Re: [DISCUSSION][IEP-80] Breaking changes in Ignite-2.x

LGTM. Merged to master. Thank you for your contribution! On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 12:20 PM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > Folks, > > This is a friendly reminder :-) > PR [1] is ready for review. Will anyone take a look? > > [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/9577/files > > On Sat, 20 Nov 2021 a

Re: [DISCUSS] PMC Chair rotation time

Igniters, I'd suggest 2 candidates who perfectly fit this role, in my opinion: Nickolay Izhikov - one of the most active community member with the significant contributions, Ignite's evangelist and tech-speaker. Alexey Goncharuk - Ignite's veteran, one of the Ignite's code-base expert with the pr

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

Hi, Alexey Please attach a reproducer to the ticket. As far as I remember we have the following behaviour for the proxies: Let's assume you have deployed service from node A, then: * if you invoke service locally from node A - it is guaranteed to service to be deployed and ready to work * if you

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

; proxy is created on node B, and "service not found" exception gets thrown > to a user anyway. Perhaps, the retry happens too fast? > > Created a ticket [1]. > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12490 > > пн, 23 дек. 2019 г. в 22:08, Vyacheslav Daradur :

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

oxy 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 > way to wait for the proper deployment? > > вт, 24 дек. 2019 г. в 12:

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

al deployment looks broken: if a compute job > is sent to a remote node after the service deployment, the job execution > may fail due to this error. > > Should we schedule this ticket for the further work on Services IEP? > > вт, 24 дек. 2019 г. в 18:49, Vyacheslav Daradur

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

Alexey, I've prepared pr [1] to show our proxy invocation guarantees and to avoid misunderstanding. Please, let me know if you think that we should improve our guaranties in some cases. [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/7213 On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 7:27 PM Vyacheslav Daradur

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

cially if multiple nodes deploy it concurrently. > Most likely users will end up always calling the second option of the proxy > (with the timeout), so, perhaps, make it default? > > вс, 29 дек. 2019 г. в 21:05, Vyacheslav Daradur : > > > Alexey, > > > > I've

Re: [VOTE] Allow or prohibit a joint use of @deprecated and @IgniteExperimental

+1 Allow, because once the community has made a decision to introduce new APIs instead of an old one - stabilization is just a matter of time. On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 11:02 AM Alexey Goncharuk wrote: > > Dear Apache Ignite community, > > We would like to conduct a formal vote on the subject of wh

Re: [DISCUSSION] Deprecation of obsolete rebalancing functionality

Hi, Alexei! CacheConfiguration#getRebalanceDelay was extremely useful for the caches backed by @CacheLocalStore to prevent rebalancing during full cluster startup/shutdown. But @CacheLocalStore annotation is deprecated also. I think "rebalancing delay" stuff might be useful for replicated cached

Re: Reference of local service.

Hi, Vladimir The answer is in API docs: "Gets *locally deployed service* with specified name." [1] That means {IgniteServices#service(String name)} returns only locally deployed instance or null. {IgniteServices#serviceProxy(…)} returns proxy to call instances across the cluster. Might be used f

Re: Reference of local service.

t reference? What if I need to wrap it? This would be local service > working via proxy or null. > > вт, 25 февр. 2020 г. в 16:03, Vyacheslav Daradur : > >> Hi, Vladimir >> >> The answer is in API docs: "Gets *locally deployed service* with >> specified

Re: Reference of local service.

, 25 февр. 2020 г. в 16:17, Vyacheslav Daradur : > >> {IgniteServices#service(String name)} returns direct reference in the >> current implementation. >> >> So, class casting should work for your example: >> ((MyServiceImpl)ignite.services().service(“myService”))

Re: Reference of local service.

l make sense to make all service invocations work through a > proxy in Ignite 3. > For now though the best thing we can do is to calculate remote invocations > only, since all of them go through a proxy. > Another option is to provide a simple way for a user to account the > service in

Re: Reference of local service.

