Question about extra backward connection in Discovery.

Hi, Igniters. Does anyone know or remember the reason of the additional 'backward ping' when some node loses the connection to its next in the ring? The ticket is [1]. Consider: 1) There is a cluster with nodes 'A', 'B, 'C' 2) 'A' fails to negotiate with B by the discovery, tries to establish a

Re: Question

Hello! Questions about Ignite usage should be asked on userlist (user@) or on Stack Overflow. Regards, -- Ilya Kasnacheev ср, 12 окт. 2022 г. в 14:59, Wadhe, Amit Pralhad : > Hi Team, > > Want to understand what could be possible scenarios where below exception > can arise? > > Exception whil

Question

Hi Team, Want to understand what could be possible scenarios where below exception can arise? Exception while consuming the event: Failed to map SQL query to topology on data node [dataNodeId=36538e74-7ab8-4598-80f4-d7131bde18d2, msg=Data node has left the grid during query execution [nodeId=

Re: Re: Question about the sources of the Apache Ignite version 2.12.0-1

me sources on GitHub. > > > > > 17 июня 2022 г., в 16:53, Koltermann, BENJAMIN > написал(а): > > > > > > Hi Apache Ignite Dev Team, > > > > > > I have a question to the sources of the Apache Ignite build 2.12.0-1. > Which sources were use

RE: Re: Question about the sources of the Apache Ignite version 2.12.0-1

nite/tags <https://github.com/apache/ignite/tags> > - same sources on GitHub. > > > 17 июня 2022 г., в 16:53, Koltermann, BENJAMIN > > написал(а): > > > > Hi Apache Ignite Dev Team, > > > > I have a question to the sources of the Apache Ignite buil

Question about the sources of the Apache Ignite version 2.12.0-1

Hi Apache Ignite Dev Team, I have a question to the sources of the Apache Ignite build 2.12.0-1. Which sources were used for the build. Were the same sources used as in version 2.12.0 or is there a difference? I mean the DEB build. In the changelog here ( https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob

Re: Question about the sources of the Apache Ignite version 2.12.0-1

nite/tags> - same sources on GitHub. > 17 июня 2022 г., в 16:53, Koltermann, BENJAMIN > написал(а): > > Hi Apache Ignite Dev Team, > > I have a question to the sources of the Apache Ignite build 2.12.0-1. Which > sources were used for the build. Were the same sources u

Question about the sources of the Apache Ignite version 2.12.0-1

Hi Apache Ignite Dev Team, I have a question to the sources of the Apache Ignite build 2.12.0-1. Which sources were used for the build. Were the same sources used as in version 2.12.0 or is there a difference? With best regards, Benjamin Koltermann Siemens Mobility GmbH SMO RI ML ADC ETCS AR

[Ignite Summit] The most popular question after Ignite Summit

, asked questions, and cheered up the speakers! I am getting back to the subject of the email. The most popular question to the Summit team is, “When are the videos available?”. So let me answer: everyone who registered for the Summit will get the email early next week. If you missed the event

Re: Question: network issues of single node.

m network > issues (blinking network) were also a driver for this improvement. They are > indeed hard to reproduce but have been seen in real world set-ups and have > proven to increase cluster stability. > > On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 5:09 PM Denis Magda wrote: > >> Finally, I got

Re: Question: network issues of single node.

5:09 PM Denis Magda wrote: > Finally, I got your question. > > Back in 2017-2018, there was a Discovery SPI's stabilization activity. The > networking component could fail in various hard-to-reproduce scenarios > affecting cluster availability and consistency. That ticket r

Re: Question: network issues of single node.

nodes rather than leave the whole cluster hanging on connection await. сб, 6 июн. 2020 г. в 17:09, Denis Magda : > Finally, I got your question. > > Back in 2017-2018, there was a Discovery SPI's stabilization activity. The > networking component could fail in various hard-to-reproduce

Re: Question: network issues of single node.

