Yakov, I've seen your comments, can you please check the jira again?
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 4:46 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <yzhda...@apache.org> wrote: > Vlad, can you please check my comments again? > > --Yakov > > 2016-03-18 17:57 GMT+03:00 Vladisav Jelisavcic <vladis...@gmail.com>: > > > Hi Yakov, > > > > yes, thanks for the comments, I think everything should be ok now, > > please review the PR and tell me if you think anything else is needed. > > > > Once ignite-642 is merged into master, > > I'll submit a PR for IgniteReadWriteLock (hopefully on time for 1.6. > > release). > > > > Best regrads, > > Vladisav > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Yakov Zhdanov <yzhda...@gridgain.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Vlad, did you have a chance to review my latest comments? > > > > > > Thanks! > > > -- > > > Yakov Zhdanov, Director R&D > > > *GridGain Systems* > > > www.gridgain.com > > > > > > 2016-03-06 12:21 GMT+03:00 Yakov Zhdanov <yzhda...@apache.org>: > > > > > > > Vlad and all (esp Val and Anton V.), > > > > > > > > I reviewed the PR. My comments are in the ticket. > > > > > > > > Anton V. there is a question regarding > optimized-classnames.properties. > > > > Can you please respond in ticket? > > > > > > > > > > > > --Yakov > > > > > > > > 2016-02-29 16:00 GMT+06:00 Yakov Zhdanov <yzhda...@apache.org>: > > > > > > > >> Vlad, that's great! I will take a look this week. Reassigning ticket > > to > > > >> myself. > > > >> > > > >> --Yakov > > > >> > > > >> 2016-02-26 18:37 GMT+03:00 Vladisav Jelisavcic <vladis...@gmail.com > >: > > > >> > > > >>> Hi, > > > >>> > > > >>> i recently implemented distributed ReentrantLock - IGNITE-642, > > > >>> i made a pull request, so hopefully this could be added to the next > > > >>> release. > > > >>> > > > >>> Best regards, > > > >>> Vladisav > > > >>> > > > >>> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 10:49 AM, Alexey Goncharuk < > > > >>> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> > Folks, > > > >>> > > > > >>> > The current implementation of IgniteCache.lock(key).lock() has > the > > > same > > > >>> > semantics as the transactional locks - cache topology cannot be > > > changed > > > >>> > while there exists an ongoing transaction or an explicit lock is > > > held. > > > >>> The > > > >>> > restriction for transactions is quite fundamental, the lock() > issue > > > >>> can be > > > >>> > fixed if we re-implement locking the same way IgniteSemaphore > > > currently > > > >>> > works. > > > >>> > > > > >>> > As for the "Failed to find semaphore with the given name" > message, > > my > > > >>> first > > > >>> > guess is that DataStructures were configured with 1 backups which > > led > > > >>> to > > > >>> > the data loss when two nodes were stopped. Mario, can you please > > > >>> re-test > > > >>> > your semaphore scenario with 2 backups configured for data > > > structures? > > > >>> > From my side, I can also take a look at the semaphore issue when > > I'm > > > >>> done > > > >>> > with IGNITE-2610. > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
