Hi, Rodion!
Could you please provide your Apache JIRA login name?
On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 5:37 PM Rodion Smolnikov wrote:
>
> Hello!
> Can I get contributor access?
> Task https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14474
>
> --
>
> Rodion Smolnikov
>
> +7(915)256-54-81
> Software Developer, Rus
Granted Contributor role. Feel free to assign issues.
On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 6:25 PM Smolnikov wrote:
>
> My username is "Smolnikov"
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
Hi, Mikhail!
I've looked at the problem and the fix. The root cause of the problem
is MetricsRegistry design which allows to register metrics in two
ways:
- using a family of methods like MetricRegistre.register(..,
XxxSupplier, ...) and MetricRegistry.xxxMetric. These methods firstly
create metr
Stan
> If archive size is less than min or more than max then the system
> functionality can degrade (e.g. historical rebalance may not work as
> expected).
Why does the condition "archive size is less than min" lead to system
degradation? Actually, the described case is a normal situation for
Maksim,
why do you want to include just one phase of functionality into
release instead of full implementation? History of Ignie development
shows (at least from my point of view) that it is bad practice. As
result users will have unfinished and badly tested functionality. We
have (or had in the p
Hi,
I think that scope should be limited by public API for beginning.
Also I don't sure that we should support specific tags like @apiNote,
@implSpec, @implNote.
Let's move using the following plan:
1. Create an empty (effectively) checkstyle config for javadoc
checking and commit it to the rep
Hi,
I understand that this rule seems too strict or may be weird. But
removing the rule could lead to review comments like "use future
instead of fut". So my proposal is to change rule from "required" to
"recommended".
On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 2:49 PM Valentin Kulichenko
wrote:
>
> Konstantin, th
Hi, Ilya
Could you please provide more details about how it should work (in
issue description)? E.g. what if I pass the cache group name instead
of the name of a particular cache? What if I will not pass any cache
names?
Also we don't use the word "statistics" anymore (while it is still
called st
lic and many private APIs is absolutely
> essential for this project, its growth and maturity.
>
> I'm surprised this community still needs to debate fundamental
> engineering issues like that...
> --
> Nikita Ivanov
>
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 4:47 AM Andrey Gura wro
Alexey,
could you please describe Transaction interface?
Also it would be great to have a couple examples of using the proposed API.
On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 4:43 PM Alexei Scherbakov
wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
> I've prepared a PR implementing my vision of public transactions API.
>
> API is very simp
Alexey, Ilya,
I took a look at the problem and corresponding fixes. It seems that
you are both right. But Alexey's fix looks like some kind of hack to
me.
We have two problems:
1. Heartbeat update from thread that will complete a future.
I agree with Ilya and Andrey. Only a critical worker itse
Looks good to me. But Idea configuration for style check is not
enough. It helps developers but does not automate style checking.
Checkstyle project provides ready to use config based on Google Code
Style [1]. I hope it matches well with Idea config and we'll avoid any
confusing incidents.
Let's
Igniters,
What I actually didn't understand from this thread: Is Guava allowed
in production code of Ignite 3 modules (not dependencies like
Calcite)?
While we agree with using shading I don't see any arguments about
using Guava library in our code base except for the fact that we have
some copy-
Follow up
On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 1:22 PM Andrey Gura wrote:
>
> Igniters,
>
> What I actually didn't understand from this thread: Is Guava allowed
> in production code of Ignite 3 modules (not dependencies like
> Calcite)?
>
> While we agree with using shading I
I mostly agree with your proposal, but, since we already have some
>> > copy-paste in our code, can we at least use Guava to remove it? So I would
>> > propose to allow at least *some* methods that we consider useful, while
>> > disallowing everything else. I understand th
hods
> then somebody will use other methods.
>
> Maybe you are right. I would suggest a vote on whether we should allow Guava
> methods in the codebase or not. Let's do that in a separate thread? In the
> meantime we will prohibit using Guava until the voting is complete.
>
&
-1
Potential compatibility issues which are related to user specific code
(services, jobs).
Potential vulnerabilities which are a problem because we can't manage
the Guava release cycle.
Arguable approach with unnecessary immutability and unmanageable GC pressure.
It's too hard to manage the *reaso
Agree that any additional object creation on a hot path could be a
problem. So hot path should not contain stream API and any other
potentially problem code (e.g. iterator instead of for by index).
