thanks for the contribution! — Denis > On Apr 7, 2017, at 1:51 PM, Denis Magda wrote: > > Hi Michael, > > Please give me a couple of days to do the review. > > — > Denis > >> On Apr 7, 2017, at 1:09 PM, michael.griggs >> wrote: >> >> Ple

Re: IGNITE-4878 ready for review

Folks, does it make sense to close the ticket than? — Denis > On Apr 10, 2017, at 12:35 AM, Sergi Vladykin wrote: > > Michael, > > This code is already changed in my branch for lazy SQL, so I will not merge > your PR. > Thanks for pointing out the issue anyways! > > Sergi > > 2017-04-07 20:0

Re: Rights to Ignite wiki.

Here's the list of the admins https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/spaces/viewspacesummary.action?key=IGNITE&showAllAdmins=true -- Take care, Konstantin (Cos) Boudnik 2CAC 8312 4870 D885 8616 6115 220F 6980 1F27 E622 Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author, and do n

Re: Rights to Ignite wiki.

Thanks, Cos, I’m not an administrator either. Dmitriy, are you an admin? Can you grant me the admin rights as well? — Denis > On Apr 10, 2017, at 12:14 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > > One doesn't need to be committer to edit wiki - it is a separate resource > IIRC. > Now, to grand permissio

Re: Rights to Ignite wiki.

One doesn't need to be committer to edit wiki - it is a separate resource IIRC. Now, to grand permissions to someone, an administrator needs to use "Space Tools" where permissions could be changed. I don't have admin privileges for Ignite wiki, so you need to do this yourself ;) Cos -- Take care

Re: Rights to Ignite wiki.

This didn’t work for other contributors presented in JIRA’s special list. *Cos*, basing on your solid experience, is it true that only committers can edit wiki resources? Igor, I’ve added you to the contributors list in JIRA. Please try to edit the wiki page, probably you’re lucky one. — Deni

Re: Rights to Ignite wiki.

I think you just need to add a user in Jira. On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Denis Magda wrote: > Dmitriy S, > > How did you grant write permissions to Ignite wiki to contributor? See the > earlier messages from this discussion: > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble. > com/Righ

Re: Rights to Ignite wiki.

Dmitriy S, How did you grant write permissions to Ignite wiki to contributor? See the earlier messages from this discussion: > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Rights-to-Ignite-wiki-tp816p16387.html > >

Re: Stable binary key representation

Considering this simple example INSERT (id, orgId, name, age, address) into Person… where id and orgId define Person’s affinity key - PersonKey(id, orgId) How do we know which fields to use for hash code generation and equality comparison? QueryEntity? No, it’s unclear how to document it prop

Re: Renaming TcpDiscoverySpi.heartbeatsFrequency to TcpDiscoverySpi.metricsUpdateFrequency

Yasha, Thanks, I’ve replied you in the ticket. In a nutshel, let’s try to merge current breaking changes to 2.0 and do the rest of compatible refactoring in further releases. Are you agree with this? — Denis > On Apr 10, 2017, at 8:39 AM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote: > > Alex Belyak, please go ahead

[GitHub] ignite pull request #1771: Ignite 3682 review

GitHub user agura opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1771 Ignite 3682 review You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/agura/incubator-ignite ignite-3682-review Alternatively you can review and ap

Re: Stable binary key representation

There is no more such resolver. It was removed. On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:58 PM, Denis Magda wrote: > Vovan, > > Before I fix the documentation, what’t the replacement for > BinaryFieldIdentiyResolver we used to define field for hash code > calculation and equality comparison when DML statements

Re: Rights to Ignite wiki.

