Denis, I can not edit this page. confluence username: dreamx
> 13 марта 2017 г., в 19:01, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com> написал(а): > > Denis, > > ok > >> 13 марта 2017 г., в 18:59, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org >> <mailto:dma...@apache.org>> написал(а): >> >> Maxim, >> >> Please update Apache Ignite 2.0 migration guide: >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide >> >> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide> >> >> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide >> >> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.0+Migration+Guide>> >> >> You need to say that the parameter has been discontinued and the users can >> use CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.PRIMARY instead. >> >> Agreed? >> >> — >> Denis >> >>> On Mar 10, 2017, at 12:06 AM, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com >>> <mailto:dreamx....@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>> Andrey, Alexey, please review >>> PR - https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 >>> <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521> >>> <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521 >>> <https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1521>> >>> tests - >>> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv >>> >>> <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv> >>> >>> <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv >>> >>> <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll&branch_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>> >>> >>>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 14:15, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org >>>> <mailto:ag...@apache.org>> написал(а): >>>> >>>> Maxim, >>>> >>>> all GridClockSyncProcessor related code should be remove (objects, >>>> messages, etc) >>>> >>>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com >>>> <mailto:dreamx....@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>> Andrey, or better remove GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class? >>>>> >>>>>> 7 марта 2017 г., в 12:21, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com >>>>>> <mailto:dreamx....@gmail.com>> написал(а): >>>>>> >>>>>> Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods: testTimeSync() >>>>>> and testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org >>>>>>> <mailto:ag...@apache.org>> написал(а): >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Maxim, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> About SER_VER_COMPARATOR. You can use code branch that executes when >>>>>>> times are equal: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> int nodeOrder1 = ver1.nodeOrder(); >>>>>>> int nodeOrder2 = ver2.nodeOrder(); >>>>>>> >>>>>>> if (nodeOrder1 == nodeOrder2) { >>>>>>> long order1 = ver1.order(); >>>>>>> long order2 = ver2.order(); >>>>>>> >>>>>>> assert order1 != order2; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> return order1 > order2 ? 1 : -1; >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> else >>>>>>> return nodeOrder1 > nodeOrder2 ? 1 : -1; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Alexey Goncharuk >>>>>>> <alexey.goncha...@gmail.com <mailto:alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>>>>> Maxim, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Global time comparison is only needed for CLOCK mode, so you should >>>>>>>> modify >>>>>>>> the code as if ignoreTime is always true. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2017-03-06 18:13 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com >>>>>>>> <mailto:dreamx....@gmail.com>>: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ok, >>>>>>>>> in GridCacheAtomicVersionComparator class, method >>>>>>>>> compare(GridCacheVersion one, GridCacheVersion other, boolean >>>>>>>>> ignoreTime) >>>>>>>>> if (globalTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) { // => if >>>>>>>>> (ignoreTime) { >>>>>>>>> ..... >>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>> else >>>>>>>>> return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1; // => return -1; >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> and, >>>>>>>>> GridCacheMvcc class, >>>>>>>>> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var. His remove and >>>>>>>>> remove >>>>>>>>> compareSerializableVersion? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 16:51, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:ag...@apache.org>> написал(а): >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Maxim, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> updateTime() method should be removed. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com >>>>>>>>>> <mailto:dreamx....@gmail.com>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> In CacheEntryImplEx class use ver.globalTime() in >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> @Override public long updateTime() { >>>>>>>>>>> return ver.globalTime(); >>>>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Than is better to replace this variable? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:ag...@apache.org>> написал(а): >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I think the next implementation will be good enough: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() { >>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId, topVer), order); >>>>>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Serialization/deserialization of GridCacheVersion.globalTime field >>>>>>>>>>>> should be removed. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 5:57 PM, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:dreamx....@gmail.com>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alexey, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() { >>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(nodeOrderDrId << 32, topVer << 32), >>>>>>>>> order); >>>>>>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> So you want to change or not? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> And >>>>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter writer) >>>>>>>>>>>>> - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader reader) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both >>>>>>>>>>>>> methods) or >>>>>>>>> replace globalTime? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:ag...@apache.org>> написал(а): >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Removing of asGridUuid() method can lead to much code changes >>>>>>>>>>>>>> but it >>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be avoided on this step. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:56 PM, Alexey Goncharuk >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <alexey.goncha...@gmail.com <mailto:alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see several usages of asGridUuid() method, so I would just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remove >>>>>>>>> global >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time and use nodeOrderDrId and topVer as different parts of high >>>>>>>>> and low >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parts of the embedded UUID. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --AG >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-03-02 12:39 GMT+03:00 Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:dreamx....@gmail.com>>: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When removed parameter globalTime, in method: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() { >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> return new IgniteUuid(new UUID(((long)topVer << 32) | >>>>>>>>> nodeOrderDrId, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime), order); >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> globalTime parameter replaced by something or remove this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> method? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 марта 2017 г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx....@gmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:dreamx....@gmail.com>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> написал(а): >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review PR again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:ag...@apache.org>> >>>>>>>>> написал(а): >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that it is ok. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim < >>>>>>>>> dreamx....@gmail.com <mailto:dreamx....@gmail.com>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. What do you say for the rest? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:ag...@apache.org>> >>>>>>>>> написал(а): >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 <mailto: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 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderNearEnabledS >>>>>>>>> elfTest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheValueConsistencyNearEnabledSelfTest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest >>>>>>>>> -> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryAsyncFailoverSelfTest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest >>>>>>>>> -> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CacheContinuousQueryFailoverSelfTest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder >>>>>>>>> -> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testNoBackups >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest. >>>>>>>>> testWithBackupsPrimaryWriteOrder >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -> GridCacheAtomicNearCacheSelfTest.testWithBackups >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remove classes: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderStoreValueTest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheReplicatedAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSe >>>>>>>>> lfTest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeFullApiSelfTest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderMultiNodeP2PDisabledFullApiS >>>>>>>>> elfTest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWrityOrderOffHeapMultiNodeFullApiSelfT >>>>>>>>> est >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderOffHeapFullApiSelfTest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderFullApiSelfTest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ok? :) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto: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 <mailto:dsetrak...@apache.org>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we still need GridClockSyncProcessor? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura < >>>>>>>>> ag...@apache.org <mailto: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 <mailto: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 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto: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 <mailto: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> >>>>>>>>> < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>> Max K. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards, >>>>>>>>>>> Max K. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Best Regards, >>>>>>>>> Max K. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Best Regards, >>>>>> Max K. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Best Regards, >>>>> Max K. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Best Regards, >>> Max K. >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > -- > Best Regards, > Max K. > > > > -- Best Regards, Max K.
