MOVING Partitions and Rebalancing

Hi All, As part of the text queries overhaul effort, I am looking into the following ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12401 As I understand it, the problem lies in the fact that a partition can move, thus causing duplicate data between two Lucene indices (on different nodes).

flaky test SqlSystemViewsSelfTest.testCachesViews

Hello, Igniters. There is a PR for this problem https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15042 https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/9215 test failed due to affinity.toString comparison Contains a lot of unnecessary fields. -- Best regards, Sergei Ryzhov

Re: Apache Ignite 2.11

Hi, Nikita! As I can see, these are the tickets we need to document [1] Can you tell me how long it will take to complete work on documentation? [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20'Ignite'%20AND%20fixVersion%20is%20not%20empty%20AND%20fixVersion%20in%20('2.11')%20AND

Re: Apache Ignite 2.11

Alexey, Some of these tickets are already documented. Do we need to clear the "Docs Required" flag if documentation for the ticket has been merged to the master and release branch? AFAIK we didn't do that for previous releases. пн, 5 июл. 2021 г. в 13:53, Alexey Gidaspov : > Hi, Nikita! > > As I

Re: IGNITE-14812: Statistics

Hello Igniters, I'd be glad to help with documenting this functionality. I do believe that it won't take long. Hope to finish it before the end of next week to have enough time for docs discussion. Regards, Nikita ср, 23 июн. 2021 г. в 18:11, Ivan Daschinsky : > AFAIK, it is enough to include m

Re: Setting IGNITE_TO_STRING_INCLUDE_SENSITIVE=false prevents VM Arguments output

+1 to Ivan’s idea about adding extra param to IgniteSystemProperties. > Ok, and what's about other VM arguments, not included to > IgniteSystemProperties? IMO all VM arguments should be considered sensitive except those annotated with @IgniteSystemProperties(sensitive=false). -- Regards, Kons

Re: IEP-76 Thin Client Protocol for Ignite 3.0

Igniters, I've updated the IEP to support "Live Schema" [1] from IEP-54. Some operations now have schemaless variants, where tuples are serialized as maps (String -> val). [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-54%3A+Schema-first+Approach#IEP54:SchemafirstApproach-Dynamicschem

Re: Apache Ignite 2.11

Hi guys! Alexey, I do confirm that some of the issues are already resolved (for example, IGNITE-14658 is already documented). What is more, some of the tickets seem to be minor or "very internal" things that do not change the behaviour/are not a

Ignite 3.0 Tuple API: how to check if value is null?

Igniters, Looks like Tuple API has no efficient way to tell if a value for a nullable column of primitive type is null. - Tuple#intValue() will return 0 when the actual value is null => not clear if 0 is 0 or null. - Tuple#value() works, but is more expensive due to boxing and type lookup. Any i

Re: Ignite 3.0 Tuple API: how to check if value is null?

Pavel, That's a good point, but I don't think there is a significantly better way of doing this in Java. There should be a way to check if a field is nullable or not though. Schema already provides this information, doesn't it? -Val On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 11:03 AM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > Igni

Re: Ignite 3.0 Tuple API: how to check if value is null?

Val, > I don't think there is a significantly better way > of doing this in Java. Yep looks like there is no way to return two values without boxing. No ref, no out, no value types. > Schema already provides this information, doesn't it? It does, though we don't have an agreement on how to expo

Re: Ignite 3.0 Tuple API: how to check if value is null?

Sorry, but what is wrong with simple method isNull() вт, 6 июл. 2021 г., 09:55 Pavel Tupitsyn : > Val, > > > I don't think there is a significantly better way > > of doing this in Java. > > Yep looks like there is no way to return two values without boxing. > No ref, no out, no value types. > > >

Re: IEP-76 Thin Client Protocol for Ignite 3.0

Ivan, Val, and others - are there any open objections or questions? Can we accept the proposal? On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 1:28 PM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > Igniters, > > I've updated the IEP to support "Live Schema" [1] from IEP-54. > Some operations now have schemaless variants, where tuples are ser