Maxim,

I think that during renaming we should not lose "Atomic" prefix.


On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Andrey, ok.
>
> Also remove in the modules/platform/dotnet CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.cs?
>
> Rename classes:
>
> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGrids -> 
> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.startGridsLocal (commit)
> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderWithStoreInvokeTest -> 
> IgniteCacheWithStoreInvokeTest
> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderInvokeTest -> IgniteCacheInvokeTest
> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledStoreValueTest -> 
> IgniteCacheNearEnabledStoreValueTest
> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearRemoveFailureTest -> 
> GridCacheNearRemoveFailureTest
> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderRemoveFailureTest -> 
> GridCacheRemoveFailureTest
> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFailoverSelfTest -> GridCacheFailoverSelfTest
> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledSelfTest -> 
> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest
> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest -> 
> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest
> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest -> 
> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest
> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder -> 
> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups
> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder -> 
> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups
>
> Remove classes:
>
> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest
> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiSelfTest
> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrderOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest
> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderOffHeapFullApiSelfTest
> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest
> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest
> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest
> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest
>
> ok? :)
>
>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> написал(а):
>>
>> No, it should be removed. If somebody use entry last update time (e.g.
>> for conflict resolving) they should store this time as entry field.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
>> <dsetrak...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor?
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Maxim,
>>>>
>>>> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we need remove all
>>>> related methods.
>>>>
>>>> Also there is component called GridClockSyncProcessor that also should
>>>> be removed. It will lead to removing globalTime field from
>>>> GridCacheVersion class and some related methods.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Valentin,
>>>>>
>>>>> Then there is no need for setting CacheConfiguration.atomicWriteOrderMode.
>>>> What do you think, remove it and and related methods?
>>>>>
>>>>>> 28 февр. 2017 г., в 2:49, Valentin Kulichenko <
>>>> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> написал(а):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Max,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In case we remove the CLOCK mode, I think we should remove the enum
>>>> too, as
>>>>>> well as configuration properties and other code using this enum. Having
>>>>>> enum with one value doesn't make sense to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Val
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Igniters,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> After remove CLOCK mode, CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum contains now
>>>> only
>>>>>>> one value PRIMARY. Andrey Gura, proposition remove
>>>>>>> CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum. Will there be something special for
>>>> this
>>>>>>> purpose is enum?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587 <
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4587>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>> Max K.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Max K.
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to