Finally, I got your question. Back in 2017-2018, there was a Discovery SPI's stabilization activity. The networking component could fail in various hard-to-reproduce scenarios affecting cluster availability and consistency. That ticket reminds me of those notorious issues that would fire o

Re: Question: network issues of single node.

Denis, I have no nodes that I'm unable to interconnect. This case is simulated in IgniteDiscoveryMassiveNodeFailTest.testMassiveFailSelfKill() Introduced in [1]. I’m asking if it is real or supposed problem. Where it was met? Which network configuration/issues could be? [1] https://issues.

Re: Question: network issues of single node.

Vladimir, I'm suggesting to share the log files from the nodes that are unable to interconnect so that the community can check them for potential issues. Instead of sharing the logs from all the 5 nodes, try to start a two-nodes cluster with the nodes that fail to discover each other and attach th

Re: Question: network issues of single node.

Denis, hi.     Sorry, I didn’t catch your idea. Are you saying this can happen and suggest experiment? I’m not descripting a probable case. It is already done in [1]. I’m asking is it real, where it was met. 04.06.2020 23:33, Denis Magda пишет: Vladimir, Please do the following experiment.

Re: Question: network issues of single node.

Vladimir, Please do the following experiment. Start a 2-nodes cluster booting node 3 and, for instance, node 5. Those won't be able to interconnect according to your description. Attach the log files from both nodes for analysis. This should be a networking issue. - Denis On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at

Question: network issues of single node.

    Hi, Igniters.     I wanted to ask how one node may not be able to connect to another whereas rest of the cluster can. This got covered in [1]. In short: node 3 can't connect to nodes 4 and 5 but can to 1. At the same time, node 2 can connect to 4. Questions: 1) Is it real case? Where th

[IGNITE-12633] [Question] Purpose of creating a new instance of QueryCancelledException every time?

Hello Igniters, I've started working on IGNITE-12633 If I understand the goal of the ticket right, QueryCancelledException needs a constructor that accepts a cause exception. @iseliverstov please, correct me if I'm wrong. As the first step, I

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

gt;> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 6:55 PM Alexey Goncharuk >> >>>>> wrote: >> >>>>>> Ok, got it. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> I agree tha

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

t; I agree that this is consistent with the old behavior, but this is > >> the > >>>> kind > >>>>>> of errors we wanted to get rid of when we started the IEP. From the > >>>>>> user perspective, even the local deployment looks broke

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

guaranties in future releases, but there is an open question: - how long taking of proxy should wait? - deployment of "heavy" service may take a while On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 6:19 PM Alexey Goncharuk wrote: What should be the user fallback in this case? Retry infinitely? Is there a w

Re: question about apache configuration

ryderyk IS - Partner Detal : > Hello. The calculator suggested a configuration based on 4 nodes with a > specific configuration each (2x5118N, 12x64GB of RAM, 2x480SSD system, 2x > 1.6TB NVMe base). The question is, can we limit the configuration to 3 > nodes by increasing the memory of e

question about apache configuration

Hello. The calculator suggested a configuration based on 4 nodes with a specific configuration each (2x5118N, 12x64GB of RAM, 2x480SSD system, 2x 1.6TB NVMe base). The question is, can we limit the configuration to 3 nodes by increasing the memory of each of them to 24x64GB and whether by

Re: Question: different setting for nodes.

Hello! How about we introduce a *developer warning* about this inconsistency, see what happens in a release with this warning, and then maybe eventually turn it into error? Please note that plain error will be breaking existing code which should make it blocker for minor releases. Regards, -- I

Re: Question: different setting for nodes.

Nikolay, This sounds like a philosophical question :) By rigid I mean inability to change some properties without whole cluster restart, and I do think it's bad. I have a good example in mind - the number of threads running rebalance. Originally, we added a validation check for

Re: Question: different setting for nodes.