Hello, Can I get access to Ignite wiki as well? I want to add some notes about per-page eviction to the 2.0 migration guide page: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide My login is ivan.glukos -- Best Regards, Ivan Rakov -- View this message in c

Re: Stable binary key representation

Vovan, Before I fix the documentation, what’t the replacement for BinaryFieldIdentiyResolver we used to define field for hash code calculation and equality comparison when DML statements are used? https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/binary-marshaller#section-binary-field-identity-resolver

Re: Sorting fields of Binarilyzable objects on write

I'm sorry, looks like I do not really well understand this stuff, but it is still not clear to me why wouldn't we just take the order of key fields given in QueryEntity and use it for both cases irrespectively to the order of fields in regular Class or in Binarylizable? I mean lets say we have a C

IGNITE - 4760 ready for review

Hello guys! Semyon, review please again. Test check corresponding IgniteCaches contain expected number of entries. Test fails for HibernateNonStrictAccessStrategy. And per-cache thread local in method threadLocalForCache fix this issue. https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1768/files Vadim Opol

Re: Sorting fields of Binarilyzable objects on write

Guys, The problem is that order of fields serialization is unknown for regular objects, where "regular" stands for non-Binarilyzable class. Reflection returns fields in unpredictable order. For this reason you cannot match fields order between class and QueryEntity. This is why we introduced sorti

Re: TouchedExpiryPolicy works incorrect in some cases IGNITE-4401

It appears that the second query execution returns empty QueryCursor(ResultSet) within expiry time. But cache.get() operation returns non-null value in this time. Looks strange пн, 10 апр. 2017 г. в 17:53, Vladislav Pyatkov : > This is a javax cache API. > Look at the java doc about how to Touche

Re: Ignite-4795 - ready for review (Inherit TransactionException and update Javadoc)

Thanks, Dmitry! I've reviewed your changes again and will merge it after TC results. On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 3:08 PM, Дмитрий Рябов wrote: > Andrey, actual PR is 1630. PR 1631 was created by mistake and I closed it > immediately after creating (couse ticket must have only 1 PR, isn't it?). > So t

Re: Sorting fields of Binarilyzable objects on write

Why "regular" are different here? Sergi 2017-04-10 18:59 GMT+03:00 Pavel Tupitsyn : > QueryEntity sorting is not an option for "regular" classes with reflective > serialization. > We have to use alphabetical. > Also, same class can participate in multiple query entities. > > 10 апр. 2017 г. 18:5

Re: Sorting fields of Binarilyzable objects on write

QueryEntity sorting is not an option for "regular" classes with reflective serialization. We have to use alphabetical. Also, same class can participate in multiple query entities. 10 апр. 2017 г. 18:52 пользователь "Dmitriy Setrakyan" < dsetrak...@apache.org> написал: On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:28

Re: Hello

Andrea, Apache Ignite dev and user lists are primary communication channels of our community that is pretty active. This is why you receive many email. Go to your mail application and setup filters that will forward all the messages coming to dev & user list from the main inbox to a dedicated o

[GitHub] ignite pull request #1737: IGNITE-4535

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1737 --- 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 ena

Re: Sorting fields of Binarilyzable objects on write

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:28 AM, Sergi Vladykin wrote: > The decision to use alphabetic order looks strange here. Using order > provided in QueryEntity and require from user to have the same order > in Binarylizable > looks more reasonable. > I think this would be much harder to verify. Alphabet

Re: Renaming TcpDiscoverySpi.heartbeatsFrequency to TcpDiscoverySpi.metricsUpdateFrequency

Alex Belyak, please go ahead. Thank you for your help! There were some work I did not expect to happen. --Yakov 2017-04-10 18:13 GMT+03:00 Sasha Belyak : > Yakov, I can do replacement "heartbeat" -> "metricsUpdate". Can I get > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4799 ? > > 2017-04-10

Re: Hello

HI Val, I'm receving many emails, I still need time to look at the documentation because i'm not familiar with apache ignite. HOw could I stop receving many notifications,Thank you From: Valentin Kulichenko To: dev@ignite.apache.org; Andrea Hernandez Garcia Sent: Monday, April 10, 201

[GitHub] ignite pull request #1770: ignite-4795 All transactional methods of IgniteCa...