On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 1:45 PM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote:
>
> Ok, maybe a total ban is overkill, but rig
+1
On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 8:16 PM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote:
>
> -1
>
> We have already started using the existing JIRA and Confluence.
> There are lots of tickets, IEPs, and commits interlinked with each other.
> Introducing a new JIRA and Confluence will cause a huge mess.
>
> On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at
Hi,
Your proposal is consistent with the current interface of
DataStorageConfiguration class, so I', okay with the proposed change.
Alternatively, DataStorageConfiguration#systemDataRegionConfiguration
field could be introduced which could be DataRegionConfiguration type
or special SystemDataRegi
he Apache Ignite Community.
Best Regards,
Andrey Gura
tion to the project since there is
> >no need to go via the patch submission process. This should enable better
> >productivity.
> >
> >Please join me in welcoming Ivan, and congratulating him on the new role in
> >the Apache Ignite Community.
> >
> >Best Regards,
> >Andrey Gura
>
>
>
>
+1 (binding)
On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 4:46 PM Denis Magda wrote:
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> —
> Denis
>
> > On Jan 25, 2022, at 2:44 PM, Valentin Kulichenko
> > wrote:
> >
> > Dear Community,
> >
> > Ignite 3 is moving forward and I think we're in a good spot to release
> > another alpha version. In
Igniters,
The new wiki section for Apache Ignite 3 contributors is created. This
page [1] is the main entry point for new and existing contributors and
the page provides information about differences in the development
process (e.g. code style, practices, etc), the product architecture,
technical
Igniters,
I'd like to start a discussion about API changes related to the data
colocation in Apache Ignite 3.0. [1]
The main purpose of the proposal is a definition of tables' colocation
from a user perspective including DDL syntax and changes related to
used terminology.
While proposed changes
+1
On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 7:22 PM Nikita Amelchev wrote:
>
> +1
>
> пт, 29 апр. 2022 г. в 17:54, Anton Vinogradov :
> >
> > +1
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 5:28 PM Maxim Muzafarov wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Community,
> > >
> > >
> > > The release candidates are ready. See the links below.
> > >
+1
On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 7:22 PM Nikita Amelchev wrote:
>
> +1
>
> пт, 29 апр. 2022 г. в 15:51, Anton Vinogradov :
> >
> > +1
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 3:48 PM Maxim Muzafarov wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Community,
> > >
> > >
> > > The release candidates are ready. See the links below.
> > >
+1
Great! Thanks!
On Sun, May 1, 2022 at 8:51 AM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote:
>
> +1, this is awesome
>
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 3:26 PM Nikita Safonov
> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Cannot but support!
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nikita
> >
> > сб, 23 апр. 2022 г. в 17:47, Maxim Muzafarov :
> >
> > > Hello,
> >
Aleksandr,
could you please create an Apache Confluence account [1] and provide
your user name?
1. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/signup.action
On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 7:24 PM Aleksandr Pakhomov wrote:
>
> Hello, Igniters. I am working on Ignite 3 REST server and a new CLI tool. I’d
> like
Permissions are granted. Please, check.
On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 1:32 PM Aleksandr Pakhomov wrote:
>
> Sure,
>
> apkhmv
>
> > On 6 May 2022, at 13:05, Andrey Gura wrote:
> >
> > Aleksandr,
> >
> > could you please create an Apache Confluence account
Aleksandr,
it would be better to finish the IEP draft and then start a discussion
thread on dev list. At the moment I see TBD sections and it makes
impossible to have a full view about the proposal.
Thanks!
On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 6:11 PM Aleksandr Pakhomov wrote:
>
> Hello, Igniters.
>
> I'd li
Hi,
I took a look at the proposal and have some questions and comments.
1. It is not clear what the main value of this proposal is. The
current implementation of REST is code-first. API specification could
be written manually. It seems that the main value is the possibility
to generate an API spe
Hi,
My two cents:
1. CLI Tool - looks like not the best name :) Shell?
2. The description says: "REPL mode is used by default and is
activated if the ignite command is executed without parameters."
