Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Ignite abbreviation plugin 4.0.0 released

lliJ > Platform > > > >Gradle Plugin 2.6.0 [3] > > > >2. Upgraded to JDK 17 > > > > 3. Raised minimum supported IntelliJ IDEA version to 2022.3 > > > >4. Updated abbreviations list [4] > > > > > > > > Also there are

Re: Updates in communication protocol [IEP-132]

Maven project and running mvn clean install will usually help. If not, please let me know. Thanks! On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 3:55 PM Maksim Timonin wrote: > Hi Igniters, > > I propose new rules and infrastructure around working with Message classes. > This work is being doing for IEP-13

Updates in communication protocol [IEP-132]

Hi Igniters, I propose new rules and infrastructure around working with Message classes. This work is being doing for IEP-132 Rolling Upgrade [1], [2]. Previously, we had an optional code generator for Message#writeTo, Message#readFrom code. I'm propose a patch [3] which makes the generation mand

Re: I want to contribute to Apache Ignite

Hi Oleg, I've added your account to the Contributors role. You now can assign the ticket for yourself. Please, feel free to start a new topic to discuss your proposal in detail. On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 5:20 PM Oleg Zinoviev wrote: > Hello Ignite Community! > > My name is Oleg. I want to cont

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Maxim Timonin

Thank you, guys! :) On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 6:39 PM Nikita Amelchev wrote: > My congratulations! > > On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 3:58 PM Zhenya Stanilovsky > wrote: > > > > > > Great !!! My congratulations too !! > > > > > > >Четверг, 15 мая 2025, 15:32 +03:00 от Ilya Shishkov < > shishkovi...@gmai

Remove experimental flag from ignite-cdc

Hello Igniters, Ignite introduced a CDC feature in 2.12 [1]. Since the moment: 1. Dozens of bugs have been fixed [2]. 2. A significant number of improvements have been made, including metrics, control utility, the conflict resolver, etc. [3]. 3. We know of several projects that use it in productio

Re: Lightweight on-heap caches for java-thin client

Hi Dmitriy! Could you please clarify in more detail what such a cache should look like? Near caches participate in transactions, whether this should be supported? Also, should the cache entries participate in cache/SQL queries? In case you talk about a lightweight cache that just stores results o

Re: [DISCUSSION] IEP-129 Application Context

. Access to this and other attributes with SessionContext API. Please take a look and share your thoughts. Thanks! [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-129%3A+Application+attributes+and+SessionContext+API On Fri, Oct 4, 2024 at 1:40 PM Maksim Timonin wrote: > Hi Ignit

[DISCUSSION] IEP-129 Application Context

Hi Igniters, I'd like to propose a new feature to Ignite. It provides access to application specific data from code run on Ignite nodes - SQL, QuerySqlFunction, CacheInterceptor, CacheQuery predicates, etc. Please take a look [1], any thoughts are welcome. [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence

Re: [VOTE] Move Ignite 2.x sources to JDK11

в 14:14, Вячеслав Коптилин < > slava.kopti...@gmail.com > > >: > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > S. > > > > > > > > вт, 16 июл. 2024 г. в 09:46, Maksim Timonin >: > > > > > > &

[VOTE] Move Ignite 2.x sources to JDK11

Hi Igniters, I'd like to start a voting process about moving Ignite 2.x sources to JDK11. Discussion of the proposal is here [1]. The plan is as follows: 1. Upgrade all TeamCity jobs from jdk1.8 to jdk11. 2. Review and merge the patch [2] that changes `maven.source.version` in Ignite's pom.xml to

Re: [DISCUSSION] IEP-125 Transaction aware queries

Hi Nikolay! I have a few questions: Ignite primary use-cases are around OLTP workload which means we deal with > small and fast transactions that change coupld of entries I know at least one popular use-case of our clients. Some clients have pretty complex logic of clearing data. They use Scan

