Hi All,
Please find PR for the aforementioned issue:
https://github.com/apache/ignite-extensions/pull/63
@Данилов Семён Please help in reviewing.
Regards,
Atri
--
Regards,
Atri
Apache Concerted
+1
Checked on macOS, played with the new expiry APIs and a bunch of
thefundamentals.
> On 17 Jun 2021, at 12:46, Pavel Tupitsyn wrote:
>
> +1
>
> Checked pip install from tar.gz on Python 3.8 on Ubuntu 20.04, ran some of
> the examples.
>
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 2:32 PM Igor Sapego wrote:
Ivan,
> why do you use PooledMessageBufferOutput in benchmarks?
To make it fair. Ignite uses thread-local reusable buffers, see [1].
> why packer from msgpack-core show better performance than
> BinaryWriter. And I suppose that benchmark is not quite fair.
MsgPack writes and reads less bytes,
>> To make it fair. Ignite uses thread-local reusable buffers, see [1].
I know, but PooledMessageBufferOutput is not about thread-local, isn't it?
I'm not against about MsgPack, I'm for fair and not biased comparison.
I suppose that MsgPack is an ideal candidate for thin client binary
protocol, n
Oh… can someone else check this: it appears that authenticated connections fail.
With Ignite 2.10 the connection times-out:
[10:28:58,015][WARNING][grid-timeout-worker-#22][ClientListenerNioListener]
Unable to perform handshake within timeout [timeout=1,
remoteAddr=/127.0.0.1:54044]
Didn’t
There is a test for it.
пт, 18 июн. 2021 г. в 12:30, Stephen Darlington <
stephen.darling...@gridgain.com>:
> Oh… can someone else check this: it appears that authenticated connections
> fail.
>
> With Ignite 2.10 the connection times-out:
>
> [10:28:58,015][WARNING][grid-timeout-worker-#22][Clie
Just rechecked test on release branch, add extra check with cluster
activation and putting some data -- everything works ok. Authentication
enabled, persistence enabled,
with and without ssl. Could you please provide you ignite config and your
code.
пт, 18 июн. 2021 г. в 12:46, Ivan Daschinsky :
AHA! I see, this is not a bug -- this is a feature. If you pass username
and password, we explicitly set use_ssl=True. So if your cluster is
configured without ssl but with authentication,
you should explicitly pass use_ssl=False.
This behaviour is from old version and I suppose it is correct. Who
And this behavior is thoroughly described in docs
https://apache-ignite-binary-protocol-client.readthedocs.io/en/latest/examples.html#password-authentication
пт, 18 июн. 2021 г. в 12:59, Ivan Daschinsky :
> AHA! I see, this is not a bug -- this is a feature. If you pass username
> and password, w
>> we explicitly set use_ssl=True.
Sorry, typo -- implicitly
пт, 18 июн. 2021 г. в 12:59, Ivan Daschinsky :
> AHA! I see, this is not a bug -- this is a feature. If you pass username
> and password, we explicitly set use_ssl=True. So if your cluster is
> configured without ssl but with authentic
I suppose that we should not cancel this release, despite the fact that
this is not obvious behaviour. This is not a regression, this behaviour is
documented and this behaviour lasts for few years. Lets remove it, if the
majority are against it, but in the next release.
пт, 18 июн. 2021 г. в 13:08
Well,
This behaviour maybe is not obvious, but it seems to be safe and
should not cause user issues. On the other hand, if we change this
behavior now, it may lead to implicit disable of SSL for users that
updated their client which seems more dangerous to me.
So I'd keep the current behaviour.
You’re right, it’s documented and works as described. My bad.
> On 18 Jun 2021, at 11:24, Igor Sapego wrote:
>
> Well,
>
> This behaviour maybe is not obvious, but it seems to be safe and
> should not cause user issues. On the other hand, if we change this
> behavior now, it may lead to implici
> Agree. I think you can start a discussion and change some abbrevs if you
wish.
How about keeping the abbreviation map file inside the Ignite repo?
In this case, you may change the abbreviation by issue/pr covered by a
green TC check.
On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 11:36 AM Nikolay Izhikov
wrote:
> >
+1 from me.
Checked on Win10:
- Python 3.8.8
- pip install pyignite-0.5.0-cp38-cp38-win_amd64.whl
- in-memory cluster 3x servers
All examples from 'pyignite-0.5.0.zip' work without errors. Errors in
server logs not found.
Also checked for correct reconnection in the failover example.
пт, 18 июн.
> in-memory cluster 3x servers
I forgot to write about the Ignite version: checked with Ignite-2.10 binary
release.
пт, 18 июн. 2021 г. в 14:37, Shishkov Ilya :
> +1 from me.
>
> Checked on Win10:
> - Python 3.8.8
> - pip install pyignite-0.5.0-cp38-cp38-win_amd64.whl
> - in-memory cluster 3x se
+1 (binding)
> 18 июня 2021 г., в 14:41, Shishkov Ilya написал(а):
>
>> in-memory cluster 3x servers
>
> I forgot to write about the Ignite version: checked with Ignite-2.10 binary
> release.
>
> пт, 18 июн. 2021 г. в 14:37, Shishkov Ilya :
>
>> +1 from me.
>>
>> Checked on Win10:
>> - Pytho
Folks,
The CLI management machinery [1] for snapshots restore procedure
merged to the master branch.
Can we cherry-pick it to the release branch?
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14723
On Tue, 15 Jun 2021 at 12:51, Alexey Gidaspov wrote:
>
> Hi, Nikita!
>
> I think it's ok to in
Hello, Igniters!
Release pyignite-0.5.0-rc1 has been accepted.
The votes received:
3 "+1" binding votes
4 "+1" votes
There are no "+0" or "-1"
Here the votes received:
- Igor Sapego (binding) +1
- Pavel Tupitsyn (binding) +1
- Nickolay Izhikov (binding) +1
- Ivan Daschinsky +1
- Alexander Surko
Hi Igniters,
I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are more than
welcomed to help.
If your changes can lead to this failure(s): We're grateful that you were a
volunteer to make the contribution to this project, but things change and you
may no longer be able to finalize
20 matches
Mail list logo