I think it is a bad idea. Firstly, it is usual CLI's behaviour to
print a help for a user. An exc
I personally don't support any additional 3rd party dependencies as
well as I don't fully understand the value of autogenerated specs for
REST endpoints. In my opinion we have another option: writing spec
manually. This option doesn't require any of proposed dependencies and
allow to avoid possible
Igor,
Thanks for the proposal.
I understand that such a situation is almost impossible but "if
anything can go wrong, it will". Does the protocol take into account
that different connections on different client instances theoretically
could generate an already existing connection ID?
Also, do I
ted without
> arguments. But I did not get your point about scripting. What do you mean
> by saying “it will just hang”? What kind of error is going to be the cause
> of such behaviour?
>
> > On 18 May 2022, at 21:14, Andrey Gura wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
understands whether logical connection was restored or not.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-16928
> >
> > On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 10:27 PM Pavel Tupitsyn
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Andrey,
> > >
>
Hi Igniters,
Four months have passed already since the Ignite 3 alpha 4 release. At
the moment we have a set of features that can be released in order to
give to a user an ability to try the features and share some feedback
with the community. The expected feature list consists of:
- Pluggable
Andrey,
there is no IEP for Java API for SQL and would be great to have it.
I'll create the IEP soon.
On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 1:56 PM Andrey Mashenkov
wrote:
>
> JFYI. we have merged the initial version of SQL public API [1] and are
> going to implement it in epic [2] and I've created few ticket
e shell” enters REPL
>
> Or
>
> - “ignite” prints help
> - “ignite-shell” enters REPL and it is a separate application
>
> I prefer the first varian but I would like to hear opinions of other
> community members.
>
>
> > On 19 May 2022, at 01:16, Andrey Gura wr
ke).
> What is the right parameter here "name" or "names"?
> Also, if there won't be a compatibility test this mistake could
> go to the production and API spec consumers could get
> a REST client that is not compatible with the server.
>
>
> > On 1
-1 (binding) from me.
Because (if I understood correctly) the main value of the IEP-87 is
the possibility to generate API specification and Swagger annotations
is enough for this purpose I don't see reasons for these dependencies.
We already have our own controllers for REST-like API's
implementat
Ilya,
are there any alternatives to Swagger that you could recommend that
don't have the mentioned drawback?
It seems that OPen API itself doesn't define primitive and wrapped
types because such information is language/runtime/etc specific. Maybe
this problem will be addressed in the future.
On
Agree with Alexander. I ask the same question in the vote thread.
On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 5:47 PM Alexander Polovtcev
wrote:
>
> Aleksandr,
>
> Can we use these annotations without the micronaut dependencies? If yes,
> why do we need micronaut at all?
>
> On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 5:34 PM Aleksandr
Why couldn't the handlers be annotated?
I think Kirill Gusakov (as the feature contributor) can give some
ideas about what and how should be annotated. This may require some
tweaking.
On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 6:06 PM Aleksandr Pakhomov wrote:
>
> Hi Alexander,
>
> Yes, swagger allows to annotate
+1 from me. Open API spec could be useful in the future for
implementing external cluster management tools.
On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 11:41 AM Aleksandr Pakhomov wrote:
>
> Hi Ivan,
>
> Dependencies that are needed for annotating
> classes are going to be included. From those
> annotations Open API
context of Ignite.
>
> [1] https://micronaut-projects.github.io/micronaut-security/latest/guide/
> [2] https://objectcomputing.com/expertise/cloud-engineering
>
> On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 6:45 PM Andrey Gura wrote:
>
> > Why couldn't the handlers be annotated?
> >
> &
Aleksandr,
please, start a new vote after updating the IEP-87. I think that
Micronaut Security is a good reason for using this framework in the
Apache Ignite.
On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 5:41 PM Andrey Gura wrote:
>
> -1 (binding) from me.
>
> Because (if I understood correctly) the m
+1
On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 12:13 PM Alexander Polovtcev
wrote:
>
> Aleksandr,
> Thanks for the update, but can you please explain what security
> capabilities are planned to be used? Maybe it should be included in the IEP
> as well.
>
> On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 11:03 PM Aleksandr Pakhomov
> wrote
gt; 3 - “+1” votes received.
> 1 - “0.5” vote received.