Re: [PROPOSAL] Move Ignite 2.x to JDK11 compilation

Hi, Igniters! I suggest it's time to return to the discussion. There were 2 issues that blocked the sources moving from jdk1.8 to jdk11 [1, 2] and they have now been resolved. I have prepared a patch that changes maven.source.version to 11 and it passes MTCGA without blockers [3]. TeamCity already

Re: I want to contribute to Apache ignite

Hi Oleg! I left a minor comment on your patch. Please take a look! Thanks On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 12:19 PM Theodor wrote: > Hello, Everyone! > > My name is Oleg Valuyskiy. I want to contribute to Ignite. I would like to > start from https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-21051. Please, >

Re: New Apache Ignite PMC member: Nikita Amelchev

Congratulations! On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 2:29 PM Anton Vinogradov wrote: > Welcome aboard :) > > On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 2:11 PM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > > > My congratulations, Nikita! > > > > On Tue, 21 Nov 2023 at 15:20, Dmitriy Pavlov wrote: > > > > > > Hello Igniters, > > > > > > The Proj

Re: I want to contribute to Apache ignite

8, 2023 at 5:37 AM Maksim Timonin > wrote: > >> Hi Lokesh! >> >> Do you have a plan on how to solve the problem in the ticket IGNITE-17942 >> [1]? >> >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-17942 >> >> On Wed, Nov 8, 2023 at 11:4

Re: I want to contribute to Apache ignite

Hi Lokesh! Do you have a plan on how to solve the problem in the ticket IGNITE-17942 [1]? [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-17942 On Wed, Nov 8, 2023 at 11:41 AM Ilya Kasnacheev wrote: > Hello, Lokesh! > > I have added you to Contributors role - you may now assign tickets to > y

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Ignite 2.14.0 Released

Hello! The Ignite team draws attention to the changed default behavior of Java thin clients since Ignite release 2.14. Before release 2.14, the default value for the flag BinaryConfiguration#compactFooter differed on Java thin clients (false) and client/server nodes (true). For details about the

Re: Silently broken java thin client backward compatibility

Thanks! Merged. On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 4:42 PM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > Approved with a suggestion > > On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 4:27 PM Maksim Timonin > wrote: > > > Hi Pavel, > > > > Could you please make a review? > > > > https://github.com/apache

Re: Silently broken java thin client backward compatibility

hough it was mentioned in the > ticket. > > Note that ClientConfiguration#setAutoBinaryConfigurationEnabled provides a > way to revert to the old behavior. > > Thank you, > Pavel > > On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 11:42 AM Maksim Timonin > wrote: > > > Hi Igniters! &g

Silently broken java thin client backward compatibility

Hi Igniters! Release 2.14 broke backward compatibility for java thin clients in the ticket [1]. Before this release default value ClientConfiguration#compactFooter was "false", but since the release the value fetched from a server node, and by default it returns "true". This change happened with n

Re: Continuous integrations tests is broken on ci

Hi! It looks like the reason is low timeout for running tests. Now it's set to 2h. See "Failure conditions" section. On ci2 those tests require 1h40m, pretty close for the timeout also. I suppose we should either increase the timeout, or split the snapshots suite into 2 parts. Actually we don't

[DISCUSSION] IEP-104: Realtime mode of CDC

Hi Igniters! I'm proposing a new enhancement into the Ignite CDC process - "CDC: Realtime mode" [1] Please take a look. Any comments, critics and suggestions are very welcome! [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-104+CDC%3A+Realtime+mode Have a nice day, Maksim

Re: The ConsistentId verification logic for the recovery process of incremental and full snapshots is different

Hi, I reproduced your behavior. Yes, I confirm that this is a bug - there is a wrong check. It verifies that increments match the full snapshot. But instead of getting consistentId from the full snapshot metafile, it gets it from the local node. Workaround is to configure the node for restore wit

Re: Setting up the project locally.