> > > пн, 2 мар. 2020 г. в 12:56, Vladimir Steshin : > > > > > Denis, Vyacheslav, hi. > > > > > > What if we just provide an option to disable service metrics at all? It > > > would keep direct references for local services. Also, we can make > >

Re: Apache Ignite 2.8.0 spring services configuration null fields

Hi, I looked through your example and can't reproduce it. Properties injection works fine. I suppose that you have run Ignite out of Spring context. Please check your Spring context configuration file once again. Here is an example: https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/53e47e9191d717b3eec495e62

Re: Apache Ignite 2.8.0 spring services configuration null fields

Sorry, wrong link in previous email. Here is an example: https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/modules/spring/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/spring/injection/spring-bean.xml On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 8:02 PM Vyacheslav Daradur wrote: > Hi, I looked through your example and ca

Re: Apache Ignite 2.8.0 spring services configuration null fields

Now I see. Your parent class (called Test in your example) *should implement 'Serializable' interface*, this will help for your case. We changed default marshaller for services in 2.8, because they have to be 'Serializable' according to API. 'JdkMarshaller' is default marshaller for services now.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Maxim Muzafarov

Great job! My congratulations! чт, 7 мая 2020 г. в 16:09, Alex Plehanov : > Maxim, congratulations! > > > чт, 7 мая 2020 г. в 15:12, Denis Garus : > > > Maxim, Congrats! > > Great job! > > > > чт, 7 мая 2020 г. в 15:02, Nikita Amelchev : > > > > > Maxim, congrats! > > > > > > чт, 7 мая 2020 г. в

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

/7771 > > On 30.12.2019 13:03, Alexey Goncharuk wrote: > > Agree, sounds like a plan, thanks for taking over! > > > > пн, 30 дек. 2019 г. в 13:00, Vyacheslav Daradur : > > > >> Alexey, > >> > >> I would not make it default in the current implem

Re: Discovery-based services deployment guarantees question

Mikhail, I merged your changes. Thanks for your contribution! On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 8:01 PM Vyacheslav Daradur wrote: > Hi Mikhail, proposed changes make sense to me. > I left some comments to the pr. > Thank you! > > On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 2:28 PM Mikhail Petrov >

Re: Alex Plehanov joins Ignite Project Management Committee

Alex, congrats! ср, 18 нояб. 2020 г. в 13:39, Вячеслав Коптилин : > Hooray! > > Congratulations, Alex! Well deserved achievement! > > Thanks, > S. > > ср, 18 нояб. 2020 г. в 03:26, Denis Magda : > > > Igniters, > > > > The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Ignite > > has invited Alex

Configuration suggestion of Java version at Ignite startup

Igniters, As you know, Ignite logs configuration tuning suggestions at node startup to improve performance. At the moment, it recommends using Java 8 even if later releases are used. Public updates will not be available for business users since January of 2019 if I'm not mistaken. It may be use

Re: Configuration suggestion of Java version at Ignite startup

change suggestions for > users. > > чт, 10 янв. 2019 г. в 14:08, Vyacheslav Daradur : > > > Igniters, > > > > As you know, Ignite logs configuration tuning suggestions at node > > startup to improve performance. > > > > At the moment, it recommends using

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [2732834] needs to be handled

Looks like the test "ServicesTest.TestGetServiceProxy(False)" became flaky after IGNITE-9607. I muted the test on TC and filled Jira issue assigned to myself: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10888 On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 2:37 AM wrote: > > Hi Igniters, > > I've detected some new iss

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [2732834] needs to be handled

The fix was merged to master. Related tests were unmuted. On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 7:03 PM Vyacheslav Daradur wrote: > > Looks like the test "ServicesTest.TestGetServiceProxy(False)" became > flaky after IGNITE-9607. > > I muted the test on TC and filled Jira issue as

Re: Service grid redesign

The wiki's article [1] has been updated according to the merged solution [2]. [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=95654584 [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9607 On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 1:10 PM Vyacheslav Daradur wrote: > > Igniters,

Re: Hello everyone

Hi, Prehistoricpenguin! It would be great if you will be able to finish a solution [1]. But I'm not sure that it's a good ticket to start contributing because of interplatform complexity. Anyway, feel free to contact me in case of working on the task. [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGN

Re: Service grid redesign

start working on the services hot redeployment next? > > > - > Denis > > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 1:36 AM Vyacheslav Daradur > wrote: > > > The wiki's article [1] has been updated according to the merged solution > > [2]. > > > > [1] > >

