Fair enough, I will try to collect more and share with the team. And +1 on the proposed release schedule: considering the complexity of the changes we better have some time to play with the bits. In fact, I'd suggest we give it 7 days for the [VOTE] so people have time to play with the bits. Thoughts?
Cos On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 11:06AM, Vladimir Ozerov wrote: > Cos, > > I am not aware of performance degradation in regards to Cassandra. AFAIK > there were extensive benchmarking prior to 2.0 release. And in the end 2.0 > release had performance not worse than 1.9. If you have more information on > the matter, let's discuss it in the separate thread. > > On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com> > wrote: > > > Vyacheslav, Denis, > > > > 7 July is too abrupt date. Scope of 2.1 is still too broad, and what is > > more important - persistent store has been merged only several days ago. We > > need some room for stabilization. I propose the following timeline: > > 16 July - code freeze > > 17-21 July - QA > > 21-24 July - vote and release > > > > On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 4:30 AM, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> wrote: > > > >> Thanks everyone for giving us enough time to take a look into the code > >> and architecture of this new feature. The webinar was certainly quite > >> helpful (thanks Denis!). > >> > >> It seems to be a good time to add the feature into the dot-release, so > >> more users can have a taste of it "officially". I have a somewhat > >> unrelated question though: it seems that 2.0 has significant > >> performance degradation compared to 1.8 when it get to the working > >> with external distributed storage (like Cassandra). Could it be caused > >> by all the changes that were made between 1.8 and 2.0 in the > >> preparation for the coming persistent store functionality? Are we > >> publishing/collecting say yardstick reports for our own releases? > >> > >> Thanks! > >> Cos > >> -- > >> Take care, > >> Konstantin (Cos) Boudnik > >> 2CAC 8312 4870 D885 8616 6115 220F 6980 1F27 E622 > >> > >> Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author, > >> and do not necessarily represent the views of any company the author > >> might be affiliated with at the moment of writing. > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 3:20 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com> > >> wrote: > >> > Igniters, > >> > > >> > Persistent store has been merged to master branch! "master-bak" branch > >> was > >> > created to keep the state before merge for safety. As release date for > >> 2.1 > >> > is mid July, I created "ignite-2.1" branch where we will stabilize the > >> > release as usual. Please push features and fixes planned for 2.1 > >> release to > >> > this branch. The rest commits should go to master. > >> > > >> > Vladimir. > >> > > >> > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> >> Hi Denis, > >> >> > >> >> Awesome news! I'll take care of necessary release procedures if nobody > >> >> minds. > >> >> > >> >> Vladimir. > >> >> > >> >> On Sat, Jul 1, 2017 at 12:25 AM, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org> > >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> Igniters, > >> >>> > >> >>> It’s time to refresh this abandoned thread and finally rollout out all > >> >>> the changes appeared in 2.1. > >> >>> > >> >>> In addition, recently donated Persistent Store got the green light > >> [1] to > >> >>> become a part of the master branch (no one asked for extra time to > >> dive > >> >>> into its details) and, personally, it’s absolutely fine to make it > >> >>> available in the nearest release. > >> >>> > >> >>> My proposal is to do the release by mid of July (closer to July > >> 15th). Is > >> >>> there anyone who is ready to take over as a release manager creating > >> the > >> >>> page like this [2] and handling all release related activities? > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/ > >> >>> Ignite-Persistent-Store-Ready-for-merge-td19160.html > >> >>> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+ > >> Ignite+2.0 > >> >>> > >> >>> — > >> >>> Denis > >> >>> > >> >>> > On Jun 1, 2017, at 9:24 AM, Alexander Paschenko < > >> >>> alexander.a.pasche...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >>> > > >> >>> > IGNITE-5327 Create predefined cache templates for CREATE TABLE > >> command > >> >>> > - minor comments left, ETA is Friday. > >> >>> > > >> >>> > IGNITE-5380 Validate cache QueryEntities in discovery thread - in > >> >>> > progress, the meat of code is written, but need to add lots of > >> tests. > >> >>> > ETA is Friday. > >> >>> > > >> >>> > IGNITE-5188 Support AFFINITY KEY keyword for CREATE TABLE command - > >> in > >> >>> > progress, made few first small steps, ETA is Friday. > >> >>> > > >> >>> > Rest is closed/patch available, ignite-4994 has been moved to 2.2. > >> >>> > > >> >>> > - Alex > >> >>> > > >> >>> > 2017-06-01 19:03 GMT+03:00 Sergey Chugunov < > >> sergey.chugu...@gmail.com>: > >> >>> >> 1. IGNITE-5386 Inactive mode must be forced on starting up grid > >> with > >> >>> >> persistence is enabled > >> >>> >> It is important improvement to fix critical bug IGNITE-5363. > >> >>> >> Working on it, ETA - tomorrow. > >> >>> >> 2. IGNITE-5375 New PersistentStoreMetrics, MemoryMetrics > >> interface > >> >>> >> improvements > >> >>> >> A lot of discussions were on this topic, ticket created only > >> today > >> >>> and > >> >>> >> requires several days to implement. > >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 6:56 PM, Taras Ledkov <tled...