Build failed in Jenkins: Geode-nightly-flaky #50

2017-06-29 Thread Apache Jenkins Server 
See 


Changes:

[bschuchardt] GEODE-3052 Restarting 2 locators together causes potential 
locator split

[eshu] GEODE-3132 EndBucketCreationMessage will not participate in a

[jstewart] Fix spotless failure

[hkhamesra] GEODE-3105: adding GetRegions handler for protobuf protocol

[jstewart] GEODE-3103: GfshRule no longer clutters output

[bschuchardt] GEODE-3145 Add new protocol to Geode JAR

[upthewaterspout] GEODE-3150: Adding a timeout to hanging test

[kmiller] GEODE-3146 Remove doc reference to GemFire 8.2

[upthewaterspout] GEODE-393: Providing cache for FunctionContext

[upthewaterspout] GEODE-2018: Added instantiators to SessionCachingFilter init 
method

[upthewaterspout] GEODE-3140: Removed DiskDirRule and replaced use with 
TemporaryFolder

[hkhamesra] GEODE-3154 Add geode-protobuf to expected_jars

[eshu] GEODE-3147: Set commBuffer for threads performing TXSynchronization

--
[...truncated 99.32 KB...]
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/io/springfox/springfox-spi/2.6.1/springfox-spi-2.6.1.pom
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/io/springfox/springfox-schema/2.6.1/springfox-schema-2.6.1.pom
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/io/springfox/springfox-swagger-common/2.6.1/springfox-swagger-common-2.6.1.pom
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/io/springfox/springfox-spring-web/2.6.1/springfox-spring-web-2.6.1.pom
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/fasterxml/classmate/1.3.1/classmate-1.3.1.pom
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/springframework/plugin/spring-plugin-core/1.2.0.RELEASE/spring-plugin-core-1.2.0.RELEASE.pom
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/springframework/plugin/spring-plugin/1.2.0.RELEASE/spring-plugin-1.2.0.RELEASE.pom
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/springframework/plugin/spring-plugin-metadata/1.2.0.RELEASE/spring-plugin-metadata-1.2.0.RELEASE.pom
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/mapstruct/mapstruct/1.0.0.Final/mapstruct-1.0.0.Final.pom
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/mapstruct/mapstruct-parent/1.0.0.Final/mapstruct-parent-1.0.0.Final.pom
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/springframework/spring-expression/4.3.5.RELEASE/spring-expression-4.3.5.RELEASE.pom
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/thoughtworks/paranamer/paranamer/2.8/paranamer-2.8.pom
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/thoughtworks/paranamer/paranamer-parent/2.8/paranamer-parent-2.8.pom
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/io/springfox/springfox-core/2.6.1/springfox-core-2.6.1.pom
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/fasterxml/jackson/module/jackson-module-scala_2.10/2.8.6/jackson-module-scala_2.10-2.8.6.jar
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/io/springfox/springfox-swagger2/2.6.1/springfox-swagger2-2.6.1.jar
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/io/springfox/springfox-swagger-ui/2.6.1/springfox-swagger-ui-2.6.1.jar
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/springframework/hateoas/spring-hateoas/0.23.0.RELEASE/spring-hateoas-0.23.0.RELEASE.jar
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/fasterxml/jackson/module/jackson-module-paranamer/2.8.6/jackson-module-paranamer-2.8.6.jar
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/io/swagger/swagger-annotations/1.5.10/swagger-annotations-1.5.10.jar
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/io/swagger/swagger-models/1.5.10/swagger-models-1.5.10.jar
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/io/springfox/springfox-spi/2.6.1/springfox-spi-2.6.1.jar
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/io/springfox/springfox-schema/2.6.1/springfox-schema-2.6.1.jar
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/io/springfox/springfox-swagger-common/2.6.1/springfox-swagger-common-2.6.1.jar
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/io/springfox/springfox-spring-web/2.6.1/springfox-spring-web-2.6.1.jar
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/springframework/plugin/spring-plugin-core/1.2.0.RELEASE/spring-plugin-core-1.2.0.RELEASE.jar
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/springframework/plugin/spring-plugin-metadata/1.2.0.RELEASE/spring-plugin-metadata-1.2.0.RELEASE.jar
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/mapstruct/mapstruct/1.0.0.Final/mapstruct-1.0.0.Final.jar
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/thoughtworks/paranamer/paranamer/2.8/paranamer-2.8.jar
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/io/springfox/springfox-core/2.6.1/springfox-core-2.6.1.jar
Note: Some input files use unchecked or unsafe operations.
Note: Recompile with -Xlint:unchecked for details.
:geode-web-api:processResources
:geode-web-api:classes
:geode-assembly:docs
:geode-assembly:gfshDepsJar
:geode-common:javadocJar
:geode-common:sourcesJar
:geode-common:signArchives SKIPPED
:geode-core:javadocJar
:geode-core:raJar
:geode-core:jcaJar
:geode-core:sourcesJar
:geode-core:signArchives SKIPPED
:geode-core:webJar
:geode-cq:jar
:geode-cq:javadoc
:geode-cq:javadocJar

Build failed in Jenkins: Geode-nightly #881

2017-06-29 Thread Apache Jenkins Server 
See 


Changes:

[bschuchardt] added backwardCompatibilityTest test task

[bschuchardt] GEODE-3052 Restarting 2 locators together causes potential 
locator split