Hello, Alexey. Sorry, my question is not related to the current discussion > this makes the cluster configuration rigid; Is it a bad thing to make cluster node configuration rigid? > 6 февр. 2020 г., в 12:20, Alexey Goncharuk > написал(а): > > Vladimir, > > In curre

Re: Question: different setting for nodes.

Vladimir, In current implementation the flag does not change if data is kept or cleared from memory - after deactivation the internal structures are cleared and only data region is kept allocated. If you add a validation for this flag, you forbid users to do a rolling cluster restart and enable/di

Re: Question: different setting for nodes.

Folks, I think it's a common problem for such system properties (which may be different on different nodes and which may lead to unpredictable cluster behaviour). The same mentioned by Ivan here [1]. Is it better to validate (somehow) all system properties, for instance, started with IGNITE_ pre

Re: Question: different setting for nodes.

Vladimir. This looks like a bug to me. Can you, please, prepare the simple reproducer for this issue and it’s consequences? > 5 февр. 2020 г., в 17:08, Vladimir Steshin написал(а): > > Hi, folks. > > > > I recently found that one node might be started with flag > reuse-memory-on-deactivat

Question: different setting for nodes.

Hi, folks. I recently found that one node might be started with flag reuse-memory-on-deactivate [1] set off while another node might be configured with the flag enabled. This ability hinders prediction of cluster behavior on deactivation/activation. One node keeps data in memory, other doesn’t.

Re: Question: Table scheme 'default'

> I think this case should fail with error like "only cache created tables > can be removed with drop table. ", not with "scheme not found." > SQL-engine is supposed to accept and understand values it returns itself. Agree. Feel free to contribute a fix. My expectation here is that it will not be

Re: Question: Node filter for Lock/Semaphore

Vladimir, In theory, we can add node filter for the corresponding atomics system cache in AtomicConfiguration. In practice, I do not see how this is useful unless you limit the node filter to a single node. A lock/semaphore is represented by a single cache key, so it cannot be collocated with more

Question: Node filter for Lock/Semaphore

Folks, who knows if there are restrictions to add node filter for distributed Semaphore/Lock? I want to suggest this feature. I met a case in personal experience: some grid services were filtered by nodes and launched over a logical sub-cluster. The services worked with caches being held in the sa

Re: Question: Table scheme 'default'

//Got a connectionConnection conn = ...; //execute() - is just a helper function. Creates prepared statement, pass params... //Get all the tables List> lst = execute(conn, "select SCHEMA_NAME, TABLE_NAME from SYS.TABLES"); for( List row : lst ){ String schemaName = (String)row.get(0);

Re: Question: Table scheme 'default'

Vladimir, I will try to shed a light on this. 1. Statically configured tables in caches (QueryEntity) by default resides in a schema having the same name as a cache it belongs to ("default" is a cache and a schema name for a table Person in your example). 2. As you might know SQL literals are case

Re: Question: Table scheme 'default'

Vladimir. Please, provide a simple, self-contained reproducer to the issue you described. > 29 янв. 2020 г., в 11:16, Vladimir Steshin написал(а): > > Hi ppl. Wanted to ask is issue a bug. Minor propably. > > Recently noticed that one simple query returns a value which can't be found > 'as is'

Question: Table scheme 'default'

Hi ppl. Wanted to ask is issue a bug. Minor propably. Recently noticed that one simple query returns a value which can't be found 'as is' in following query. I tried to find and drop all the tables I created with "create table": select schema_name, table_name, cache_name from sys.tables And ther

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

> > > > > Should we schedule this ticket for the further work on Services > IEP? > > > > > > > > > > вт, 24 дек. 2019 г. в 18:49, Vyacheslav Daradur < > daradu...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > > > > Not sure th

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

that "user fallback" is the right definition, it is not new > > > > > behaviour in comparison with legacy implementation. > > > > > > > > > > Our synchronous deployment provides guaranties for a deployment > > > >

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

th service immediately after > > > > deployment finished successfully. > > > > For not the deployment initiator we can't provide such guarantees > now, > > > > because of unknown deployment result and possibly fail. > > > > > > >