GitHub user agura opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1770 ignite-4795 All transactional methods of IgniteCache should throw TransactionException You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/agura/inc

Re: Sorting fields of Binarilyzable objects on write

I even think that in DML we have to just calculate hashCode in order of QueryEntity regardless of order in Binarylizable. Sergi 2017-04-10 18:29 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan : > Does anyone disagree about having users sort the fields themselves, as > Sergi and I suggested above? > > On Mon, Apr 1

Re: Sorting fields of Binarilyzable objects on write

Does anyone disagree about having users sort the fields themselves, as Sergi and I suggested above? On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:21 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > Sergi, DML writes fields in alphabetic order and computes hash code > accordingly. > If user-defined Binarylizable impl uses different orde

Re: Sorting fields of Binarilyzable objects on write

The decision to use alphabetic order looks strange here. Using order provided in QueryEntity and require from user to have the same order in Binarylizable looks more reasonable. Sergi 2017-04-10 18:21 GMT+03:00 Pavel Tupitsyn : > Sergi, DML writes fields in alphabetic order and computes hash cod

[GitHub] ignite pull request #1769: Ignite 3477 master CPP Win32 OOM fix

GitHub user sergey-chugunov-1985 opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1769 Ignite 3477 master CPP Win32 OOM fix as usual, DO NOT MERGE You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/gridgain/apache-ignite

Re: Sorting fields of Binarilyzable objects on write

Sergi, DML writes fields in alphabetic order and computes hash code accordingly. If user-defined Binarylizable impl uses different order, hash codes will be inconsistent. On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 6:18 PM, Sergi Vladykin wrote: > What is correct or incorrect ordering for DML? > > Sergi > > 2017-04

Re: Sorting fields of Binarilyzable objects on write

What is correct or incorrect ordering for DML? Sergi 2017-04-10 18:14 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan : > I would agree that it should be on a user to always sort the fields, if we > make it a part of the contract. However, in this case, we should always > throw exception if user somehow provides fi

Re: Sorting fields of Binarilyzable objects on write

I would agree that it should be on a user to always sort the fields, if we make it a part of the contract. However, in this case, we should always throw exception if user somehow provides fields in the wrong order. D. On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:07 AM, Sergi Vladykin wrote: > Could you please ela

Re: Renaming TcpDiscoverySpi.heartbeatsFrequency to TcpDiscoverySpi.metricsUpdateFrequency

Yakov, I can do replacement "heartbeat" -> "metricsUpdate". Can I get https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4799 ? 2017-04-10 14:50 GMT+03:00 Yakov Zhdanov : > Guys, I have finished with initial changes. There were a little bit more > work to do than I originally estimated. > > Denis, can

Re: Prohibit stateful affinity (FairAffinityFunction)

I updated the issue [1] with the table of the average count of migrated primary partitions when one node leaves. [1]. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3018?focusedCommentId=15963015&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15963015 On 10.04.20

Re: Prohibit stateful affinity (FairAffinityFunction)

Guys, To my knowledge FairAffinity, which is the most balanced distribution possible, works just fine whenever the caches are configured on startup. I think we should keep it, but throw an exception whenever a cache is started dynamically (after the system start) with FairAffinity configured. Am I

Re: Sorting fields of Binarilyzable objects on write

I agree with performance concerns. BinarYLizable (why don't we rename it to Binarizable already, btw?) used to be the fastest approach to serialization (and it makes sense that manual approach is the best). With sorting it won't be so anymore. On the other hand, incorrect ordering will break DML i

Re: Sorting fields of Binarilyzable objects on write

Could you please elaborate why would we want to sort fields in Binarilyzable classes? If you are taking from stable binary representation perspective, then I think it is a problem of user, but not ours. Sergi 2017-04-10 17:53 GMT+03:00 Vladimir Ozerov : > Zapalniki, > > Inspired by IGNITE-4669