Re: Services hot redeployment

Denis, thank you for driving of Service Grid's development! Sounds like a good plan. Does it mean that a user will have to register a classloader for service's class explicitly in case of using the feature? On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 4:38 PM Denis Mekhanikov wrote: > > Igniters, > > I'd like to star

[DISCUSSION] Service Grid Roadmap

Igniters, While working on the redesign of the Service Grid component I've looked at the component as end-user and I've faced with usability issues. I'd suggest updating IEP-17 [1] or create a new one to specify streams of improvements: --- Features - IGNITE-8367 Implement hot redeployment of se

Re: Services hot redeployment

rvice classpath with some new Ignite API. > >> The only requirement for classes - they should be available > >> locally(on client node or thin client host). > >> > >> 3. User deploy the service with some Ignite API. > >> > >>

Re: Running single test multiple times on TeamCity

I'd recommend move the IgniteReproducingSuite to separate module to be able use it for all modules. For example, at the moment, we are not able use the suite to run tests from 'indexing' module because of lack dependency. On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 10:38 AM Павлухин Иван wrote: > > Ed, > > Thank yo

Re: [Discussion] Persistence compatibility framework refactoring

Hi, Pavel! First of all, I'd like to clarify that the Compatibility Testing Framework was designed to work with a cluster of multi-version nodes. The main idea is to run a test to verify backward compatibility or do some kind of rolling upgrades. It's not about persistence compatibility, but actu

Re: [Discussion] Persistence compatibility framework refactoring

t; > > This is a long process and there could be developer mistakes, > > > some > > > > of > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > test suites can be missed and nobody will know about it before > > > real > >

Re: [DISCUSSION] Service Grid Roadmap

; Such tasks aggregation makes sense for me. If to range by priority I would > focus on hot redeployment, metrics and failover. > > > - > Denis > > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 12:48 PM Vyacheslav Daradur > wrote: > > > Igniters, > > > > While working on t

Re: Tests for ML using binary builds

Hi, Alexey! >> If we can use multi JVM test with >> different classpaths I will use them - such approach is more convenient >> from TC point of view. There is not such ability at the moment, you are only able to specify additional JVM arguments in 'GridAbstractTest#additionalRemoteJvmArgs'. But,

Re: [DISCUSSION] System cache persistence.

Hi, Andrey! >> 6. ServiceGrid. >> We can use Metastore and drop old-services later. As you mentioned new Service Grid does not use system cache. Legacy implementation (GridServiceProcessor), uses system cache WITHOUT persistence since 2.3 release and does not restore services state at node resta

Re: Ignite 2.8 Release: Time & Scope & Release manager

Denis, >> After this release, let's introduce a practice of maintenance >> releases What a reason of waiting for 2.8 to introduce maintenance release? Let's prepare 2.7.1 with Java 11 fixes? Look like this is the safest and fastest way to deliver Java 11 related improvements to our end-users. O

Re: GridDhtInvalidPartitionException takes the cluster down

In general I agree with Andrey, the handler is very usefull itself. It allows us to become know that ‘GridDhtInvalidPartitionException’ is not processed properly in PME process by worker. Nikolay, look at the code, if Failure Handler hadles an exception - this means that while-true loop in worker’

Re: New Committer: Vyacheslav Daradur

> > > > > Dear Ignite Developers, > > > > > > The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Ignite has invited > > > Vyacheslav Daradur to become a committer and we are pleased to announce > > > that he has accepted. Apache Ignite PMC appr

Re: Code inspection

Maxim, I looked through the PR and it looks good to me in general. The only question how it's planned to maintain check styles in 2 different configurations, for IDEA and check style plugin? On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 12:30 PM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > > Igniters, > > The issue [1] with enabled mav

Re: [IEP-35] Monitoring & Profiling. Current API Analysis.