Hi Gael! There are such docs: DEVNOTES.txt, CONTRIBUTING.md. Please check them in the root directory (nearby README.md). Maksim. On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 8:00 PM Gael Yimen Yimga wrote: > Hello Ilya, > > There is no documentation that explains how to set up the project on a > local machine ? I

Re: Force push to apache/ignite@master

10 2023 +0300 : Thu Mar 9 22:59:03 2023 +0300 a8e1689951 > (2023-03-09 22:59:03 +0300) Maksim Timonin > IGNITE-17177 Added incremental snapshots > (#10539)* > Previous hash was 04304d4e9e > > As it seems, someone (supposedly Maksim himself) updated the master branch > with f

Re: Unanswered GitHub issues - IndexQuery, Calcite, etc

Hi, Pavel! Thanks for pointing that out. Actually I didn't know that it's possible to open an issue in Github for our repository, I thought that this opportunity is restricted. > IndexQuery returns wrong results for IN Query combined with other clauses Answered this question. On Mon, Feb 6, 202

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Welcome Mikhail Petrov as a new Committer

Hi Mikhail! Congratulations! On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 11:30 AM Vladimir Steshin wrote: > Mikhail, congratulations! > > 11.11.2022 11:20, Maxim Muzafarov пишет: > > The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Ignite has invited > > Mikhail Petrov to become a committer and we are pleased to a

Re: [DISCUSSION] Change default behaviour of atomic operations inside transactions

anging the atomic caches in a transaction is really weird, so I would > remove the property as well and retain only the safe behavior. > If you want to update an atomic cache, do it before or after a transaction. > > пт, 28 окт. 2022 г. в 13:06, Maksim Timonin : > > > Hi,

Re: [DISCUSSION] Change default behaviour of atomic operations inside transactions

ow to change the behavior back. If there are no objections, I'll revert a commit on Monday. Thanks! On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 3:43 PM Maksim Timonin wrote: > Hi, Stan! > > >> Say, I have an ATOMIC and TRANSACTIONAL caches in my system, and I need > to change them at

Re: [DISCUSSION] Change default behaviour of atomic operations inside transactions

.com/apache/ignite/pull/10327/files > > > > > > сб, 22 окт. 2022 г. в 17:42, Stanislav Lukyanov < > stanlukya...@gmail.com > > >: > > >> > > >> Hi all, > > >> > > >> Can someone please clarify what specific changes

Re: [DISCUSSION] Change default behaviour of atomic operations inside transactions

Hi guys, We agreed here [1] that all deprecations must be noted within release notes. Do we have an option to mark a jira ticket in such a way to fill the future release notes correctly? [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/3ko0kjdv16o3oftsfh8z8nz0tyfvo13v On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 8:21 PM Anton Vi

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Ivan Daschinsky

Hi, Ivan! Congratulations! On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 10:05 AM Вячеслав Коптилин wrote: > Hi, > > Congratulations Ivan! Well-deserved! > > Thanks, > Slava. > > > вс, 18 сент. 2022 г. в 12:10, Zhenya Stanilovsky > >: > > > > > Join the congratulations ! > > > > > > > > > > >Hi Igniters! > > > > >

Re: [DISCUSSION] IEP-89: PITR

that it could be beneficial to have a separate section > >> explaining when the corresponding records are written to WAL, to make > >> this information easier to find. Or, maybe, this could be added to the > >> current 'WAL records' section. > >> > &g

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [6557404] needs to be handled

Hi, this is a bug [1] - NPE in CacheQuery future. I'm fixing that. [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-17526 On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 6:55 AM wrote: > Hi Igniters, > > I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are more than > welcomed to help. > > *Test with

Re: [DISCUSSION] IEP-89: PITR

> > Also, it seems that it could be beneficial to have a separate section > explaining when the corresponding records are written to WAL, to make > this information easier to find. Or, maybe, this could be added to the > current 'WAL records' section. > > пн, 16 мая 202