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

27;t provide such guarantees now, > > > because of unknown deployment result and possibly fail. > > > > > > In this case, a reasonable timeout might be an acceptable solution. > > > > > > We can improve guaranties in future releases, but there is an ope

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

mediately after > > deployment finished successfully. > > For not the deployment initiator we can't provide such guarantees now, > > because of unknown deployment result and possibly fail. > > > > In this case, a reasonable timeout might be an acceptable solution. >

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

t result and possibly fail. > > In this case, a reasonable timeout might be an acceptable solution. > > We can improve guaranties in future releases, but there is an open > question: > - how long taking of proxy should wait? - deployment of "heavy" > service may take

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

or not the deployment initiator we can't provide such guarantees now, because of unknown deployment result and possibly fail. In this case, a reasonable timeout might be an acceptable solution. We can improve guaranties in future releases, but there is an open question: - how long taking of pr

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

c 23, 2019 at 6:55 PM Alexey Goncharuk > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nikolay, > > > > > > > > Yes, I've rechecked, the new service processor is being used. I'll > > file a > > > > bug shortly. > > > > &g

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

Nikolay, > > > > > > Yes, I've rechecked, the new service processor is being used. I'll > file a > > > bug shortly. > > > > > > пн, 23 дек. 2019 г. в 17:33, Николай Ижиков : > > > > > > > Alexey, are you sure, you are tes

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

ice processor is being used. I'll file a > > bug shortly. > > > > пн, 23 дек. 2019 г. в 17:33, Николай Ижиков : > > > > > Alexey, are you sure, you are testing new service framework? > > > > > > Is yes - you definitely should file a bug. > &g

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

you are testing new service framework? > > > > Is yes - you definitely should file a bug. > > > > > 23 дек. 2019 г., в 17:02, Alexey Goncharuk > > написал(а): > > > > > > Igniters, > > > > > > I have a question based on

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

ек. 2019 г., в 17:02, Alexey Goncharuk > написал(а): > > > > Igniters, > > > > I have a question based on one of my recent tests debugging. > > > > The test is related to Ignite services. I noticed that sometimes a proxy > > invocation of a newly deployed ser

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

Alexey, are you sure, you are testing new service framework? Is yes - you definitely should file a bug. > 23 дек. 2019 г., в 17:02, Alexey Goncharuk > написал(а): > > Igniters, > > I have a question based on one of my recent tests debugging. > > The test is relat

Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

Igniters, I have a question based on one of my recent tests debugging. The test is related to Ignite services. I noticed that sometimes a proxy invocation of a newly deployed service fails because the service cannot be found. I managed to reduce the test to a simple "start two nodes, dep

Re: A question

Hi Maria, Yes, it should work with your classes. It worth noting, that "lastName" will be accessible in your queries, "SELECT lastName FROM ..." should work. Note that you should use simply "lastName" in SQL but not "general.lastName". By the way, usually it is better to write such questions to I

A question

Hello! Qould you please tell me, can I get Embeddable field data by sql query? My field is (I need to get lastNamefrow sql query): @Table(name = "rzd_employee") public class EmployeeExtVO implements Serializable { ... @Embedded @QuerySqlField private GeneralAttrs gene

Re: StackOverflow question about encryption

Hello, Dmitriy. You are absolutely right. I put the same answer on the SO, already. В Вт, 23/07/2019 в 13:36 +0300, Dmitriy Pavlov пишет: > Thank you, Stephen. I've checked this question. For now, it seems to me > that keys are different on 2 different nodes. Why it can happen, it

Re: StackOverflow question about encryption

Thank you, Stephen. I've checked this question. For now, it seems to me that keys are different on 2 different nodes. Why it can happen, it is not so clear for me. TDE verifies digests of master keys of nodes joining to cluster. These digests should be equal. Equal keys give the same digests

Re: StackOverflow question about encryption

Assume he means this one: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/57124826/apache-ignite-transparent-data-encryption-master-key-digest-differs-node-join > On 23 Jul 2019, at 11:02, Dmitriy Pavlov wrote: > > Hi Vladimir, could you please share link to the question? > > вт, 23 июл.