Hi, Nikolay, >From my point of view, this is one of the most useful IEP for Ignite end-users. I often face with a case when Ignite is a black-box for administrators and devops engineers. I'd like to have a feature to monitor PME's queue, to view its size and events type. The same is actual for Se

Re: Code inspection

we will: > - keep IDE level inspection configuration (the Project_Default.xml config); > - add a new checkstyle plugin configuration file (checkstyle.xml > config) which will be used simultaneously for checking code style on > build procedure and for the IDE-checkstyle plugin; > >

Re: Code inspection

quirements in a separate thread to avoid confusion of community. cc Petr, Pavel (JFYI) [1] https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_CheckCodeStyle&tab=buildTypeBranches On Sun, Apr 21, 2019 at 10:18 PM Vyacheslav Daradur wrote: > > Maxim, > > I le

Re: Code inspection

Also, I excluded "IntelliJ IDEA Inspections" from RunAll and marked it as "~[Excluded]". On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 12:25 AM Vyacheslav Daradur wrote: > > Maxim, I merged your changes to master. > > Also, I've created a new build plan "Check Code Style

Re: Code inspection

?tab=buildLog&logTab=tree&filter=debug&expand=all&buildId=3677858&_focus=288 > > > On 23 Apr 2019, at 00:25, Vyacheslav Daradur wrote: > > Maxim, I merged your changes to master. > > Also, I've created a new build plan "Check Code Style" on TC

Re: Code inspection

gt; > I'll check it. > > > > > > Also, please pass TC build for review next time and do not add to Run All > > without it. > > > > Thanks! > > > > > >> On 23 Apr 2019, at 11:53, Vyacheslav Daradur wrote: > >> > >> Thi

Re: Brainstorm: Make TC Run All faster

Hi Igniters, At the moment we have several separated test suites: * ~Build Apache Ignite~ _ ~10..20mins * [Javadocs] _ ~10mins * [Licenses Headers] _ ~1min * [Check Code Style] _ ~7min The most time of each build (except Licenses Headers) is taken by dependency resolving. Their main goal is a che

Re: AI 3.0: writeSynchronizationMode re-thinking

Hi, Sergey, Makes sense to me in case of performance issues, but may lead to losing data. >> *by the new option *syncPartitions=N* (not best name just for referring) Seems similar to "Write Concern"[1] in MongoDB. It is used in the same way as you described. On the other hand, if you have such

Re: Brainstorm: Make TC Run All faster

o tests, are not they? Do you suggest to combine > mentioned 4 jobs into one? How long will it run in a such case? > > чт, 25 апр. 2019 г. в 10:50, Vyacheslav Daradur : > > > > Hi Igniters, > > > > At the moment we have several separated test suites: > >

Re: [IEP-35] Monitoring & Profiling. Proof of concept

Hi, Nikolay, I looked through PR and IEP, and I have some comments: It would be better to implement it as a separate module, I can't say if it is possible for the main part of monitoring or not, but I believe that HttpExposer with Jetty's dependencies should be detached from the core module. I l

Re: Brainstorm: Make TC Run All faster

em a part of > > build Apache Ignite procedure. > > > > Also, I'd suggest going deeper. We can try to merge `Licenses Header` > > into the `Code style checker` [1]. This will simplify the code > > checking process. > > > > [1] http://checkstyle.sourcefo

Re: [DISCUSSION] Release Apache Ignite 2.7.5-rc4

+1 from me. Built from sources and run several examples. Ivan, try to clean local repo (~/m2) and rebuild the project once again according to DEVNOTES.txt On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 7:37 PM Павлухин Иван wrote: > > I spent a while running examples for RC from bin package. I did the following: > 1. "

Re: [DISCUSSION] Release Apache Ignite 2.7.5-rc4

; > > And thank you for advice on how to check examples. > > > > Sincerely > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > чт, 6 июн. 2019 г. в 22:37, Vyacheslav Daradur : > > > > > +1 from me. Built from sources and run several examples. > > > > > >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.7.5-rc4

+1 from me. Built from sources and run several examples. On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 2:52 AM Yuriy Babak wrote: > > +1 - checked ML examples > > Best regards, > Yuriy Babak > > > чт, 6 июн. 2019 г. в 19:16, Павлухин Иван : > > > +1 > > Launched a couple of nodes using bin package. Run SQL examples > >

Re: [VOTE] Complete Discontinuation of IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator

+1 for moving to a separate branch from the master On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 11:54 AM Nikita Amelchev wrote: > > +1 > > чт, 20 июн. 2019 г. в 11:28, Anton Vinogradov : > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 10:08 AM Dmitriy Pavlov wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > чт, 20 июн. 2019 г. в