[DISCUSSION] IEP-89: PITR

Dear Igniters, I just published IEP-89 [1] that proposes a new feature to Ignite - (point in time recovery) PITR. I propose to implement the Consistent Cut algorithm for this, actually I achieved a working PoC for Ignite. And based on my research I wrote this IEP. Let's start a discussion here. A

Re: Empty test report for 'Control-utility' and 'Zookeeper

't be built). On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 4:46 PM Ivan Daschinsky wrote: > Great job Maxim! > > пн, 28 мар. 2022 г. в 15:51, Maksim Timonin : > > > Hi, guys! > > > > I investigated the issue. This is due to commit: fe95954c. It updated the > > curator-test ver

Re: Empty test report for 'Control-utility' and 'Zookeeper

Hi, guys! I investigated the issue. This is due to commit: fe95954c. It updated the curator-test version in the control-utility module (from 4.2.0 to 5.2.0). It led to changed transitive dependencies (jar-hell) of junit and tests just don't start due to different junit version (5 instead of 4). I

Re: [DISCUSSION] Removing extensions for obsolete Ignite Spring Data integrations.

extension > itself is updated. This process is described in the thread - [2]. > > > [1] - https://github.com/apache/ignite-extensions/tree/master/modules > [2] - https://lists.apache.org/thread/wox65gp3fyjkx048205t9omm418o3f20 > > On 18.02.2022 13:13, Maksim Timonin wrote:

Re: [DISCUSSION] Removing extensions for obsolete Ignite Spring Data integrations.

Hi Mikhail, > remove extension modules that are tied to the specific Spring Data versions - keep only a single spring-data-ext module. For now, it will contain code for the latest Ignite Spring Data integration - ignite-spring-data-2.2-ext. I'm +1 for having a single repository for the spring-dat

Re: IEP-83 Thin Client Keepalive (heartbeat)

out can't change, why send it back with every heartbeat > > response? > > >> > > >> > possible cases with cluster restart, upgrade > > >> In those cases, a new connection will be established, and we'll > retrieve > > >> the new

Re: IEP-83 Thin Client Keepalive (heartbeat)

of > > > timers > > > > > to > > > > > > > implement > > > > > > > this feature? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > > > > &

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Welcome Pavel Pereslegin as a new committer

Hi Pavel, Congratulations! On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 6:16 PM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Ignite has invited > Pavel Pereslegin to become a committer and we are pleased to announce that > he has accepted. > > He made a lot of major contributions to th

Re: Apache Ignite 2.13 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

Hi, guys! Ignite 2.12 was released on 17th Jan. And here is a plan to release 2.13 on 28 Mar. It is only 2.5 months between those versions. IMHO, it's better to have more time between releases: 1. We had some bug reports after releasing 2.11, and it can be worth waiting for users feedback about 2.

Re: IEP-83 Thin Client Keepalive (heartbeat)

gure heartbeatTimeout accordingly (e.g. divide by 2). > Thoughts? > > On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 3:14 PM Maksim Timonin > wrote: > > > Hi Pavel, > > > > Thanks for the links. Yes, I forgot that the flag of changed topology is > > lazy. Also I missed that the keepAlive sett

Re: IEP-83 Thin Client Keepalive (heartbeat)

> > Partition awareness is a "lazy" notification in a form of a > response > > > > > message flag [2]. > > > > > You won't get one on an idle connection. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the connec

Re: IEP-83 Thin Client Keepalive (heartbeat)

Hi Pavel, Thanks for starting this thread! Can I ask some questions here to get the feature more clearly? As I understand it correctly, half-state is a possible situation when an Ignite node goes down or somehow removes connection to a thin client. But with enabled (true by default) partitionAwar

Re: Travis service is not working properly

Hi, I have a similar issue for my PR [1]: 1. Github shows that the previous commit check is not completed yet. But on Travis' side I see that it actually has already finished [2]. 2. There is a new commit after the previous and Travis ignores it and doesn't schedule a new build. Should I add this