Re: StackOverflow question about encryption

Hi Vladimir, could you please share link to the question? вт, 23 июл. 2019 г. в 12:47, Vladimir Pligin : > Hi igniters, > > I can see a question on SO > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com. The question is > related to encryption. > Nikolay Izhikov, as far

StackOverflow question about encryption

Hi igniters, I can see a question on SO http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com. The question is related to encryption. Nikolay Izhikov, as far as know you're the author of the feature and unfortunately I don't know anyone else who is familiar with it. Could you ple

Re: Case sensitive indexes question.

00 от stanilovsky evgeny < > estanilovs...@gridgain.com>: > > > > > > > >--- Forwarded message --- > >From: "Vladimir Ozerov" < voze...@gridgain.com > > >To: dev < dev@ignite.apache.org > > >Cc: arzamas...@mail.ru > >Sub

Re: Case sensitive indexes question.

> >To: dev < dev@ignite.apache.org > >Cc: arzamas...@mail.ru >Subject: Re: Case sensitive indexes question. >Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2018 15:27:02 +0300 > >I think that this is not an exceptional case, as nothing is broken. >Throwing exception may make migration from othe

Re: Case sensitive indexes question.

I think that this is not an exceptional case, as nothing is broken. Throwing exception may make migration from other systems harder. Warning should be enough. Also remember that all SQL caches already have 1-2 automatic indexes out of the box, and we haven't seen much performance complaints about t

Re: Case sensitive indexes question.

Zhenya, Vladimir suggested not to restrict anything. However, my opinion is to throw exception on duplicating indexes. We should better add ability to rename index if it can be useful for anyone. Having same field set indexed with same index type is pretty strange and adds a lot of risk for perfor

Re: Case sensitive indexes question.

kiy >: > > > >--- Forwarded message --- >From: "Vladimir Ozerov" < voze...@gridgain.com > >To: dev < dev@ignite.apache.org > >Cc: >Subject: Re: Case sensitive indexes question. >Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2018 23:11:50 +0300 > >Hi Zhenya, >

Re: Case sensitive indexes question.

usage will create > different ones and quotation absence will create index name in upper > registry. > 3. what index, query planner would be use? > 4. and main question: why do we need this functional? > > i found that other vendors not allow such indexes [2] > > if we ca

Case sensitive indexes question.

ent index structures. 2. documentation [1] not clarify that quotation usage will create different ones and quotation absence will create index name in upper registry. 3. what index, query planner would be use? 4. and main question: why do we need this functional? i found that other vendors no

Re: [QUESTION] SegmentAware holder initialization (fix of WAL blocked rollOver)

d to be investigate. > > If you already have fix for it, please will create task and add me to the > watchers. Or I can fix it by myself. > > -- > Best regards, > Anton Kalashnikov > > > 28.09.2018, 16:06, "Maxim Muzafarov" : > > Igniters, > > &

Re: [QUESTION] SegmentAware holder initialization (fix of WAL blocked rollOver)

d add me to the watchers. Or I can fix it by myself. --  Best regards, Anton Kalashnikov 28.09.2018, 16:06, "Maxim Muzafarov" : > Igniters, > > I would like to discuss this question here and create a separate topic for > it. Previously, I've posted some comments on the p

[QUESTION] SegmentAware holder initialization (fix of WAL blocked rollOver)

Igniters, I would like to discuss this question here and create a separate topic for it. Previously, I've posted some comments on the probable issue in Apache Ignite 2.7 topic [2]. My question is related to the IGNITE-8559 [3] (commit [4]). We've added a new SegmentAware class and

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-9641) Web console: inconsistent 'question' icon behaviour

Pavel Konstantinov created IGNITE-9641: -- Summary: Web console: inconsistent 'question' icon behaviour Key: IGNITE-9641 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9641 Proje