>
> Here are +1 votes received:
>
> - Alexander Polovtcev
> - Andrey Gura
> - Ivan Pavlukhin
>
> Here is -0.5 vote received:
>
> - Ilya Kasnacheev (binding)
>
> Link to the voting thread -
> http
Igniters,
our release schedule has shifted a bit. But it is time for a code
freeze and a new branch creation.
The following issues is still in progress (not an issues status, but
work state):
Data rebalancing
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14209
CLI MVP
https://issues.apache.org/j
obably, will be ready in an hour. Just waiting for CI build.
>
> Best regards,
> Aleksandr
>
> > On 6 Jun 2022, at 17:56, Andrey Gura wrote:
> >
> > Igniters,
> >
> > our release schedule has shifted a bit. But it is time for a code
> > freeze and
And, of course, there is a code freeze for the release branch. So,
permission is required to make any changes to the release branch.
Don't hesitate to discuss such changes in this topic (except three
issues from the previous post).
On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 10:52 PM Andrey Gura wrote:
>
&g
Vadim,
Contributor role has been granted.
On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 11:36 AM Vadim Pakhnushev
wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Could you please grant contributor access to JIRA and Confluence?
> My username is vpakhnushev.
>
> Thanks!
Aleksey,
contributor role has been granted.
On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 1:56 PM Aleksey Demakov wrote:
>
> Hi Ignite community,
>
> My name is Aleksey Demakov, I'd like to contribute to the Apache
> Ignite project. Could you please grant me contributor permissions to
> jira and wiki. My username is a
some PRs with docs for new features. Can you include them in
> release?
>
> https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/850
> https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/856
> https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/857
>
>
> >Вторник, 7 июня 2022, 0:09 +04:00 от Andrey Gura :
>
ed to the main and to the
> > release branch.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 6:02 PM Aleksandr Pakhomov
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Andrey,
> > >
> > > As for CLI MVP, the planned timeline is today till 21:00.
> > >
the release?
>
> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-17128:
> PersistentPageMemoryStorageExample cannot be run twice
> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-17129: cli tool doesn't
> expand tilde in a config path
>
> пн, 6 июн. 2022 г. в 19:56, Andrey Gura
Kirill, thanks for help!
I've already targeted this issue to the current release. Make me know
when the issue will be ready to merge.
On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 5:59 PM ткаленко кирилл wrote:
>
> Hello everyone, I would like to fix the identified bug when destroying the
> table for persistent PageM
sues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-17126
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-17126>
>
> Thanks
>
> > On 6 Jun 2022, at 17:56, Andrey Gura wrote:
> >
> > Igniters,
> >
> > our release schedule has shifted a bit. But it is time for a c
browse/IGNITE-17127
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-17106
>
>
> >Вторник, 7 июня 2022, 19:07 +04:00 от Andrey Gura :
> >
> >Aleksandr,
> >
> >okay, looks like a harmless change with documentation fixes. Targeted
> >to the release. Notify m
Igor,
Thanks for your efforts. All changes have been merged.
On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 5:41 PM Игорь Гусев wrote:
>
>
>
> I fixed issues with the PRs mentioned earlier, so hopefully they can be
> merged.
>
> >Вторник, 7 июня 2022, 16:45 +04:00 от Andrey Gura :
>
des.
> It'll be in main in a couple hours.
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-17057
>
> On Wed, Jun 8, 2022 at 9:27 AM Андрей Хитрин
> wrote:
>
> > Looks reasonable to me. IGNITE-17129 could wait for the next release. Thank
> > you!
>
for the next release. Thank
> > you!
> >
> > вт, 7 июн. 2022 г. в 20:05, Andrey Gura :
> >
> > > Andrey,
> > >
> > > while IGNITE-17128 is okay just because it demonstrates some
> > > functionality, IGNITE-17129 doesn't look
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-16963
> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-17088
>
> пн, 6 июн. 2022 г. в 22:52, Andrey Gura :
>
> > Igniters,
> >
> > ignite-3.0.0-alpha5 release branch has been created. But the following
> >
the release scope:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-17139
>
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 5:56 PM Andrey Gura wrote:
>
> > Igniters,
> >
> > our release schedule has shifted a bit. But it is time for a code
> > freeze and a new branch creation.
> >
&
n Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 5:56 PM Andrey Gura wrote:
>
> > Igniters,
> >
> > our release schedule has shifted a bit. But it is time for a code
> > freeze and a new branch creation.