[eshu] GEODE-3132 EndBucketCreationMessage will not participate in a

[jstewart] Fix spotless failure

[hkhamesra] GEODE-3105: adding GetRegions handler for protobuf protocol

[jstewart] GEODE-3103: GfshRule no longer clutters output

[bschuchardt] GEODE-3145 Add new protocol to Geode JAR

[upthewaterspout] GEODE-3150: Adding a timeout to hanging test

[kmiller] GEODE-3146 Remove doc reference to GemFire 8.2

--
[...truncated 51.79 KB...]
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat8:javadoc
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat8:javadocJar
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat8:sourcesJar
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat8:signArchives SKIPPED
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat8:assemble
:extensions/geode-modules-assembly:distTcServer
:extensions/geode-modules-assembly:distTcServer30
:extensions/geode-modules-assembly:distTomcat
:extensions/geode-modules-assembly:dist
:extensions/geode-modules-assembly:build
:extensions/geode-modules-assembly:distributedTest UP-TO-DATE
:extensions/geode-modules-assembly:integrationTest UP-TO-DATE
:extensions/geode-modules-session:compileTestJavaNote: 

 uses or overrides a deprecated API.
Note: Recompile with -Xlint:deprecation for details.

:extensions/geode-modules-session:processTestResources
:extensions/geode-modules-session:testClasses
:extensions/geode-modules-session:checkMissedTests
:extensions/geode-modules-session:spotlessJavaCheck
:extensions/geode-modules-session:spotlessCheck
:extensions/geode-modules-session:test
:extensions/geode-modules-session:check
:extensions/geode-modules-session:build
:extensions/geode-modules-session:distributedTest
:extensions/geode-modules-session:integrationTest
:extensions/geode-modules-session-internal:javadocJar
:extensions/geode-modules-session-internal:sourcesJar
:extensions/geode-modules-session-internal:signArchives SKIPPED
:extensions/geode-modules-session-internal:assemble
:extensions/geode-modules-session-internal:compileTestJava UP-TO-DATE
:extensions/geode-modules-session-internal:processTestResources UP-TO-DATE
:extensions/geode-modules-session-internal:testClasses UP-TO-DATE
:extensions/geode-modules-session-internal:checkMissedTests UP-TO-DATE
:extensions/geode-modules-session-internal:spotlessJavaCheck
:extensions/geode-modules-session-internal:spotlessCheck
:extensions/geode-modules-session-internal:test UP-TO-DATE
:extensions/geode-modules-session-internal:check
:extensions/geode-modules-session-internal:build
:extensions/geode-modules-session-internal:distributedTest UP-TO-DATE
:extensions/geode-modules-session-internal:integrationTest UP-TO-DATE
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat7:compileTestJava
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat7:processTestResources
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat7:testClasses
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat7:checkMissedTests
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat7:spotlessJavaCheck
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat7:spotlessCheck
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat7:test
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat7:check
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat7:build
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat7:distributedTest
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat7:integrationTest
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat8:compileTestJavaNote: 

 uses or overrides a deprecated API.
Note: Recompile with -Xlint:deprecation for details.

:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat8:processTestResources
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat8:testClasses
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat8:checkMissedTests
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat8:spotlessJavaCheck
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat8:spotlessCheck
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat8:test
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat8:check
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat8:build
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat8:distributedTest
:extensions/geode-modules-tomcat8:integrationTest
:geode-assembly:compileJava UP-TO-DATE
:geode-assembly:processResources UP-TO-DATE
:geode-assembly:classes UP-TO-DATE
:geode-assembly:defaultCacheConfig
:geode-assembly:defaultDistributionConfig
:geode-assembly:depsJar
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/google/protobuf/protobuf-java/3.3.1/protobuf-java-3.3.1.pom
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/google/protobuf/protobuf-parent/3.3.1/protobuf-parent-3.3.1.pom
Download 
https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/google/protobuf/protobuf-java/3.3.1/protobuf-java-3.3.1.jar
:geode-benchmarks:compileJava UP-TO-DATE
:geode-benchmarks:processResources UP-TO-DATE
:geode-benchmarks:classes UP-TO-DATE
:geode-cq:compileJavaNote: Some input

Re: Review Request 60550: GEODE-3154: add geode-protobuf to expected_jars.txt

2017-06-29 Thread Udo Kohlmeyer 

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/60550/#review179319
---


Ship it!




Ship It!

- Udo Kohlmeyer


On June 29, 2017, 9:39 p.m., Galen O'Sullivan wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/60550/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 29, 2017, 9:39 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for geode, Alexander Murmann, Barry Oglesby, Bruce Schuchardt, 
> Hitesh Khamesra, Udo Kohlmeyer, and Brian Rowe.
> 
> 
> Repository: geode
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> Currently BundledJarsJUnitTest is failing because we added geode-protobuf to 
> geode-assembly but not to the `expected_jars.txt` file, which tells us which 
> jars we expect. This one-liner adds it. This should keep builds from failing.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   geode-assembly/src/test/resources/expected_jars.txt 62601677f 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60550/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> Built on my machine, verified that the test passes.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Galen O'Sullivan
> 
>

Re: Review Request 60347: GEODE-3097: GFSH works over HTTP with SSL

2017-06-29 Thread Jared Stewart 


> On June 29, 2017, 5:34 p.m., Kirk Lund wrote:
> > geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/management/ConnectToLocatorSSLDUnitTest.java
> > Line 63 (original), 66 (patched)
> > 
> >
> > Looks like this test has some problems. The Rules are not marked with 
> > @Rule, so the test would be responsible for invoking before and after on 
> > each Rule. I've said this before: a Rule that's not used as a Rule is 
> > "astonishing" or "surprising" -- 
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_least_astonishment

The Rules are being rules in this case, they're just being called through a 
`RuleChain` since we need to ensure order.  Do you have any suggestions for how 
to make that more apparent?