Re: [DISCUSSION] Ignite 3.0 and to be removed list

Ivan, * About Service Grid: Yes, we discussed that old service grid implementation (GridServiceProcessor) should be removed in 3.0, now it is marked as obsolete. This was in the list, maybe it was lost during formatting. Also, a class `ServiceConfiguration` should be moved to common package of co

Re: [DISCUSSION] Ignite 3.0 and to be removed list

I think all agreed items should be marked @Deprecated in the code base, so we will be able to remove them transparently for the end-users. On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 9:32 AM Павлухин Иван wrote: > > Alex, > > I already added a couple of items to wishlist [1]. > > Yes, I agree that the process should

Re: SecurityTestSuite as a separate test suite at TC

Hi Denis. I think it is fine to extract security tests in a separate build plan on TC. BTW, if you are going to write a lot of Sandbox's tests pay attention to 'extdata' module and an approach of P2P tests (IgniteP2PSelfTestSuite) - this may help you to avoid Maven's classloading issues. On Tue,

Re: New Ignite PMC Member: Ilya Kasnacheev

Ilya, congratulations! On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 8:41 AM Павлухин Иван wrote: > > Ilya, my congratulations! > > вт, 6 авг. 2019 г. в 23:12, Dmitriy Pavlov : > > > > Ilya, congratulations! > > > > вт, 6 авг. 2019 г. в 22:58, Denis Magda : > > > > > The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Ig

Re: Coding guidelines. Useless JavaDoc comments.

I agree that useless comments look weird in the codebase. But, identical distance/padding/margin between fields in a class - is really cool, and helps read the class very fast. On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 12:26 PM Nikolay Izhikov wrote: > > Hello, Denis. > > Thanks for starting this discussion. > > I

Re: New Сommitter: Maxim Muzafarov

Good job Maxim, congratulations! On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 9:59 AM Anton Vinogradov wrote: > > Welcome aboard :) > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 3:35 AM Roman Shtykh > wrote: > > > Maxim, congratulations! > > > > -- Roman > > > > > > On Thursday, August 29, 2019, 12:11:29 a.m. GMT+9, Dmitriy Pavlo

Re: [ML] Distributed metrics computation

Hi, Alexey, I agree that Map-Reduce on demand looks more promising solution. We can use Compute tasks for implementation. 'Map' phase can be tunned to process data by some trigger (dataset update?) on ContiniousQuery manner and call 'Reduce' (with some cache?) on demand. On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at

Re: IGNITE-4374 - Ignite should validate JVM and OS configuration and output warning in log

092&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15832092> Yakov, please, review it again. 2016-12-28 12:29 GMT+03:00 Vyacheslav Daradur : > Yakov, I have looked at source codes and I agree with you. > > Let's rename GridPerformanceSuggestions to ConfigurationSuggestio

IGNITE-3196 - ready for review

Hello. I fixed it. Please, review. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3196 - Marshaling works wrong for the BigDecimals that have negative scale

Re: IGNITE-3196 - ready for review

e comments in Jira. > > Best Regards, > Igor > > On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur > wrote: > > > Hello. I fixed it. Please, review. > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3196 - Marshaling works > wrong > > for the BigDecimals that have negative scale > > >

Re: IGNITE-3196 - ready for review

mal: >> int sign = vals[3] < 0 ? -1 : 0; >> stream.WriteInt(sign); >> >> Can you help with this task? >> >> >> 2017-01-31 12:46 GMT+03:00 Igor Sapego : >> >>> Vyacheslav, >>> >>> I had a look at your PR and left some comments in Jira. >

Re: IGNITE-3196 - ready for review

oughts? > > Pavel > > On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur > wrote: > > > Hello. > > > > I looked and understood the code of methods ReadDecimal and WriteDecimal > > on .NET platform. > > > > 1. At the moment remaking of this

Re: IGNITE-3196 - ready for review

p;tab=buildResultsDiv&buildTypeId=IgniteTests_IgnitePlatformNet> How about this solution? 2017-02-03 13:59 GMT+03:00 Vyacheslav Daradur : > 1. On my first question > I think up, if we serialize only positive numbers, we can write sign in > first byte, because it is positive alway

Re: IGNITE-3196 - ready for review

\modules\platforms\cpp\ > > odbc\src\utility.cpp, > > functions ReadDecimal and WriteDecimal. > > > > Best Regards, > > Igor > > > > On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Vyacheslav Daradur > > > wrote: > > > >> Pavel, Igor > >> >