@gridgain.com > >> > > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>> >> > >> >>> >>> Folks, > >> >>> >>> > >> >>> >>> IGNITE-4922 JDBC Driver: renew thin client based solution: > >> >>> >>> > >> >>> >>> On 2.1 the functionality of the new thin client JDBC driver will > >> be > >> >>> >>> between deprecated Ignite thin JDBC and Ignite JDBCv2. > >> >>> >>> 1. The most functions of SQL query (include DML) are implemented > >> and > >> >>> ready > >> >>> >>> for review; > >> >>> >>> 2. The most functions of JDBC metadata are implemented and ready > >> for > >> >>> >>> review; > >> >>> >>> 3. Transactions, batching, streaming, blobs, scrollable / writable > >> >>> cursors > >> >>> >>> will not be supported in 2.1. > >> >>> >>> > >> >>> >>> > >> >>> >>> > >> >>> >>> On 01.06.2017 18:43, Vladimir Ozerov wrote: > >> >>> >>> > >> >>> >>>> Folks, > >> >>> >>>> > >> >>> >>>> We are almost reached proposed feature-complete date (June 2), > >> Could > >> >>> you > >> >>> >>>> please share current status of your major features? > >> >>> >>>> > >> >>> >>>> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 3:51 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan < > >> >>> dsetrak...@apache.org > >> >>> >>>>> > >> >>> >>>> wrote: > >> >>> >>>> > >> >>> >>>> Looks a little tight. Let's hope we can make it. > >> >>> >>>>> > >> >>> >>>>> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 1:29 PM, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org > >> > > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>> >>>>> > >> >>> >>>>> Well, let me propose the following milestones for 2.1 release > >> then. > >> >>> >>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> Code freeze: June 2nd. > >> >>> >>>>>> Final QA and benchmarking: June 5 - June 8 > >> >>> >>>>>> Voting: ~ June 9 > >> >>> >>>>>> Release: ~ June 13 > >> >>> >>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> Also I heard H2 has to be released once again to support > >> Ignite’s > >> >>> CREATE > >> >>> >>>>>> table command. Think that we should talk to H2 folks to make it > >> >>> happen > >> >>> >>>>>> in > >> >>> >>>>>> June 22nd - June 2nd time frame. > >> >>> >>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> — > >> >>> >>>>>> Denis > >> >>> >>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> On May 11, 2017, at 2:26 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn < > >> ptupit...@apache.org> > >> >>> >>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> wrote: > >> >>> >>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>> As for .NET, I would propose to concentrate on peer deployment > >> >>> >>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> (IGNITE-2492) > >> >>> >>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>> and related stuff, like IGNITE-1894 .NET: Delegate support in > >> the > >> >>> API > >> >>> >>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> via > >> >>> >>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> extension methods. > >> >>> >>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>> SQL Dependency does not look important to me, we can > >> reschedule > >> >>> it for > >> >>> >>>>>>> later versions. > >> >>> >>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan < > >> >>> >>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> dsetrak...@apache.org> > >> >>> >>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>> wrote: > >> >>> >>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>> Vyacheslav, I think it is worth the research, but you should > >> >>> always > >> >>> >>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>> keep > >> >>> >>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> data querying and indexing in mind. For example, I don't see > >> how > >> >>> >>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>> by-page > >> >>> >>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> compression will solve it. > >> >>> >>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 1:52 AM, Vyacheslav Daradur < > >> >>> >>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>> daradu...@gmail.com> > >> >>> >>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>> wrote: > >> >>> >>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>> Dmitriy, > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I'm researching a best way for this future. > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> At the moment I found only one way (querying and indexing > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>> compatible), > >> >>> >>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> this > >> >>> >>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> is per-objects-field compression. > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> But there is a good proffit only for long strings or fields > >> with > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>> large > >> >>> >>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> objects. > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> Maybe it makes sense just to introduce compression for > >> string > >> >>> fileds. > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I'm researching the new page-memory architecture as applied > >> to > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>> by-page > >> >>> >>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> compression. > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> 2017-05-11 11:30 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan < > >> >>> dsetrak...@apache.org > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>> : > >> >>> >>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 12:44 AM, Vyacheslav Daradur < > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> daradu...