- Jared


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/60347/#review179282
---


On June 21, 2017, 10:48 p.m., Jared Stewart wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/60347/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 21, 2017, 10:48 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for geode, Emily Yeh, Jared Stewart, Ken Howe, Kirk Lund, and 
> Patrick Rhomberg.
> 
> 
> Repository: geode
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> GEODE-3097: GFSH works over HTTP with SSL
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   
> geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/management/internal/cli/commands/ShellCommands.java
>  2da95a7c3f305aab4e615d4be7b14c19b9b31dbc 
>   
> geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/management/ConnectToLocatorSSLDUnitTest.java
>  844e0322eecdc93c4d46c546f4df2d278c5f15cd 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60347/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> Precheckin running
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jared Stewart
> 
>

[Spring CI] Spring Data GemFire > Nightly-ApacheGeode > #601 was SUCCESSFUL (with 1908 tests)

2017-06-29 Thread Spring CI 

---
Spring Data GemFire > Nightly-ApacheGeode > #601 was successful.
---
Scheduled
1910 tests in total.

https://build.spring.io/browse/SGF-NAG-601/





--
This message is automatically generated by Atlassian Bamboo

Re: Review Request 60312: GEODE-2804 Cache InetAddress if configure host as ip string.

2017-06-29 Thread Hitesh Khamesra 

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/60312/
---

(Updated June 29, 2017, 10:27 p.m.)


Review request for geode, Alexander Murmann, Bruce Schuchardt, and Galen 
O'Sullivan.


Changes
---

Updated diff


Repository: geode


Description
---

GEODE-2804 Cache InetAddress if configure host as ip string.

1. We keep configure host string in HostAddress class
2. We reuse InetsocketAddress if it is ipString.
3. Client has logic to retry thus we keep InetsocketAddress even if 
   it is not ip string.

GEODE-3017 IPv6 issue on windows. Above changes fixed this issue.

GEODE-2940 Now we don't validate configure host string on start. As
there is possibility that host may not available.

1. Earlier wan config were failing because of that. Now we just keep
those configure host string. And try this later.

Added unit tests for it.


Diffs
-

  geode-assembly/build.gradle 39bb542 
  geode-assembly/src/test/resources/expected_jars.txt 6260167 
  geode-core/build.gradle 7f34b4a 
  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/admin/internal/DistributionLocatorImpl.java
 c1bfc93 
  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/cache/client/internal/AutoConnectionSourceImpl.java
 53d401a 
  geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/cache/client/internal/PoolImpl.java 
3ded54a 
  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/distributed/internal/AbstractDistributionConfig.java
 01c6157 
  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/distributed/internal/InternalDistributedSystem.java
 a4b3a50 
  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/distributed/internal/membership/gms/GMSUtil.java
 da295ab 
  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/distributed/internal/membership/gms/locator/GMSLocator.java
 aff1938 
  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/distributed/internal/membership/gms/membership/GMSJoinLeave.java
 bc3d708 
  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/distributed/internal/tcpserver/TcpClient.java
 6b54170 
  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/internal/admin/remote/DistributionLocatorId.java
 5ab1bed 
  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/internal/admin/remote/RemoteTransportConfig.java
 1dc2fd1 
  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/ClusterConfigurationLoader.java
 92cfd96 
  geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/PoolFactoryImpl.java 
d4fdbd0 
  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/management/internal/JmxManagerLocatorRequest.java
 0efba01 
  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/management/internal/cli/commands/LauncherLifecycleCommands.java
 88832ba 
  
geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/cache/client/internal/AutoConnectionSourceDUnitTest.java
 789d326 
  
geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/cache/client/internal/AutoConnectionSourceImplJUnitTest.java
 3cc3cfc 
  
geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/distributed/internal/DistributionConfigJUnitTest.java
 9f6c5fb 
  
geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/distributed/internal/StartupMessageDataJUnitTest.java
 9d63050 
  
geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/distributed/internal/membership/gms/membership/GMSJoinLeaveJUnitTest.java
 a31fa8d 
  
geode-core/src/test/resources/org/apache/geode/codeAnalysis/excludedClasses.txt 
6a6e0c1 
  
geode-wan/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/cache/client/internal/locator/wan/LocatorDiscovery.java
 f5a8fcf 
  
geode-wan/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/cache/client/internal/locator/wan/LocatorMembershipListenerImpl.java
 d6d5d7c 
  
geode-wan/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/wan/AbstractRemoteGatewaySender.java
 dbc2cc6 
  
geode-wan/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/wan/misc/WanAutoDiscoveryDUnitTest.java
 6d75064 
  gradle/dependency-versions.properties 6a730a4 


Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60312/diff/3/


Testing
---


File Attachments (updated)


Latest diff
  
https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2017/06/29/45369a6d-34d0-42dd-96bc-a1c009d00824__GEODE-2804v2.patch


Thanks,

Hitesh Khamesra

[GitHub] geode pull request #614: Add geode-protobuf to expected_jars

2017-06-29 Thread asfgit 
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/614


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Re: Review Request 60550: GEODE-3154: add geode-protobuf to expected_jars.txt

2017-06-29 Thread Hitesh Khamesra 

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/60550/#review179309
---


Ship it!




Ship It!