> >
> > The following issues is still in progress (not an issues s
Thanks a lot to all! We are ready to vote.
On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 2:28 PM Andrey Gura wrote:
>
> Targeted to the release.
>
> Thanks, Alexander.
>
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 2:09 PM Alexander Polovtcev
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello again, there's another issue t
Dear Community,
In the last few month the following major features have been added:
- Pluggable storages: ability to choose a specific storage for a
table (RocksDB based storage, Page memory persistent and in-memory
storage) with some known limitations.
- Compute API (A simple remote job exec
; >
> > On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 1:37 AM Valentin Kulichenko <
> > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 9:17 AM Alexander Polovtcev <
> > > alexpolovt...@gmail.com>
> > >
Igniters,
Apache Ignite 3.0.0-alpha5 RC1 has been accepted.
7 "+1" votes received:
- Semyon Danilov
- Kirill Tkalenko
- Alexander Polovtcev
- Valentin Kulichenko (binding)
- Igor Sapego (binding)
- Pavel Tupitsyn (binding)
- Andrey Gura (binding)
No
Igniters,
I'm happy to announce that the 5th alpha version of Ignite 3 is out!
On top of the functionality that was previously released, Alpha 5 adds
the following major features:
- Pluggable storages: ability to choose a specific storage for a
table (RocksDB based storage, Page memory persiste
Hi,
> 1. Is MVCC the only atomicity mode that supports SQL transactions?
Yes, only TRANSACTIONAL_SNAPSHOT atomicity mode is applicable to SQL.
> What if
I create a table with TRANSACTIONAL atomicity? Will it fall back to like
optimistic/pessimistic transactions (OCC/PCC), or just no transaction
The main question here is : what is the node URL? How will the user
know a port from a wide port range?
On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 3:01 PM Vadim Pakhnushev
wrote:
>
> Hi Igniters!
> After implementing commands for CLI tool listed in the IEP-88
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP
Igniters,
What is the purpose of this vote? There is no problem during
discussion of the IEP. Silent consensus is enough here.
As I understand, aforementioned dependencies don't affect production
code, so this item doesn't require a voting process.
+1 from me. But it seems that we can go forward
Hi, Igniters!
It's time for a new release of Apache Ignite 3 beta 1. The expected
feature list consists of:
- RPM and DEB packages: simplified installation and node management
with system services.
- Client's Partition Awareness: Clients are now aware of data
distribution over the cluster nodes w
Igniters,
Due to personal reasons I need to take a pause so we need a new
release manager for the Apache Ignite 3 beta 1 release.
The best option is a PMC member. Committer is also a good option, but
it will need some help from PMC members.
Please feel free to submit your candidacy in this threa
ne is 14th
october. Tomorrow I will announce the scope freeze officially. It
means that any issue could be added to the release only after
discussion with the community and a release manager.
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 7:41 AM Aleksandr Pakhomov wrote:
>
> +1
>
> > On 7 Oct 2022, at 23
15:08, :
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I’ll be happy to do this.
> >
> > I’ll need help from a PMC to do the steps requiring PMC permissions but I
> > can do most of the work.
> >
> > Any PMC who is ready to support me in this?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Stan
&
see.
>
> чт, 13 окт. 2022 г. в 16:34, Stanislav Lukyanov :
>
> > Thanks Slava. For me, that's a dream team of two! :)
> > Happy to work in this way if there are no objections.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Stan
> >
> > > On 13 Oct 2022, at 17:08, Andr
Igniters,
The 'ignite-3.0.0-beta1' branch was created (the latest commit is
8160ef31ecf8d49f227562b6f0ab090c6b4438c1).
The scope for the release is frozen.
It means the following:
- Any issue could be added to the release (fixVersion == 3.0.0-beta1)
only after discussion with the community and
Igniters,
Vyacheslav Koptilin () is a release manager
for the Apache Ignite 3.0.0 beta 1 release.
Stan Lukyanov () will assist Vyacheslav.
Slava, Stan, thanks a lot for your help!
+1
On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 10:36 AM Nikita Amelchev wrote:
>
> +1
>
> Checked compilation, ran some examples.
>
> пт, 9 дек. 2022 г. в 03:53, Alexandr Shapkin :
> >
> > Dear Community,
> >
> >
> > The release candidates are ready.