Re: Quick question on data and index pages

Hi, 1. As the name implies, indirectCount is the count of indirect items, which are references to direct items. According to our DataPage format, we keep all items in the beginning of the page. Take a look at this diagram: https://cwiki-test.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/73632614/Part

Quick question on data and index pages

Hi, 1. What are direct and indirect count in data page header used for? What is the difference? [ https://cwiki-test.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Ignite+Durable+Memory+-+under+the+hood#IgniteDurableMemory-underthehood-Freelists ] 2. Are data pages organized in a B+ tree structure or inde

Re: [Question] Where could I find the ignite website template?

Hi Wu, I don't see any obstacles why you can't reuse our design. In general, we don't have any specific template. Our site is a set of custom CSS and HTML files stored here: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ignite/site/trunk Feel free to reach out to Prachi (copied) who helps us a lot with the

[Question] Where could I find the ignite website template?

Hi ignite community I am PPMC member of Apache SkyWalking(Incubating). I am interested in your official website[1]. It is a very good design. May I use this as the template to build SkyWalking's new website[2]? And where could I find the template source codes? [1] https://ignite.apache.org/i

Re: A quick question on cluster topology and partitions?

On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 5:20 PM, John Wilson wrote: > Regarding 1. I'm referring to the documentation here, > https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/topology-validation, which states > "*Topology > validator is used to verify that cluster topology is valid for further > cache operations*." and "*If t

Re: A quick question on cluster topology and partitions?

Regarding 1. I'm referring to the documentation here, https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/topology-validation, which states "*Topology validator is used to verify that cluster topology is valid for further cache operations*." and "*If topology validator is not configured, then the cluster topology

Re: A quick question on cluster topology and partitions?

On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 4:03 PM, John Wilson wrote: > Hi, > > >1. What exactly is a cluster topology? What makes a cluster topology >invalid for further cache operations? > Cluster topology is a set of Ignite nodes in the cluster. I do not think a cluster topology could be invalid on its

A quick question on cluster topology and partitions?

Hi, 1. What exactly is a cluster topology? What makes a cluster topology invalid for further cache operations? 2. Why do we have the concept of partitions in Ignite? Why don't we have a key-to-node mapping rather than a key-to-partition and a partition-to-node mapping? Thanks, Jo

Fwd: Question on peer class loading

Hi, Cross posting to user list. dev list is intended for contribution related discussions. Sincerely, -- Forwarded message - From: vbm Date: чт, 7 июн. 2018 г. в 10:55 Subject: Question on peer class loading To: Hi, I have a Ignite server running with 3rd partyDB (MYSQL). I

Question on peer class loading

Hi, I have a Ignite server running with 3rd partyDB (MYSQL). I have the below configuration in xml file: * * ... On the server the jar for mysql jdbc driver is present iand the servers are coming up successfully. I have placed the mysql jdbc driver in a seperate folder and a

Re: A quick question on Ignite's B+ tree implementation

; The documentation here, > https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/memory-architecture > <https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/memory-architecture>, states that each > index node (including internal nodes) store information to access the data > page and offset for the key in question (not

Re: Cassandra configuration SO question

Andrey, You are right. Somehow, I have not noticed that. Thanks for your help. Best Regards, Igor On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 8:27 PM, Andrey Gura wrote: > I've commented first reply to the question. But actualy I didn't test it. > > On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Andrey G

Re: Cassandra configuration SO question

I've commented first reply to the question. But actualy I didn't test it. On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Andrey Gura wrote: > org.*h2*.jdbc.JdbcSQLException > > It isn't realted with JDBC. He uses schema name instead of table name > for insert. > > On Thu, Jun

Re: Cassandra configuration SO question

1.my_java_class_name* instead of just *cache1*. >> >> >> >> Igor >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan >> wrote: >> >> > Igor, which Igor are you asking? (no pun intended) P