- Hitesh Khamesra


On June 29, 2017, 9:39 p.m., Galen O'Sullivan wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/60550/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 29, 2017, 9:39 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for geode, Alexander Murmann, Barry Oglesby, Bruce Schuchardt, 
> Hitesh Khamesra, Udo Kohlmeyer, and Brian Rowe.
> 
> 
> Repository: geode
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> Currently BundledJarsJUnitTest is failing because we added geode-protobuf to 
> geode-assembly but not to the `expected_jars.txt` file, which tells us which 
> jars we expect. This one-liner adds it. This should keep builds from failing.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   geode-assembly/src/test/resources/expected_jars.txt 62601677f 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60550/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> Built on my machine, verified that the test passes.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Galen O'Sullivan
> 
>

[GitHub] geode pull request #608: GEODE-3140: Removed DiskDirRule and replaced use wi...

2017-06-29 Thread asfgit 
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/608


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Review Request 60550: GEODE-3154: add geode-protobuf to expected_jars.txt

2017-06-29 Thread Galen O'Sullivan 

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/60550/
---

Review request for geode, Alexander Murmann, Barry Oglesby, Bruce Schuchardt, 
Hitesh Khamesra, Udo Kohlmeyer, and Brian Rowe.


Repository: geode


Description
---

Currently BundledJarsJUnitTest is failing because we added geode-protobuf to 
geode-assembly but not to the `expected_jars.txt` file, which tells us which 
jars we expect. This one-liner adds it. This should keep builds from failing.


Diffs
-

  geode-assembly/src/test/resources/expected_jars.txt 62601677f 


Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60550/diff/1/


Testing
---

Built on my machine, verified that the test passes.


Thanks,

Galen O'Sullivan

[GitHub] geode issue #608: GEODE-3140: Removed DiskDirRule and replaced use with Temp...

2017-06-29 Thread upthewaterspout 
Github user upthewaterspout commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/608
  
+1 - I'll merge this.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] geode pull request #74: Added cache to FunctionalContextImpl

2017-06-29 Thread asfgit 
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/74


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] geode pull request #589: GEODE-393: Providing cache for FunctionContext

2017-06-29 Thread asfgit 
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/589


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] geode pull request #587: GEODE-2018: Added instantiators to SessionCachingFi...

2017-06-29 Thread asfgit 
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/587


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Re: Review Request 60513: GEODE-3147 Set TLCommBuffer threadLocal for threads executing TXSynchronization

2017-06-29 Thread Darrel Schneider 

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/60513/#review179303
---




geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/tier/sockets/AcceptorImpl.java
Lines 1796 (patched)


The current code is good but I had one more idea.
Why not have the "isSelector()" checks in setTLCommBuffer and 
releaseTLCommBuffer?
You can implement them to have the first line:
if (!isSelector()) return;

That would allow you to get rid of your call if isSelector in 
TXSynchronizationCommand
and your run method in TXSynchronizationRunnable would no longer need to do 
the null check.


- Darrel Schneider


On June 29, 2017, 11:39 a.m., Eric Shu wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/60513/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 29, 2017, 11:39 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for geode, anilkumar gingade, Darrel Schneider, and Lynn 
> Gallinat.
> 
> 
> Bugs: GEODE-3147
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-3147
> 
> 
> Repository: geode
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> Set byte buffer for the threads that need to send reply to clients when 
> Max_Threads are set.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   
> geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/TXSynchronizationRunnable.java
>  35b0e75 
>   
> geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/tier/sockets/AcceptorImpl.java
>  472af09 
>   
> geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/tier/sockets/CommBufferPool.java
>  PRE-CREATION 
>   
> geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/tier/sockets/ServerConnection.java
>  ebc9dab 
>   
> geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/tier/sockets/command/TXSynchronizationCommand.java
>  b1b0cfb 
>   
> geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/internal/jta/ClientServerJTADUnitTest.java
>  51ef44a 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60513/diff/3/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> precheckin.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Eric Shu
> 
>

Re: Question regarding the next release

2017-06-29 Thread Anthony Baker 
The community is working hard to ensure that backwards compatibility is 
preserved.

There are currently 2 open issues remaining to be fixed:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=statusCategory%20%3D%20new%20AND%20project%20%3D%2012318420%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%2012339257%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20key%20ASC
 


Once those are complete we’ll create another release candidate.

Anthony

> On Jun 29, 2017, at 3:06 AM, Roi Apelker  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Is there an expected date for release of 1.2?
> 
> Are there any backward compatibility issues in this version? If so, are they 
> documented separately from the other issues?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Roi
> This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and 
> confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
> 
> you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer 
>

[GitHub] geode issue #611: GEODE-3145 Add new protocol to Geode JAR

2017-06-29 Thread galen-pivotal 
Github user galen-pivotal commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/611
  
This has been merged in f63b9d .


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Re: Review Request 60375: GEODE-3117: fix Gateway authentication with legacy security