> >
> > These are new Ignite Spark integrations based on Spark 2.4
+1 for Alexey Goncharuk (binding)
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 9:07 PM Denis Magda wrote:
>
> +1 for Nikolay Izhikov (binding)
>
> -
> Denis
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 11:06 AM Denis Magda wrote:
>
> > Ignite community,
> >
> > Please cast a vote for one of the following candidates:
> >
> >- A
Units just can be added to a metric description. What is the purpose
of dedicated field for it?
We doesn't provide any API for work with measurement units and should
not do it. Metrics interpretation is responsibility of external
systems for metrics gathering. Enum with metrics measurement doesn't
ask
> developers to not forget to specify units in description?
> But with enum we can make it mandatory field. Or write a test that will
> check all metrics for "not null" for this field.
>
> What do you think?
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 6:28 PM Andrey Gura wrote
n make it mandatory field. Or write a test that will
> > check all metrics for "not null" for this field.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 6:28 PM Andrey Gura wrote:
> >
> >> Units just can be added to a metric des
Hi, Mirza!
I've granted contributor role to your account.
Welcome on board.
On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 6:55 PM Мирза Алиев wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> I would like to start to contribute, could you please add me to
> contributors list? My login for https://issues.apache.org/ is maliev
>
> Best regards,
It seems that JIRA have some troubles with link building.
Fixed link:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20IGNITE%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20%22Patch%20Available%22)%20AND%20component%20%3D%20ml%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20newbie%20ORDER%20BY%20prio
Hi, Mikhail!
Could you please describe the case for this new event?
On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 12:45 PM Mikhail Petrov wrote:
>
> Hello, Igniters.
>
> There is a case which requires to handle joining node validation failure
> in Ignite components and obtain information of the node that tried to
> j
gt;>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Mikhail.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Forwarded Message
> >> Subject:Re: Joining node validation failure event.
> >> Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 21:43:33 +0300
> >> F
>From my point of view, Ignite should provide meaningful metrics for
internal components that could be useful for monitoring and analysis.
All suggested options are meaningless in a sense. Below I'll try
explain why.
>* `get`, `put`, `remove` time histograms. Measured for API calls on the caller
Igniters,
recently I run build with checkstyle profile on Windows machine and
got 8 issues related to the "NewlineAtEndOfFile" rule while there are
no problems on my Linux machine.
I investigated the problem and suggest explicitly configure this rule
by LF separator. See [1] for more details.
I
etter to upgrade the checkstyle plugin version?
> > > > It seems the issue has been fixed since 8.21 version (currently we have
> > > > 8.19)
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://checkstyle.org/releasenotes.html#Release_8.21
> > > >
> > > > O
es.
>
> Good, let’s do it?
>
> > So, from my point of view, commits for get/put/remove and commit/rollback
> > should be reverted.
>
> I disagree here.
> If you have a better approach to measure cache operations performance -
> please, share your vision.
>
>
s transaction performance.
>
> I think we should provide a way to measure part of the business transaction
> that relates to the Ignite.
>
>
> > 20 дек. 2019 г., в 13:02, Andrey Gura написал(а):
> >
> >> The goal of the proposed metrics is to measure whole
w it relates to business operations? Is it become slower or faster?
> What does it mean for an application performance?
>
> On the other hand - if `PuTime` increased - then we know for sure, all
> operation executing `put` becomes slower.
>
> *Why* it’s become slower - is the esse
the producers.
> `fetch-latency-avg` - The average time taken for a fetch request.
>
> It seems, they implement a similar approach to what I proposed.
>
>
> [1] https://docs.confluent.io/current/kafka/monitoring.html#producer-metrics
> [2]
> https://docs.confluent.io/current/
t be visible?
> >>
> >> For example, the user saw «checkpoint time» metric becomes x2 bigger.
> >> How it relates to business operations? Is it become slower or faster?
> >> What does it mean for an application performance?
> >>
> >> On th
Hi,
The first, I agree with Alexey about deprecation of APIs that are
still supported and don't offer reasonable substitution.
The second, from my point of view, we can't recommend
MetricExporterSpi's because it are still not-production ready. There
are some issues with it and usage of ReadOnlyMe
1 - 100 of 564 matches
Mail list logo