Re: Unmarshalable result from the MX beans

Hi Vladimir, I think that var 3. is OK. Currently `clusterStates` javadocs declares `IgniteCheckedException` but actually throws `IgniteException`. So this is a bug in any case, so I think we can just replace it with JMException. I'd like to propose to use the same approach for other JMX methods

Re: [DISCUSS] Index corruption scenarios to be fixed.

will automatically detect a new index as more suitable for the affinity index. It looks a little bit complicated, but pretty safe from the other hand. Am I missing smth here? On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 11:12 PM Maksim Timonin wrote: > Hi Andrey, > > > Max would you please assist and

Re: [DISCUSS] Index corruption scenarios to be fixed.

Hi Andrey, > Max would you please assist and validate the test ResumeCreateIndexTest. testIncompleteIndexDroppedOnCacheDestroy, maybe I've missed smth. Sure, I'll check it and other issues you mentioned on Monday. Thank you for investigating these things. Maksim On Friday, January 28, 2022, An

Re: Proxy (GridServiceProxy) for local services if required

urn an > > instance > > >>> and never returns a proxy. Does it corrupt the metrics as well? > > >>> > > >>> -Val > > >>> > > >>> On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 1:09 PM Valentin Kulichenko < > > >>&g

Re: Proxy (GridServiceProxy) for local services if required

that I don't really understand how client > side > > >> mechanics affect server side metrics (number of executions and their > > >> durations). I feel that we might be fixing a wrong problem. > > >> > > >> Could you elaborate on why we count

Re: Proxy (GridServiceProxy) for local services if required

uite normal to return a proxy for a local instance in > > > the case when the user has explicitly enabled statistics collection in > > > the service settings. Those. by default, we do not change the behavior > > > and if the collection of metrics is not needed, a loca

Re: Proxy (GridServiceProxy) for local services if required

Hi! I agree that users shouldn't expect a non-proxy when invoking the `IgniteServices#serviceProxy()` method. I think it's up to Ignite to return a non-proxy instance here as possible optimisation. But users have to use interfaces in any case. There is the `IgniteServices#service()` method for exp

Re: [DISCUSSION] @Nullable/@NotNull annotation usage in Ignite 3

Hi! There is a pretty popular project NullAway [1] that checks code of a project in compile-time for possible NPE. AFAIK, it works only with the "@Nullable" annotation. I think we can try to add this check to Ignite2 and 3. But I wonder, whether smbd already tried to introduce this check? If not,

Re: [DISCUSSION] Reserve partitions for CacheQueries

separate codebase? Does it share some code with > ScanQuery on a "query" layer (higher than BTree layer)? > > 2021-12-10 13:25 GMT+03:00, Maksim Timonin : > > Hi! > > > >> Existing users may already have some logic in place to handle > > inconsistencies

Re: [DISCUSSION] Reserve partitions for CacheQueries

with ScanQuery, I think it's better to add a "reservePartitions" > > property so that default behavior is not affected. > > Existing users may already have some logic in place to handle > > inconsistencies. So if we enable reservation by default, > > t

Re: [DISCUSSION] Reserve partitions for CacheQueries

t; Regarding partition reservation for long-time open cursors I guess > > some ideas might be found in LAZY mode for SQL queries [1]. > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9171 > > > > 2021-12-08 20:11 GMT+03:00, Maksim Timonin : > > > Hi, Ignit

[DISCUSSION] Reserve partitions for CacheQueries

Hi, Igniters! There is a known issue that ScanQuery on unstable topology returns incorrect results: duplicates data [1] or fails with an exception [2]. The reason is ScanQuery doesn't reserve partitions. IndexQuery shares the same query processing as ScanQuery, and then it is also affected by uns

Re: Add ability to specify INLINE_SIZE for PK sorted index and key's schema validation [IGNITE-11402]

Hi, Taras! I get critical system failure when I tried to explicitly set inline size with negative value. WDYT, if we restrict it with only positive numbers for public API? Also, I put some minor comments. Can you please have a look? On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 6:09 PM Taras Ledkov wrote: > Hi Ignit