2017-06-29 Thread Jinmei Liao 


> On June 26, 2017, 11:58 p.m., Jinmei Liao wrote:
> > geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/cache/client/internal/ConnectionFactoryImpl.java
> > Line 82 (original), 82 (patched)
> > 
> >
> > since we already pass in the entire sys, do we need to pass in 
> > sys.getSecurityService() as well? Can we change the signaure of the 
> > constructor to take an InternalDistributedSystem, and directly uses the 
> > security service inside the passed sys?
> 
> Kirk Lund wrote:
> I'm trying to separate our major services instead of folding them in 
> together. For example, I don't want to go to Cache to get DistributedSystem 
> (but you can) and I don't want our code to go to DistributedSystem to get 
> SecurityService. The link between DistributedSystem and SecurityService is 
> tenuous at best -- DistributedSystem USES SecurityService but it doesn't 
> logically own it except for the fact that DS is the 1st object in Geode that 
> needs to use it. So from the point-of-view of an object like HandShake, I'm 
> trying to give it individual services. This also has the side effect of 
> making classes such as HandShake easier to unit test when mocking the 
> collaborators. Another reason I'm doing this is because it makes ALL of the 
> collorators visible at the constructor level which is a good practice to 
> follow.
> 
> If we want to start using Dependency Injection (which I want to), then we 
> need to do even more of this -- passing in every collaborator individually 
> rather than passing in a god object to invoke getters against on it to get 
> the other dependencies.
> 
> Or to summarize even more, I'm trying to steer away from bad code to good 
> code (good object-oriented design) and god objects are one of the worst 
> anti-patterns.
> 
> Jinmei Liao wrote:
> If you envisioned that security service will be rippsed out of ds in the 
> future, and wants to gear towards that way, then I can see your point. But 
> from the current state of things I would not call it bad o-o design though. 
> If I see any method call that's in the shape of callXYZ(o, o.getX(), 
> o.getY(), o.getZ()), then I would question why bother pssing in the last 
> three parameters. To me, that's anti-pattern.
> 
> Kirk Lund wrote:
> I'd much prefer to discuss object-oriented design principles outside of a 
> simple bug fix. You seem to not want me to make subtle improvements to class 
> design. YOu need to understand that I can't fix every class in Geode all at 
> once -- I can only do it very gradually.
> 
> DistributedSystem is a god object [1] which is a pattern that we want to 
> move away from.
> 
> Requiring HandShake to know that DistributedSystem (2nd arg to 
> constructor) has a SecurityService breaks the Law of Demeter [2].
> 
> As we change classes to use Dependency Injection [3], one visible 
> difference. is that you're going to see every logically separate dependency 
> as a separate argument being passed into the constructor.
> 
> Now ask yourself, is SecurityService logically a part of 
> DistributedSystem? Such that it doesn't make sense to use Security outside of 
> the membership and distribution code?
> 
> Last but not least, we have organized our teams to utilize what upper 
> management calls Inverse Conway's Manuever [4]. Unfortunately this point has 
> more to do with Pivotal and GemFire than Geode. The point of Inverse Conway's 
> Manuever (according to Elisabeth and Michael) is that our code will gradually 
> separate from the code owned by other teams and eventually become so modular 
> that we can even have separate git repos. The Communications team owns 
> membership and distribution (org.apache.geode.distributed). The Storage team 
> owns caching (org.apache.geode.cache). The M team owns Security 
> (org.apache.geode.security) and Configuration. Unfortunately Configuration is 
> currently spaghettied throughout DistributedSystem and Cache (distributed and 
> cache packages). The only reason why InternalDistributedSystem currently 
> touches SecurityService is because it needs to inject SecurityService into 
> the membership Services. We would potentially create a new Configuration 
> entity which handles 
 the lifecycle of configuration in Geode instead of it being spread out within 
DistributedSystem and Cache. So aside from breaking Law of Demeter, using 
system.getSecurityService() instead of simply passing in SecurityService adds 
one more point of code that we have to change when we tease apart 
SecurityService from both DistributedSystem and Cache.
> 
> I honestly don't know what else to tell you regarding this. I believe we 
> need to stop having these reviews break down into philosophical discussions 
> about proper object oriented coding and how each person involved on Geode 
> wants to guide the code as it evolves towards better modularity.

Re: Review Request 60513: GEODE-3147 Set TLCommBuffer threadLocal for threads executing TXSynchronization

2017-06-29 Thread Eric Shu 

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/60513/
---

(Updated June 29, 2017, 6:39 p.m.)


Review request for geode, anilkumar gingade, Darrel Schneider, and Lynn 
Gallinat.


Changes
---

Added a new interface based on review comment.


Bugs: GEODE-3147
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-3147


Repository: geode


Description
---

Set byte buffer for the threads that need to send reply to clients when 
Max_Threads are set.


Diffs (updated)
-

  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/TXSynchronizationRunnable.java
 35b0e75 
  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/tier/sockets/AcceptorImpl.java
 472af09 
  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/tier/sockets/CommBufferPool.java
 PRE-CREATION 
  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/tier/sockets/ServerConnection.java
 ebc9dab 
  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/tier/sockets/command/TXSynchronizationCommand.java
 b1b0cfb 
  
geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/internal/jta/ClientServerJTADUnitTest.java
 51ef44a 


Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60513/diff/3/

Changes: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60513/diff/2-3/


Testing
---

precheckin.


Thanks,

Eric Shu

[GitHub] geode issue #601: GEODE-3117: fix Gateway authentication with legacy securit...

2017-06-29 Thread kirklund 
Github user kirklund commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/601
  
@pdxrunner thanks for finding the commented out code! I fixed it.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Re: Review Request 60375: GEODE-3117: fix Gateway authentication with legacy security

