Re: [DISCUSS] How many days to wait if no response from reviewer?

+1 It would also be great to also add this in contributor guidelines. On 2023/02/12 05:39:25 Dinesh Chitlangia wrote: > +1. > > 15 days can be too long and and especially the new contributors would feel > more stalled. > As long as the reviewer's comments are addressed and there is at least 1 >

Re: [VOTE] Proposal to merge Ozone datanode side RocksDB merge feature branch (HDDS-3630) into master

+1 Regards Lokesh > On 26-May-2022, at 6:39 AM, Bharat Viswanadham wrote: > > +1 for merge. > > Thanks, > Bharat > > On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 1:41 PM Uma Maheswara Rao Gangumalla < > umaganguma...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> +1 >> >> Regards, >> Uma >> >> On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 2:15 AM Sammi Ch

Re: [VOTE] Merge Ozone S3 Multi-Tenancy feature branch (HDDS-4944) into master

+1 Regards Lokesh > On 26-May-2022, at 6:38 AM, Bharat Viswanadham wrote: > > +1 > > Thanks, > Bharat > > On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 6:07 PM jackson yao wrote: > >> +1 for the merge. thanks for working on this >> >> Uma Maheswara Rao Gangumalla 于2022年5月26日周四 >> 00:12写道： >> >>> +1 for the me

Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal to merge Ozone datanode side RocksDB merge feature branch (HDDS-3630) into master

+1 Regads Lokesh > On 24-May-2022, at 9:56 AM, Uma Maheswara Rao Gangumalla > wrote: > > +1 for the merge. > > Thanks to the Tencent team and Sammi for working on this. > > Regards, > Uma > > On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 5:49 AM Sammi Chen wrote: > >> Dear Ozone Devs, >> >> I 'm starting this

Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal to merge Ozone S3 Multi-Tenancy feature branch (HDDS-4944) into master

+1 Regards Lokesh > On 19-May-2022, at 8:55 AM, Shashikant Banerjee wrote: > > +1. > > Thanks > Shashi > > On Thu, May 19, 2022, 1:44 AM Michel Sumbul wrote: > >> +1 (non binding) >> Great feature! Thanks >> >> Le mer. 18 mai 2022, 14:10, NILOTPAL NANDI a >> écrit : >> >>> +1 for the mer

Re: [VOTE] Merge Ozone Erasure Coding branch (HDDS-3816-ec) into master

+1 for merge Thanks Lokesh > On 07-Apr-2022, at 11:06 AM, Tsz Wo Sze wrote: > > +1 > We should merge it so that more people can try it. We can work on the > remaining tasks in the master branch. Thanks a lot! > > Tsz-Wo > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 1:17 PM Aravindan Vijayan > wrote: > >> +1

Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal to merge Ozone Erasure Coding branch (HDDS-3816-ec) into master

+1 for merge Regards Lokesh > On 20-Feb-2022, at 2:05 AM, Ayush Saxena wrote: > > +1 for merge. > Thanx Uma for driving this. Good Luck!!! > > -Ayush > >> On 18-Feb-2022, at 9:38 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan wrote: >> >> +1 for merging EC into master branch. >> >> Thanks @Uma for putting this

Re: Design doc to fix HDDS-5905

Hey Kota I really like the proposed approach because it makes sure that blocks are deleted in order of key deletion. I would suggest using Ratis transaction id as the prefix. I don’t think we will need a random suffix with that approach as transaction id would avoid any collisions. Further it a

Re: Ratis 2.1.0-03f3b68-SNAPSHOT not found

Hey The snapshot jars are available at this link. https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots/org/apache/ratis/ Regards Lokesh > On 08-Sep-2021, at 2:14 PM, Janus Chow wrote: > > Raised a ticket about this