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Welcome Maxim Timonin as a new committer

Hi, guys! Thanks everyone :) On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 1:16 PM Petr Ivanov wrote: > Great news! Congratulations, Maksim! > > > > On 29 Nov 2021, at 19:13, Kseniya Romanova > wrote: > > > > Igniters, > > > > The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Ignite has invited > Maxim > > Timonin

Re: Apache Ignite 2.12 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

12:59 PM Maksim Timonin wrote: > Hi, guys, we have a blocker [1]. NPE for some SQL queries. I will fix it > in 1-2 days. > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15943 > > On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 2:57 PM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > >> Folks, >> >> I&

Re: Issue - IGNITE-15348

Hi, there are flaky tests. TC wrote a green visa to the ticket. So, everything is fine now. I'll check your PR tomorrow. Thanks! On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 2:15 PM Andrei Demidov wrote: > Hi! > > Seems like everything in my PR built successfully. > But I still get errors while checking TeamCity,

Re: Apache Ignite 2.12 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

I'd like to include the [1] > issue in > > > > > > > > the release. Currently, the status is "Patch Available" and > it's > > > > > > > > actively reviewing now. I'd be happy if we wait a couple of > days &

Re: Issue - IGNITE-15348

Hi, you don't fix all issues. You can check it there: https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Build/6272643?logFilter=debug [INFO] Starting audit... 18:51:20

Re: Apache Ignite 2.12 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

: > > > > > > > > > Ivan, IGNITE-15806 seems to be a minor refactoring, not sure we > > should > > > > > inflate the scope with this. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 2:13 PM Ivan Daschinsky < > ivan

Re: Apache Ignite 2.12 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

Hi, I'd like to include the ticket in 2.12. There was a performance issue, I spent some time trying to figure it out. I prepared some fixes and I am going to submit a patch this week. I think this issue is critical to include to 2.12 together with basic IndexQuery functionality, because this tick

Re: [DISCUSS] IEP-71 Public API for secondary index search

7;ll prepare a patch for that. Igniters, WDYT? [1] https://docs.mongodb.com/manual/indexes/ [2] https://docs.mongodb.com/manual/tutorial/sort-results-with-indexes/#sort-on-multiple-fields On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 5:52 PM Maksim Timonin wrote: > Hi! > > It's a PR re-review re

Re: Request for new TC suite

FYI, the IndexQuery PR merged. New TC suite [1] now is part of RunAll. [1] https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_IndexQueryApi On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 5:29 PM Maksim Timonin wrote: > It has not to be before merge. After merge we will add it to RunAll. > &g

Re: Request for new TC suite

It has not to be before merge. After merge we will add it to RunAll. On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 5:25 PM Andrey Mashenkov wrote: > Actually, Index Query API suite is not part of RunAll. > Let's fix this. > > On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 5:12 PM Maksim Timonin > wrote: > > &g

Re: Request for new TC suite

Hi, Petr! I closed the ticket, Anton Vinogradov (thanks!) helped me and created the suite fast. It successfully ran. https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_IndexQuery?mode=branches On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 6:13 PM Maksim Timonin wrote: > Hi, Petr! > > Thank

Re: Request for new TC suite

ile a ticket please and I will see it through. > > > On 14 Sep 2021, at 17:24, Maksim Timonin > wrote: > > > > Hi, Igniters! > > > > This is a request for a new TC suite. This PR [1] introduces new > > functionality (IndexQuery API). I've prepared

Request for new TC suite

Hi, Igniters! This is a request for a new TC suite. This PR [1] introduces new functionality (IndexQuery API). I've prepared a suite [1] with tests related to this API. I'd like to have an opportunity to run those tests in a separate TC suite. Currently for my PR only, and after merge it should be