Re: IGNITE-3196 - ready for review

0x80) System.out.println(a | -0x80); // -28 System.out.println(a | 0x80); // 228 - cast to int Is it bad style? 2017-02-06 20:04 GMT+03:00 Igor Sapego : > Vyacheslav, > > Overall looks good. But why do you use -0x80 instead of 0x80? > > Best Regards, > Igor > > On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 a

Re: IGNITE-3196 - ready for review

>> So it's just made a minus sign look a little redundant and pointless to me >> in C++ code. >> >> Best Regards, >> Igor >> >> On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 10:15 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur >> wrote: >> >>> Byte.MIN_VALUE = -128 = -0x80

Re: IGNITE-4374 - Ignite should validate JVM and OS configuration and output warning in log

Hi, I changed the output. Please, review it again) If something is bad, I will quickly correct. Thanks. 2017-01-25 18:24 GMT+03:00 Vyacheslav Daradur : > GridPerformanceSuggestions isn't changed. > > JVM checks are encapsulated in JvmConfigurationSuggestions > OS checks ar

Re: IGNITE-3196 - ready for review

gt; Pavel > > On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Igor Sapego wrote: > > > Looks good to me. > > > > Best Regards, > > Igor > > > > On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur > > wrote: > > > > > Ok, thanks for expla

Re: Test failures

I vote for the master-branche without failed-tests) I understand that impossible to make it quickly. We shall aim at this approach. It will be more comfortable to us to develop. 2017-02-08 12:17 GMT+03:00 Alexander Fedotov : > Hi, > > I would agree with Aleksey. > From the CI perspective, fail

Re: DML & Transactions

Hello everyone. Sergi, you wrote about the MVCC. It's very interesting and perspective. Someone already does it? 2017-02-09 9:25 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan : > On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 10:20 PM, Yakov Zhdanov > wrote: > > > Guys, I think we should explicitly state this on readme.io - Do not us

IGNITE-4158 - ready for review

Hello. I did it. Please, review. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4158 - Implement Time type for binary protocol. latest ci.tests

Re: IGNITE-3196 - ready for review

ld be better if Vladimir Ozerov does the final review considering > > all the changes in .NET, C++ and Java. > > > > Vladimir, could you do that? > > > > — > > Denis > > > > > On Feb 7, 2017, at 5:04 AM, Vyacheslav Daradur > > wrote: &g

Re: IGNITE-3196 - ready for review

not break > existing code. > > Pavel > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur > wrote: > > > Pavel, thanks. > > > > What about PR to master-branch? > > > > 2017-02-10 16:55 GMT+03:00 Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > > > M

Re: IGNITE-3196 - ready for review

Thanks for your explanation. 2017-02-10 18:18 GMT+03:00 Pavel Tupitsyn : > You can close it. > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 6:16 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur > wrote: > > > I meant what I need to do with opened PR? > > I need to close it or to leave it open for future merge? &

Questions of the Ignite Configurations

Hello everybody. I have some questions about classes of configuration in the Ignite. 1. IgniteConfiguration - is it only one instance per Ignite-node? 2. BinaryConfiguration - is it only one instance per Ignite-node? 3. Does BinaryConfiguration relates only to binary-infrastructure or I can u

Re: Questions of the Ignite Configurations

Vladimir, thanks for your answers. 2017-02-15 13:32 GMT+03:00 Vladimir Ozerov : > Hi Vyacheslav, > > Answering your questions: > > 1. Yes > 2. Yes > 3. Only binary infrastructure > 4. Yes > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 12:32 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur > wrote: >

IGNITE-3422 - ready for review

Hello everyone. Please, review implemented solution. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3422 - No way to control object initialization during deserialization/unmarshalling ci.tests

Re: IGNITE-2626 Binary marshaller: sort fields alphabetically

Hello. Look at the ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4695 - Write primitive fields before during binary object marshalling Maybe it relates. 2017-02-16 11:18 GMT+03:00 ALEKSEY KUZNETSOV : > im going to take https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-2626 > -- > > *Best Rega

IGNITE-4611 - ready for review

Hello everyone. I think it's ready for review: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4611 - Write IgniteUuid with BinaryMarshaller ci.tests