@gmail.com> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> Denis, > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> The described roadmap looks great! > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> Additional, I vote for introducing an ability (OOTB) to > >> store > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> objects > >> >>> >>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> in > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> a > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> cache in a compressed form. > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> This will allow to store more data at the cost of > >> incriasing > >> >>> of CPU > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> utilization. > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> One of the problems with compression is indexing and > >> >>> querying. How > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> do > >> >>> >>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> we > >> >>> >>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> index the data if it is compressed? > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> 2017-05-11 4:23 GMT+03:00 Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org > >> >: > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> Igniters, > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Let me start a discussion around the scope for 2.1 > >> release. > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> In my vision the main direction of our ongoing efforts > >> >>> should be > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> implementing in life a use case of Ignite as a > >> transactional > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> distributed > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> SQL database and HTAP platform. The current use cases > >> >>> (database > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> cache, > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> data > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> grid, micro services platform, etc.) will be supported as > >> >>> usual, > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> no > >> >>> >>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> changes > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> on that frontier. > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Keeping this in mind, the roadmap needs to include > >> essential > >> >>> SQL > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> related > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> features as well as disk based capabilities, MVCC support, > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> advanced > >> >>> >>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> DDL > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation and so on so forth. This is for Ignite as a > >> SQL > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> database. > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> Next, Machine Learning will be a great addition to Ignite > >> as > >> >>> an > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> HTAP > >> >>> >>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> platform offering. This is why we should keep investing our > >> time > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> and > >> >>> >>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> resources in that recently released component. > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Having this said, I see the scope for 2.1 release this > >> way: > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Distributed Persistent Store - if the donation is > >> >>> accepted by > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> ASF. > >> >>> >>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> The > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> decision is to be done in separate discussion. W/o the > >> store > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Ignite can only be used as In-Memory SQL database. > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 2. SQL Grid: > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - CREATE & DROP table commands: > >> >>> https://issues.apache.org/ > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> jira/browse/IGNITE-4651 > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - Renewed JDBC driver: https://issues.apache.org/ > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> jira/browse/IGNITE-4922 > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - Collocation based routing of SQL queries: > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/ > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> jira/browse/IGNITE-4510, > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4509 > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 3. .NET: > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - Peer-class loading: https://issues.apache.org/ > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> jira/browse/IGNITE-2492 > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - SQLDependency: https://issues.apache.org/ > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> jira/browse/IGNITE-2657 > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 4. C++: > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - Compute Grid: https://issues.apache.org/ > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> jira/browse/IGNITE-3574 > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 5. ML Grid: > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - Linear regression algorithms: > >> >>> https://issues.apache.org/ > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> jira/browse/IGNITE-5012 > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> - K-means clustering: https://issues.apache.org/ > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> jira/browse/IGNITE-5113 > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Please join the thread and share your thoughts, ideas and > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> concerns. > >> >>> >>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> — > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Denis > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards, Vyacheslav > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> -- > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> Best Regards, Vyacheslav > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>>>>> > >> >>> >>>>>> > >> >>> >>> -- > >> >>> >>> Taras Ledkov > >> >>> >>> Mail-To: tled...@gridgain.com > >> >>> >>> > >> >>> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> > > > >
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