2017-06-29 Thread Kirk Lund 


> On June 26, 2017, 11:58 p.m., Jinmei Liao wrote:
> > geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/cache/client/internal/ConnectionFactoryImpl.java
> > Line 82 (original), 82 (patched)
> > 
> >
> > since we already pass in the entire sys, do we need to pass in 
> > sys.getSecurityService() as well? Can we change the signaure of the 
> > constructor to take an InternalDistributedSystem, and directly uses the 
> > security service inside the passed sys?
> 
> Kirk Lund wrote:
> I'm trying to separate our major services instead of folding them in 
> together. For example, I don't want to go to Cache to get DistributedSystem 
> (but you can) and I don't want our code to go to DistributedSystem to get 
> SecurityService. The link between DistributedSystem and SecurityService is 
> tenuous at best -- DistributedSystem USES SecurityService but it doesn't 
> logically own it except for the fact that DS is the 1st object in Geode that 
> needs to use it. So from the point-of-view of an object like HandShake, I'm 
> trying to give it individual services. This also has the side effect of 
> making classes such as HandShake easier to unit test when mocking the 
> collaborators. Another reason I'm doing this is because it makes ALL of the 
> collorators visible at the constructor level which is a good practice to 
> follow.
> 
> If we want to start using Dependency Injection (which I want to), then we 
> need to do even more of this -- passing in every collaborator individually 
> rather than passing in a god object to invoke getters against on it to get 
> the other dependencies.
> 
> Or to summarize even more, I'm trying to steer away from bad code to good 
> code (good object-oriented design) and god objects are one of the worst 
> anti-patterns.
> 
> Jinmei Liao wrote:
> If you envisioned that security service will be rippsed out of ds in the 
> future, and wants to gear towards that way, then I can see your point. But 
> from the current state of things I would not call it bad o-o design though. 
> If I see any method call that's in the shape of callXYZ(o, o.getX(), 
> o.getY(), o.getZ()), then I would question why bother pssing in the last 
> three parameters. To me, that's anti-pattern.

I'd much prefer to discuss object-oriented design principles outside of a 
simple bug fix. You seem to not want me to make subtle improvements to class 
design. YOu need to understand that I can't fix every class in Geode all at 
once -- I can only do it very gradually.

DistributedSystem is a god object [1] which is a pattern that we want to move 
away from.

Requiring HandShake to know that DistributedSystem (2nd arg to constructor) has 
a SecurityService breaks the Law of Demeter [2].

As we change classes to use Dependency Injection [3], one visible difference. 
is that you're going to see every logically separate dependency as a separate 
argument being passed into the constructor.

Now ask yourself, is SecurityService logically a part of DistributedSystem? 
Such that it doesn't make sense to use Security outside of the membership and 
distribution code?

Last but not least, we have organized our teams to utilize what upper 
management calls Inverse Conway's Manuever [4]. Unfortunately this point has 
more to do with Pivotal and GemFire than Geode. The point of Inverse Conway's 
Manuever (according to Elisabeth and Michael) is that our code will gradually 
separate from the code owned by other teams and eventually become so modular 
that we can even have separate git repos. The Communications team owns 
membership and distribution (org.apache.geode.distributed). The Storage team 
owns caching (org.apache.geode.cache). The M team owns Security 
(org.apache.geode.security) and Configuration. Unfortunately Configuration is 
currently spaghettied throughout DistributedSystem and Cache (distributed and 
cache packages). The only reason why InternalDistributedSystem currently 
touches SecurityService is because it needs to inject SecurityService into the 
membership Services. We would potentially create a new Configuration entity 
which handles the li
 fecycle of configuration in Geode instead of it being spread out within 
DistributedSystem and Cache. So aside from breaking Law of Demeter, using 
system.getSecurityService() instead of simply passing in SecurityService adds 
one more point of code that we have to change when we tease apart 
SecurityService from both DistributedSystem and Cache.

I honestly don't know what else to tell you regarding this. I believe we need 
to stop having these reviews break down into philosophical discussions about 
proper object oriented coding and how each person involved on Geode wants to 
guide the code as it evolves towards better modularity. Any questions about why 
I'm trying to do this?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_object
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Demeter
[3]

Re: Review Request 60347: GEODE-3097: GFSH works over HTTP with SSL

2017-06-29 Thread Kirk Lund 

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/60347/#review179282
---




geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/management/ConnectToLocatorSSLDUnitTest.java
Line 63 (original), 66 (patched)


Looks like this test has some problems. The Rules are not marked with 
@Rule, so the test would be responsible for invoking before and after on each 
Rule. I've said this before: a Rule that's not used as a Rule is "astonishing" 
or "surprising" -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_least_astonishment


- Kirk Lund


On June 21, 2017, 10:48 p.m., Jared Stewart wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/60347/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 21, 2017, 10:48 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for geode, Emily Yeh, Jared Stewart, Ken Howe, Kirk Lund, and 
> Patrick Rhomberg.
> 
> 
> Repository: geode
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> GEODE-3097: GFSH works over HTTP with SSL
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   
> geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/management/internal/cli/commands/ShellCommands.java
>  2da95a7c3f305aab4e615d4be7b14c19b9b31dbc 
>   
> geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/management/ConnectToLocatorSSLDUnitTest.java
>  844e0322eecdc93c4d46c546f4df2d278c5f15cd 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60347/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> Precheckin running
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jared Stewart
> 
>

Re: Review Request 60483: GEODE-3139 remove geode-core/src/main artifacts from classpath of backward-compatibility tests

2017-06-29 Thread Kirk Lund 

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/60483/#review179280
---


Ship it!




Ship It!

- Kirk Lund


On June 27, 2017, 10:40 p.m., Bruce Schuchardt wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/60483/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 27, 2017, 10:40 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for geode, Kirk Lund and Dan Smith.
> 
> 
> Bugs: GEODE-3139
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-3139
> 
> 
> Repository: geode
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> This removes the geode-core product artifacts from old-version JVM classpaths 
> for backward-compatibility testing.  I had to change the distributed test 
> framework to not refer to InternalClientCache but surprisingly that caused no 
> compilation failures.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   
> geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/test/dunit/cache/internal/JUnit3CacheTestCase.java
>  917361fbc3f5c78b115b29a9ddab21af486a6720 
>   
> geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/test/dunit/cache/internal/JUnit4CacheTestCase.java
>  862974942bcbf41d563215603edc3ca27f5b277c 
>   
> geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/test/dunit/standalone/ProcessManager.java
>  21b79e857feb5aab0abba91060c322b43296d91a 
>   gradle/test.gradle 3015ec0973a0c9049f124be343ba505b776030a9 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60483/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bruce Schuchardt
> 
>

Re: Review Request 60375: GEODE-3117: fix Gateway authentication with legacy security

2017-06-29 Thread Kirk Lund 

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/60375/
---

(Updated June 29, 2017, 5:29 p.m.)