Re: OptimizedMarshaller is still public

Would be nice to get it done before the release. On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 7:56 AM, Vladimir Ozerov wrote: > I created the ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4938 > > On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Denis Magda wrote: > > > Agree, it makes sense to conceal it. Who can do that? >

Re: Prohibit stateful affinity (FairAffinityFunction)

Absolutely agree, lets get some numbers on RendezvousAffinity with both variants: useBalancer enabled and disabled. Taras, can you provide them? Anyways at the moment we need to make a decision on what will get into 2.0. I'm for dropping (or hiding) all the suspicious stuff and adding it back if w

Re: OptimizedMarshaller is still public

I created the ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4938 On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Denis Magda wrote: > Agree, it makes sense to conceal it. Who can do that? > > -- > Denis > > On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 6:59 AM, Sergi Vladykin > wrote: > > > Guys, > > > > Just noticed that Opt

Re: TouchedExpiryPolicy works incorrect in some cases IGNITE-4401

This is a javax cache API. Look at the java doc about how to TouchedExpiryPolicy should be work[1]. [1]: http://static.javadoc.io/javax.cache/cache-api/1.0.0/javax/cache/expiry/TouchedExpiryPolicy.html On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 5:48 PM, ALEKSEY KUZNETSOV wrote: > Fine. So what is the point of thi

Sorting fields of Binarilyzable objects on write

Zapalniki, Inspired by IGNITE-4669 (.NET: Sort binary object fields) [1]. Currently we sort binary object fields before when writing them to the output stream in case of standard (Serializable) objects and BinaryObjectBuilder. This makes sense as we have stable binary object representation irresp

Re: TouchedExpiryPolicy works incorrect in some cases IGNITE-4401

Ah, i see. After 1 round the entity got expired, but it should not пн, 10 апр. 2017 г. в 17:48, ALEKSEY KUZNETSOV : > Fine. So what is the point of this ticket? What is the correct behavior of > the policy? > > пн, 10 апр. 2017 г. в 17:45, Vladislav Pyatkov : > > Aleksey, > > Yes, it's corect. >

Re: TouchedExpiryPolicy works incorrect in some cases IGNITE-4401

Fine. So what is the point of this ticket? What is the correct behavior of the policy? пн, 10 апр. 2017 г. в 17:45, Vladislav Pyatkov : > Aleksey, > > Yes, it's corect. > Pay attention, in the example was used TouchedExpiryPolicy with 20 seconds > as parameter. This mean enteries will never expir

Re: TouchedExpiryPolicy works incorrect in some cases IGNITE-4401

Aleksey, Yes, it's corect. Pay attention, in the example was used TouchedExpiryPolicy with 20 seconds as parameter. This mean enteries will never expired in the example, because its touching each 10 seconds. On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 5:23 PM, ALEKSEY KUZNETSOV wrote: > Hello igniters! > Im fixing

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-4939) Receive event before cache initialized

Nikolay Tikhonov created IGNITE-4939: Summary: Receive event before cache initialized Key: IGNITE-4939 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4939 Project: Ignite Issue Type: B

[GitHub] ignite pull request #1768: Ignite 4760

GitHub user vadopolski opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1768 Ignite 4760 Added failed test with adding, updating cache. Fixed method threadLocalForCache per-cache thread local. You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

[GitHub] ignite pull request #1687: IGNITE-4863: Log4jLogger can change RootLogger lo...

Github user AMashenkov closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1687 --- 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

TouchedExpiryPolicy works incorrect in some cases IGNITE-4401

Hello igniters! Im fixing https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4401 In configuration of cache with name defaultNameEDUPropCache in initializeCache() there is ExpiryPolicyFactory with duration 20 seconds. In main test method after sleeping 10 seconds the entity must not be expired. So my qu

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-4938) Move OptimziedMarshaller to internal package

Vladimir Ozerov created IGNITE-4938: --- Summary: Move OptimziedMarshaller to internal package Key: IGNITE-4938 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4938 Project: Ignite Issue Typ

Re: Prohibit stateful affinity (FairAffinityFunction)

Sergi, AFAIK the only reason why RendezvousAffinity is used by default is that behavior on rebalance is no less important than steady state performance, especially on large deployments and cloud environments, when nodes constantly joins and leaves topology. Let's stop guessing and discuss the numb

[GitHub] ignite pull request #1767: Ignite 4891 master Fix. Key is deserialized durin...