Re: Cassandra configuration SO question

kes sense > > to explicitly add him to CC. > > > > D. > > > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Igor Sapego wrote: > > > > > Igor, > > > > > > Can you please take a look at this question at SO? > > > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/44589774/configure- > > > apache-ignite-cache-with-cassandra-and-odbc/44630522 > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > Igor > > > > > >

Re: Cassandra configuration SO question

(no pun intended) Perhaps it makes sense > to explicitly add him to CC. > > D. > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Igor Sapego wrote: > > > Igor, > > > > Can you please take a look at this question at SO? > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/

Re: Cassandra configuration SO question

Igor, which Igor are you asking? (no pun intended) Perhaps it makes sense to explicitly add him to CC. D. On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Igor Sapego wrote: > Igor, > > Can you please take a look at this question at SO? > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/44589774/conf

Cassandra configuration SO question

Igor, Can you please take a look at this question at SO? https://stackoverflow.com/questions/44589774/configure-apache-ignite-cache-with-cassandra-and-odbc/44630522 Best Regards, Igor

Re: Cassandra related SO question

I'll look it it. Igor On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 3:24 AM, Igor Sapego wrote: > Igor, > > Can you please take a look at this question at SO? > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/44512192/ignite-put- > function-for-cassandra-malfunction-in-c > > Best Regards, > Igor >

Cassandra related SO question

Igor, Can you please take a look at this question at SO? https://stackoverflow.com/questions/44512192/ignite-put-function-for-cassandra-malfunction-in-c Best Regards, Igor

Re: Cassandra related question

Val, I replied to the thread. Igor On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Valentin Kulichenko < valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > Igor, > > Can you please take a look at this question from a user? Is it a bug? > > http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Ignite-

Cassandra related question

Igor, Can you please take a look at this question from a user? Is it a bug? http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Ignite-Cassandra-Exception-td13529.html -Val

Re: waiting for partition release question

gt;> > >> > > * Two threads now hold the lock >> > >> > > >> > >> > > There is a theoretical possibility of transferring lock ownership >> > >> > > information during rebalancing, but this opens up whole lot n

Re: waiting for partition release question

> > >> > > * Two threads now hold the lock > > >> > > > > >> > > There is a theoretical possibility of transferring lock ownership > > >> > > information during rebalancing, but this opens up whole lot new > race > > >&g

Re: waiting for partition release question

ncing, but this opens up whole lot new race > >> > > conditions and failover difficulties. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > 2017-05-19 12:52 GMT+03:00 Дмитрий Рябов : > >> > > > >> > > > May

Re: waiting for partition release question

; > > >> > > 2017-05-19 12:52 GMT+03:00 Дмитрий Рябов : >> > > >> > > > May be let second node to finish join and enter the ring, but start >> > > > rebalance after all lock will be released. >> > > > >> > > &g

Re: waiting for partition release question

ficulties. > > > > > > > > > 2017-05-19 12:52 GMT+03:00 Дмитрий Рябов : > > > > > > > May be let second node to finish join and enter the ring, but start > > > > rebalance after all lock will be released. > > > > > > > > 2

Re: waiting for partition release question

sed. > > > > > > 2017-05-19 12:30 GMT+03:00 ALEKSEY KUZNETSOV >: > > > > > > > If we acquired a lock and a new node is joining cluster, should it > wait > > > for > > > > lock release? > > > > May

Re: waiting for partition release question

gt; > May be let second node to finish join and enter the ring, but start > > rebalance after all lock will be released. > > > > 2017-05-19 12:30 GMT+03:00 ALEKSEY KUZNETSOV : > > > > > If we acquired a lock and a new node is joining cluster, should it wait > &g

Re: waiting for partition release question

ired a lock and a new node is joining cluster, should it wait > for > > lock release? > > May be it could proceed joining ? > > The question comes from my ticket > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-2671 > > > > чт, 18 мая 2017 г. в 20:05, Alexey Gonc

  1   2   3   >