Re: IGNITE-3422 - ready for review

for contribution. I reviewed implementation again and now I am > in > > doubts whether our product would really benefit from it or not. See my > > comments in the ticket. I'de prefer Denis Magda to chime in and give his > > feedback first. > > > > Vladimir. > &

Re: IGNITE-3422 - ready for review

ain and now I > am in > > > doubts whether our product would really benefit from it or not. See my > > > comments in the ticket. I'de prefer Denis Magda to chime in and give > his > > > feedback first. > > > > > > Vladimir. > > > >

Re: IGNITE-3422 - ready for review

Guys, any thoughts? 2017-02-23 13:22 GMT+03:00 Vyacheslav Daradur : > I think it makes a sense to define factory in IgniteConfiguration, as the > Map which will be ised when deserializing. > > Interface example: > > public intterface InstanceFactory { > newInstance(Clas

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ignite 1.9.0 RC1

Denis, Sergey witch version of JDK8 do you use? I got this exception with the lates jdk-8u121. Building with flag "-Dmaven.javadoc.skip=true" works fine. Look at "*New --allow-script-in-comments option for javadoc":* http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/8u121-relnotes-3315208.html 20

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ignite 1.9.0 RC1

I checked it: jdk8u121_x64 - *fine* jdk8u91_x64 - *fail* It is strange. 2017-03-02 11:53 GMT+03:00 Sergey Kozlov : > I used Oracle JDK 1.8.0_91 > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 11:38 AM, Vyacheslav Daradur > wrote: > > > Denis, Sergey witch version of JDK8 do you use? > &g

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ignite 1.9.0 RC1

Guys, I found that. apache-ignite-1.9.0-src\parent\pom.xml line: 940 We need to remove flag "--allow-script-in-comments", it is new, and not capability with version less than jdk8u121_x64 I can create PR with fix, or you can just fix it yourself. 2017-03-02 12:35 GMT+03:00 Vyachesl

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ignite 1.9.0 RC1

121_x64 - *fine* > >> jdk8u91_x64 - *fail* > > Which one is true? > > I have no compilation errors at latest 1.8.0_121-b13 > > Anyways, I'm looking for better solution. > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur > wrote: > > > Guys,

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ignite 1.9.0 RC1

>> Which one is true? This one true for https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/1.9.0-rc1: jdk8u121_x64 - *fine* jdk8u91_x64 - *fail 2017-03-02 12:52 GMT+03:00 Vyacheslav Daradur : > >> I got this exception with the lates jdk-8u121. > I had this problem earlier, not wi

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ignite 1.9.0 RC1

t;> [ERROR] Failed to execute goal org.apache.maven.plugins: > maven-javadoc-plugin:2.10.1:jar > >> (module-javadoc) on project ignite-tools: MavenReportException: Error > while > >> creating archive: > >> [ERROR] Exit code: 1 - javadoc: error - Argument for -b

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ignite 1.9.0 RC1

Anton, a workaround solution: 2017-03-02 13:39 GMT+03:00 Vyacheslav Daradur : > Anton, I found it too. > > And I confirm, it is the main reason of building-error. > > If remove ., then: > "mvn clean package -DskipTests" > jdk1.8.0_121_x64 - fine > jdk1.8.0

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ignite 1.9.0 RC1

gradov > > wrote: > > > Vyacheslav, > > > > I see strange spaces and newlines here, please make a pull request, to > > solve possible formation issues. > > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur > > wrote: > > > >> Anton

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ignite 1.9.0 RC1

Anton, please be careful: my PR doesn't contain the flag "--allow-script-in-comments flag" 2017-03-02 15:26 GMT+03:00 Vyacheslav Daradur : > Anton, I think I found better way. > > Please, look at: > https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1586/files > >

Re: IGNITE-3422 - ready for review

s it then we will close it > later on. > > — > Denis > > > On Mar 1, 2017, at 12:11 AM, Vyacheslav Daradur > wrote: > > > > Guys, any thoughts? > > > > 2017-02-23 13:22 GMT+03:00 Vyacheslav Daradur : > > > >> I think it makes a sense to

Ignite 2.0 - Update Spring dependency to latest stable version

Hello everyone! There are no changes long ago: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4211 Is it actual?

  1   2   3   4   5   >