GitHub user dkarachentsev opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1767 Ignite 4891 master Fix. Key is deserialized during transactional get() even if withKeepBinary is set You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https:

Re: Prohibit stateful affinity (FairAffinityFunction)

Guys, It seems that both mentioned problem have the same root cause: each cache has personal affinity function instance and it leads to perfromance problem (we retry the same calcualtions for each cache) and problem related with fact that FailAffinityFunction is statefull (some co-located cache ha

[GitHub] ignite pull request #1759: IGNITE-4354

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1759 --- 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 ena

[GitHub] ignite pull request #1766: IGNITE-4907: Excessive service instances can be s...

GitHub user AMashenkov opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1766 IGNITE-4907: Excessive service instances can be started with dynamic deployment. You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/gridgain/a

Re: Prohibit stateful affinity (FairAffinityFunction)

As for default value for useBalancer flag, I agree with Yakov, it must be enabled by default. Because performance in steady state is usually more important than performance of rebalancing. For edge cases it can be disabled. Sergi 2017-04-10 15:04 GMT+03:00 Sergi Vladykin : > If the RendezvousAff

Re: Ignite-4795 - ready for review (Inherit TransactionException and update Javadoc)

Andrey, actual PR is 1630. PR 1631 was created by mistake and I closed it immediately after creating (couse ticket must have only 1 PR, isn't it?). So ticket has only one attached link to "GitHub Pull Request #1630". 2017-04-10 14:24 GMT+03:00 Andrey Gura : > Dmitry, > > this review is in progres

Re: Prohibit stateful affinity (FairAffinityFunction)

If the RendezvousAffinity with enabled useBalancer is not much worse than FairAffinity, I see no reason to keep the latter. Sergi 2017-04-10 13:00 GMT+03:00 Vladimir Ozerov : > Guys, > > We should not have it enabled by default because as Taras mentioned: "but > in this case there is not guarant

[GitHub] ignite pull request #1563: IGNITE-4733

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1563 --- 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 ena

Re: Renaming TcpDiscoverySpi.heartbeatsFrequency to TcpDiscoverySpi.metricsUpdateFrequency

Guys, I have finished with initial changes. There were a little bit more work to do than I originally estimated. Denis, can you please reply in the ticket? I would like you to propose documentation changes. Can you help? There is also another question - we have a lot of "heartbeat" mentions in TC

Re: Ignite-4795 - ready for review (Inherit TransactionException and update Javadoc)

Dmitry, this review is in progress. But I'm confused about PR number because in JIRA ticket we discussed PR 1631. What is actual PR number for latest changes? On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 11:38 AM, Дмитрий Рябов wrote: > Hello, igniters. Please, review. > > PR: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1

[GitHub] ignite pull request #1765: IGNITE-4910 Add setCopyOnRead parametr.

GitHub user dream-x opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1765 IGNITE-4910 Add setCopyOnRead parametr. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4910 You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/dream-

GNITE-2313 - ready for review (fail atomic operations within a transaction)

Hello, igniters. Can you review it? We should finish it before 2.0. PR: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1709/files JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-2313

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-4937) Deadlock detection should happens on each grid hang

Anton Vinogradov created IGNITE-4937: Summary: Deadlock detection should happens on each grid hang Key: IGNITE-4937 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4937 Project: Ignite

[GitHub] ignite pull request #1764: ML: distributed algebra

GitHub user ybabak opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1764 ML: distributed algebra Apache ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4572 You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/nivanov/

Re: Prohibit stateful affinity (FairAffinityFunction)