Re: [DISCUSS] 1.2.0 release

+1 Regards Lokesh > On 27-Aug-2021, at 7:22 AM, jackson yao wrote: > > +1, thanks for the work! > > Ayush Saxena 于2021年8月27日周五 上午8:47写道： > >> +1 >> >>> On 27-Aug-2021, at 1:49 AM, Xiaoyu Yao wrote: >>> >>> +1 >>> On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 12:23 PM Ethan Rose >> wrote: >>>

Re: [VOTE] - Merge Non rolling upgrade branch - 'HDDS-3698-nonrolling-upgrade'

+1 Thanks Aravindan for driving this! Regards Lokesh > On 23-Jun-2021, at 9:45 PM, Hanisha Koneru > wrote: > > Thank Aravindan for driving this. > +1 for merge. > > Thanks > Hanisha > > >> On Jun 23, 2021, at 8:59 AM, Xiaoyu Yao wrote: >> >> +1, thanks for driving this @Aravindan Vijayan

Re: [VOTE] - Merge FSO branch HDDS-2939 to master

+1 for merge Thanks for driving this feature Rakesh! Regards Lokesh > On 03-Jun-2021, at 11:33 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan wrote: > > Thank you very much @weichiu for the feedback and voting. > > I believe you are mentioning the delete bugs in the master branch. I will > fetch it and follow-up o

Re: [DISCUSS] - Merge FileSystem Optimizations branch HDDS-2939 to master

Thanks for working on this feature! +1 Regards Lokesh > On 08-Apr-2021, at 11:05 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan wrote: > > Thank you very much Yiqun and Marton for the feedback/useful comments. > Please find my responses below. > > @Yiqun, > As per the discussions, key deletion tasks have been impl

Re: Secrets committed as part of Ozone Commits

Hey Mukul Thanks for reporting the issue! I also see the commit in 1.1.0-RC0 branch. Regards Lokesh > On 25-Mar-2021, at 10:30 AM, Mukul Kumar Singh > wrote: > > Thanks Arpit and Sammi for the responses. > > Note: Please block any merges to Apache master while this commit is being > removed

Re: [VOTE] - Merge SCM-HA Branch - HDDS-2823

Thanks for working on this! +1 Regards Lokesh > On 19-Mar-2021, at 2:04 PM, Mukul Kumar Singh > wrote: > > +1. > > Thanks everyone for the collaborative effort. > > Thanks, > > Mukul > > On 19/03/21 12:34 pm, Aravindan Vijayan wrote: >> +1 for the merge. Thanks for working on this! >> >>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Go client for ozone

+1 Regards Lokesh > On 03-Mar-2021, at 9:57 PM, Xiaoyu Yao wrote: > > +1 > > Xiaoyu > > On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 1:59 AM Bharat Viswanadham wrote: > >> +1 >> >> Thanks, >> Bharat >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 1:50 PM Sammi Chen wrote: >> >>> +1， Great idea! >>> >>> Sammi >>> >>> On M

Re: [DISCUSS] RetryCount in DeletedBlockLogImp in SCM

Hi Rui I think that would be a very good optimisation. +1 It would reduce the number of updates made to delete table as well. > The drawback of only updating retrycount at the limit is, if SCM restart at For this I would suggest we also update the retry count in intervals of 100(or some other v

Re: [DISCUSS] 1.1.0 release

+1 Regards Lokesh > On 11-Jan-2021, at 12:16 PM, Ayush Saxena wrote: > > +1 > > -Ayush > >> On 11-Jan-2021, at 11:56 AM, Sammi Chen > > wrote: >> >> +1 for the new release. >> >> >> Sammi >> >>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 2:02 AM Arpit Agarwal >>> wrote: >>> >>

Re: Enabling Ratis on OM by default

+1 Regards Lokesh > On 24-Nov-2020, at 11:05 AM, Shashikant Banerjee > wrote: > > +1 > > Thanks > Shashi > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 8:39 AM Bharat Viswanadham > wrote: > >> +1 >> >> Thanks, >> Bharat >> >> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 4:21 PM Vivek Ratnavel >> wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> On