Re: [DISCUSS] IEP-71 Public API for secondary index search

m/apache/ignite/pull/9118 [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15391 On Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 10:49 AM Maksim Timonin wrote: > Hi! > > Thanks all for your comments! > > 1. I'm OK on the first step to make the indexName param required and not > check fields order fo

Re: [DISCUSS] IEP-71 Public API for secondary index search

ions instead of the ordered collection. > > In the strange case when the both index exist (a, b) and (b, a) - use > > the any index > > when index name isn't specified. > > > > On 26.08.2021 16:49, Maksim Timonin wrote: > > > There are some thoughts about strict f

Re: [DISCUSS] IEP-71 Public API for secondary index search

oc of the 'IndexQuery#setCriteria' > method. > > If the user uses logical criteria instead of index bounds > why he must remember about the order of the index's fields? > > > 2. We should avoid cases when a user uses in query only field B for > index (A, B). >

Re: [DISCUSS] IEP-71 Public API for secondary index search

rithm to match index to field names, so it is > strange > > > to compare it to sql engine optimizer. > > > > > > It is an usability nightmare to make user write index name in all > cases. > > > > > > чт, 26 авг. 2021 г., 14:42 Maksim Timonin : >

Re: [DISCUSS] IEP-71 Public API for secondary index search

t there is no guaranteed way to get an index name (or I don't know it). Igniters, what do you think? [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/9118#discussion_r642557531 [2] https://ignite.apache.org/docs/latest/monitoring-metrics/system-views On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 4:04 PM Maksim Timonin wr

Re: IGNITE-13364: Improve index inline defaults

Hi! JFYI, it was merged to master today, then this patch will be part of 2.12 only. On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 5:00 PM Maksim Timonin wrote: > Hi, > > I've prepared a patch for this feature. Can anybody have a look at it? > > https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/9167 > ht

Re: [DISCUSSION] Allow use QuerySqlField.precision for varlen types

авг. 2021 г. в 18:27, Maksim Timonin : > > > Hi, Ivan! > > > > I agree about String. It looks like there is someone who just forgot to > > document it. > > > > But what about binary? H2 supports varbinary type (along with varchar). > So > > I think w

Re: [DISCUSSION] Allow use QuerySqlField.precision for varlen types

weird > that this feature is not documented. > > ср, 11 авг. 2021 г. в 00:08, Maksim Timonin : > > > Hi, Igniters! > > > > I dived to the precision param of QuerySqlField and SQL data types. The > > javadocs of QuerySqlField say that the param is for decimal ty

[DISCUSSION] Allow use QuerySqlField.precision for varlen types

Hi, Igniters! I dived to the precision param of QuerySqlField and SQL data types. The javadocs of QuerySqlField say that the param is for decimal type only. But actually it works for String fields out of the box. So it looks like an easter egg. I think we should either document it or forbid it. A

Re: [DISCUSS] IEP-71 Public API for secondary index search

18 On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 10:43 PM Maksim Timonin wrote: > Andrey, hi! > > Some updates, there. > > I've submitted a PR for IndexQuery [1]. There is an issue about lazy page > loading, that is also related to Text query ticket IGNITE-12291. > > CacheQueries already

Re: Text Queries Support

Hi, Atri! You're right, Actually there is a lack of support for TextQueries. For the last ticket I'm doing I see some obvious issues with them (no page size support, for example). I'm glad that somebody wants to maintain this functionality. Thanks a lot! For the MergeSort algorithm there is alrea

Re: IGNITE-13364: Improve index inline defaults

Hi, I've prepared a patch for this feature. Can anybody have a look at it? https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/9167 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13364 On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 12:14 PM Maksim Timonin wrote: > Hi, I've left a comment in your PR, could you pleas

Re: IGNITE-13364: Improve index inline defaults

Hi, I've left a comment in your PR, could you please have a look? On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 6:09 AM 18624049226 <18624049...@163.com> wrote: > Hello team, > > I think this is a very valuable optimization. This patch has been > developed for a long time, I don't think there is any reason to continue