Guys, We should not have it enabled by default because as Taras mentioned: "but in this case there is not guarantee that a partition doesn't move from one node to another when node leave topology". Let's avoid any rush here. There is nothing terribly wrong with FairAffinity. It is not enabled by d

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-4936) Web Console: Improve design of tables part 2

Vica Abramova created IGNITE-4936: - Summary: Web Console: Improve design of tables part 2 Key: IGNITE-4936 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4936 Project: Ignite Issue Type: B

Re: Prohibit stateful affinity (FairAffinityFunction)

Why wouldn't we have useBalancer always enabled? Sergi 2017-04-10 12:31 GMT+03:00 Taras Ledkov : > Folks, > > I worked on issue https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3018 that > is related to performance of Rendezvous AF. > > But Wang/Jenkins hash integer hash distribution is worse then M

Re: Prohibit stateful affinity (FairAffinityFunction)

We should have it enabled by default. --Yakov 2017-04-10 12:42 GMT+03:00 Sergi Vladykin : > Why wouldn't we have useBalancer always enabled? > > Sergi > > 2017-04-10 12:31 GMT+03:00 Taras Ledkov : > > > Folks, > > > > I worked on issue https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3018 that > > i

[GitHub] ignite pull request #1763: Ignite 1.9.1 p1

GitHub user dkarachentsev opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1763 Ignite 1.9.1 p1 You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/gridgain/apache-ignite ignite-1.9.1-p1 Alternatively you can review and

[GitHub] ignite pull request #1761: IGNITE-4935 .NET: IgniteConfiguration.EventStorag...

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1761 --- 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 ena

Re: Prohibit stateful affinity (FairAffinityFunction)

Folks, I worked on issue https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3018 that is related to performance of Rendezvous AF. But Wang/Jenkins hash integer hash distribution is worse then MD5. So, i try to use simple partition balancer close to Fair AF for Rendezvous AF. Take a look at the he

[GitHub] ignite pull request #1762: Ignite 1.9.2

GitHub user dkarachentsev opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1762 Ignite 1.9.2 You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/gridgain/apache-ignite ignite-1.9.2 Alternatively you can review and apply

[GitHub] ignite pull request #1761: IGNITE-4935 .NET: IgniteConfiguration.EventStorag...

GitHub user ptupitsyn opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1761 IGNITE-4935 .NET: IgniteConfiguration.EventStorageSpi You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/ptupitsyn/ignite ignite-4935 Alternati

Ignite-4795 - ready for review (Inherit TransactionException and update Javadoc)

Hello, igniters. Please, review. PR: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1630/files JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4795

null Cache names

Who can pickup this one? We should do it before 2.0 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3488 Sergi

Re: Hello

Hello Andrea, Are you willing to contribute to a particular ticket? -Val On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Andrea Hernandez Garcia < andro...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote: > Hello, I'm new in Apache Ignite >

Re: Data compression in Ignite 2.0

Alexey, Yes, I've read it. Ok, let's discuss about public API design. I think we need to add some a configure entity to CacheConfiguration, which will contain the Compressor interface implementation and some usefull parameters. Or maybe to provide a BinaryMarshaller decorator, which will be comp

Re: Data compression in Ignite 2.0

Vyacheslav, Did you read initial discussion [1] about compression? As far as I remember we agreed to add only some "top-level" API in order to provide a way for Ignite users to inject some sort of custom compression. [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Data-compression-in-I

Re: IGNITE-4878 ready for review

Michael, This code is already changed in my branch for lazy SQL, so I will not merge your PR. Thanks for pointing out the issue anyways! Sergi 2017-04-07 20:00 GMT+03:00 michael.griggs : > This change is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4878 > > IgniteH2Indexing can throw java.util.

Re: Data compression in Ignite 2.0

Hi Igniters! I am interested in this task. Provide some kind of pluggable compression SPI support I developed a solution on BinaryMarshaller-level, but reviewer has rejected it. Let's continue discussion of task goals and solution design. As