Review request for geode, Emily Yeh, Jinmei Liao, Jared Stewart, Ken Howe, and 
Patrick Rhomberg.


Changes
---

Fixed commented out code


Bugs: GEODE-3117
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-3117


Repository: geode


Description
---

GEODE-3117: fix Gateway authentication with legacy security

* add GatewayLegacyAuthenticationRegressionTest to reproduce bug
* fix authentication of Gateway sender/receiver with 
SECURITY_CLIENT_AUTHENTICATOR


Diffs (updated)
-

  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/cache/client/internal/ConnectionFactoryImpl.java
 a419d575010d39d4dab6c5c8f9748928c1764344 
  
geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/tier/sockets/HandShake.java
 32735b9ab17fe9467cea46096bd177902145e4bd 
  
geode-wan/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/wan/misc/GatewayLegacyAuthenticationRegressionTest.java
 PRE-CREATION 


Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60375/diff/2/

Changes: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60375/diff/1-2/


Testing
---

* new test reproduces GEODE-3117: GatewayLegacyAuthenticationRegressionTest
* precheckin passes


Thanks,

Kirk Lund

Re: Review Request 60375: GEODE-3117: fix Gateway authentication with legacy security

2017-06-29 Thread Kirk Lund 

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/60375/#review179274
---




geode-wan/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/wan/misc/GatewayLegacyAuthenticationRegressionTest.java
Lines 160 (patched)


Need to fix this line



geode-wan/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/wan/misc/GatewayLegacyAuthenticationRegressionTest.java
Lines 164 (patched)


Need to fix this line


- Kirk Lund


On June 26, 2017, 6:02 p.m., Kirk Lund wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/60375/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 26, 2017, 6:02 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for geode, Emily Yeh, Jinmei Liao, Jared Stewart, Ken Howe, 
> and Patrick Rhomberg.
> 
> 
> Bugs: GEODE-3117
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-3117
> 
> 
> Repository: geode
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> GEODE-3117: fix Gateway authentication with legacy security
> 
> * add GatewayLegacyAuthenticationRegressionTest to reproduce bug
> * fix authentication of Gateway sender/receiver with 
> SECURITY_CLIENT_AUTHENTICATOR
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   
> geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/cache/client/internal/ConnectionFactoryImpl.java
>  a419d575010d39d4dab6c5c8f9748928c1764344 
>   
> geode-core/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/tier/sockets/HandShake.java
>  32735b9ab17fe9467cea46096bd177902145e4bd 
>   
> geode-wan/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/wan/misc/GatewayLegacyAuthenticationRegressionTest.java
>  PRE-CREATION 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60375/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> * new test reproduces GEODE-3117: GatewayLegacyAuthenticationRegressionTest
> * precheckin passes
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Kirk Lund
> 
>

RE: [GitHub] geode pull request #613: GEODE-3151: Internal Region Registration in JMX as ...

2017-06-29 Thread Dinesh Akhand 
Hi Team,

I want to raise the review request for the same. I created the pull request.
Can some one help , How I can raise review request.

Thanks,
Dinesh Akhand

-Original Message-
From: dineshpune2006 [mailto:g...@git.apache.org] 
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 7:41 PM
To: dev@geode.apache.org
Subject: [GitHub] geode pull request #613: GEODE-3151: Internal Region 
Registration in JMX as ...

GitHub user dineshpune2006 opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/613

GEODE-3151: Internal Region Registration in JMX as per config parameter

Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache Geode.

In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
to ensure the following steps have been taken:

### For all changes:
- [X ] Is there a JIRA ticket associated with this PR? Is it referenced in 
the commit message?

- [X ] Has your PR been rebased against the latest commit within the target 
branch (typically `develop`)?

- [ X] Is your initial contribution a single, squashed commit?

- [X ] Does `gradlew build` run cleanly?

- [ X] Have you written or updated unit tests to verify your changes?

- [ ] If adding new dependencies to the code, are these dependencies 
licensed in a way that is compatible for inclusion under [ASF 
2.0](http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-a)?

### Note:
Please ensure that once the PR is submitted, you check travis-ci for build 
issues and
submit an update to your PR as soon as possible. If you need help, please 
send an
email to dev@geode.apache.org.


You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/dineshpune2006/geode feature/GEODE-3151

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/613.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch with (at 
least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #613


commit 5098e58360c31d3e44954010c4ed7263e60186f3
Author: dineshpune2006 
Date:   2017-06-29T13:40:51Z

GEODE-3151: Internal Region Registration in JMX as per config parameter




---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your 
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature 
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please 
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with 
INFRA.
---
This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and 
confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,

you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer

Re: Review Request 60451: GEODE-2996: adding Put handler

2017-06-29 Thread Alexander Murmann 

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/60451/#review179269
---




geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/MessageUtil.java
Line 20 (original), 31 (patched)


Anyone got any suggestions on how we could best test the message 
construction by the util methods? The test code has to be almost identical to 
the implementation code which is unfortunate. In our current approach we have 
the same thing in essence twice, which doesn't really test anything eiter. 
Maybe just will need to rely on PDD's integration test to be 100% sure that it 
works?