Re: Apache Ignite 2.11

) > > On 2021/06/03 14:30:55, Maksim Timonin wrote: > > > Regarding non-SQL index API it really depends on readiness. I guess if > it > > is not in the master, we can skip and release it next time. > > > > Hi, Dmitry! Yes, currently it is on review. I'm OK

Re: Apache Ignite 2.11

> Regarding non-SQL index API it really depends on readiness. I guess if it is not in the master, we can skip and release it next time. Hi, Dmitry! Yes, currently it is on review. I'm OK to release it within the next release. On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 5:26 PM Dmitry Pavlov wrote: > Hi Alexey, > >

Re: Default Lucene index for String cache values

luceneIndex() != null) { > Long qryId = runningQueryManager().register(qry, TEXT, schemaName, > true, null); > > try { > // We will reach this line if we use String as cache values or > if we used @QueryTextField annotation > return tbl.luceneInd

Re: Default Lucene index for String cache values

Hi, Ilya! AFAIK, to create LuceneIndex it's required to do this: CacheConfiguration.setIndexedTypes(Long.class, String.class); It's pretty straightforward, a user wants the value class to be indexed. If you just create a simple cache (without entities, indexed types) with String.class as value it

Re: Apache Ignite 2.11

Hi, Ilya! I've picked it. On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 7:04 PM Ilya Kasnacheev wrote: > Hello! > > I have found a blocker: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14781 > > Regards, > -- > Ilya Kasnacheev > > > пт, 21 мая 2021 г. в 15:30, Maksim Timonin

Re: [DISCUSS] IEP-71 Public API for secondary index search

tps://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/9118 [2] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/9086 On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 1:52 PM Maksim Timonin wrote: > Andrey, > > Thanks! I picked it. > > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 1:51 PM Maksim Timonin > wrote: > >> Stephen, >> >> I don

Re: Apache Ignite 2.11

5:11 PM Алексей Гидаспов > wrote: > > > > Hi, Dmitriy! > > > > I suggest this timeline > > > > Scope Freeze: May 31, 2021 > > Code Freeze: 14 June, 2021 > > Voting Date: 21 June, 2021 > > Release Date: 28 June, 2021 > > > > пт,

Re: Apache Ignite 2.11

Hi, I'd like to include Phase 1 of index queries feature [1] to the next AI release. Currently there are 2 tickets in progress ([2], [3]), and they will be ready for review next week. What is a time of code freeze if it's going to release AI 2.11 at the end of June? [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/co

Re: Empty test results for Security Test Suite ran against master branch on Team City

778 On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 5:21 PM Maksim Timonin wrote: > Hi! I've started to investigate the issue. Try to back soon. > > On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 4:41 PM Ilya Kasnacheev > wrote: > >> Hello! >> >> I have filed a ticket https://issues.apache.org/j

Re: Empty test results for Security Test Suite ran against master branch on Team City

р. 2021 г. в 14:10, Ilya Kasnacheev : > >> Hello! >> >> It seems that we have broke this suite in our "tests not in suites" >> commit: >> >> commit 62cc45861c0273286e00eb6fbc510c0bb5589e52 >> Author: Maksim Timonin >> Date: Fri Feb 5 19:10:18

Re: [DISCUSS] IEP-71 Public API for secondary index search

Andrey, Thanks! I picked it. On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 1:51 PM Maksim Timonin wrote: > Stephen, > > I don't see a reason to replace or deprecate IndexingSpi. I'm not sure how > smbd uses it, but it works now. > > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 1:42 PM Stephen Da

Re: [DISCUSS] IEP-71 Public API for secondary index search

ecate (and > remove) it? > > Or do you see them as complimentary? > > > On 12 Apr 2021, at 11:29, Maksim Timonin > wrote: > > > > Hi Stephen! > > > > Please have a look at the QueryProcessing paragraph [1]. I've described > > why IndexingSpi

  1   2   >