- Alexander Murmann


On June 27, 2017, 1:20 a.m., Brian Rowe wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/60451/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 27, 2017, 1:20 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for geode, Alexander Murmann, Bruce Schuchardt, Galen 
> O'Sullivan, Hitesh Khamesra, and Udo Kohlmeyer.
> 
> 
> Bugs: GEODE-2996
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-2996
> 
> 
> Repository: geode
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> This is a continuation of the review Alex submitted this morning with the 
> following changes:
> 
> Addresses review feedback for GEODE-2996, mainly refactoring 
> getOpertionHandler to handle failures like the putOperationHandler
> Adding put operations to the RoundTripCacheConnectionJUnitTest, which is the 
> integration test for the protobuf module
> Removing service loading for protobuf operations and instead have the 
> ProtobufStreamProcessor populate its OperationHandlerRegistry
> Remove exception throwing from OperationHandler.process calls and remove 
> TypeEncodingException
> Fixing ProtobufOpsProcessor to handle responses for types other than get
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/operations/OperationHandler.java
>  7683e3bf3 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/operations/registry/OperationsHandlerRegistry.java
>  8e3a33149 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/ProtobufOpsProcessor.java
>  d426149e4 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/ProtobufStreamProcessor.java
>  d7b5d4bd2 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/ProtobufUtilities.java
>  d76366298 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/operations/GetRequestOperationHandler.java
>  d9c14752f 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/operations/PutRequestOperationHandler.java
>  PRE-CREATION 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/serialization/exception/TypeEncodingException.java
>  f3145a774 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/serialization/exception/UnsupportedEncodingTypeException.java
>  c577e768a 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/serialization/registry/exception/CodecNotRegisteredForTypeException.java
>  5c923a520 
>   geode-protobuf/src/main/proto/region_API.proto 52291c451 
>   geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/MessageUtil.java 
> f0b0b417b 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/RoundTripCacheConnectionJUnitTest.java
>  b9faca3c9 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/ProtobufOpsProcessorJUnitTest.java
>  fc980aec9 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/operations/GetRequestOperationHandlerJUnitTest.java
>  daa5870ed 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/operations/PutRequestOperationHandlerJUnitTest.java
>  PRE-CREATION 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60451/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> Unit tests, whole module test, precheckin in progress.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Brian Rowe
> 
>

Re: Review Request 60523: GEODE-3141 New flow: GetRegion

2017-06-29 Thread Bruce Schuchardt 


> On June 28, 2017, 6:24 p.m., Udo Kohlmeyer wrote:
> > geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/operations/GetRegionRequestOperationHandler.java
> > Lines 42 (patched)
> > 
> >
> > Does this not muddy the implementation? What can a destroyed region 
> > return? Surely a region exists or it does not...

Yeah, maybe we don't need that.  I think Region.isDestroyed() is mostly useful 
if you're retaining a reference to a Region and it somehow becomes destroyed.


> On June 28, 2017, 6:24 p.m., Udo Kohlmeyer wrote:
> > geode-protobuf/src/main/proto/region_API.proto
> > Lines 118 (patched)
> > 
> >
> > What does this field mean? How do we represent a failure?

People seem to like the idea of having a separate "success" field.  There 
aren't, at present, any failure modes for GetRegion so I thought I'd save some 
space.


- Bruce


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/60523/#review179217
---


On June 28, 2017, 4:06 p.m., Bruce Schuchardt wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/60523/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 28, 2017, 4:06 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for geode, Alexander Murmann, Galen O'Sullivan, Hitesh 
> Khamesra, Udo Kohlmeyer, and Brian Rowe.
> 
> 
> Bugs: GEODE-3141
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-3141
> 
> 
> Repository: geode
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> Added a GetRegion(regionName) API.  More details about the server region can 
> be added if needed.  This implementation just has a success flag and flag 
> saying whether the region is destroyed.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/ProtobufOpsProcessor.java
>  4318fb444dd0eb5f5d07175a466e26f03933cc4d 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/ProtobufStreamProcessor.java
>  4e76de4a15d1ff0cfeddcc2c7115c7c18c2e14ba 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/operations/GetRegionRequestOperationHandler.java
>  PRE-CREATION 
>   geode-protobuf/src/main/proto/clientProtocol.proto 
> 0c192950a4e750f7c55e186c18a79a6c52716bf0 
>   geode-protobuf/src/main/proto/region_API.proto 
> d3af17acb1ee45c134837c321b2009c8532817cc 
>   geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/MessageUtil.java 
> dc897241fc229da53a5ff7a0e2df1678b8bceb6d 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/RoundTripCacheConnectionJUnitTest.java
>  77b984f7e28a7bfa21b8e1c8c6a83467e9a37242 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/operations/GetRegionRequestOperationHandlerJUnitTest.java
>  e8f1e651a71240474a793d005164df1ba5d4cda7 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/operations/GetRegionsRequestOperationHandlerJUnitTest.java
>  PRE-CREATION 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60523/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> new unit tests
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bruce Schuchardt
> 
>

Re: Review Request 60523: GEODE-3141 New flow: GetRegion

2017-06-29 Thread Bruce Schuchardt 


> On June 28, 2017, 4:39 p.m., Brian Rowe wrote:
> > geode-protobuf/src/main/proto/region_API.proto
> > Lines 119 (patched)
> > 
> >
> > I think it'd be cleaner to add these fields to the Region protobuf 
> > object (we'd also need to change the GetRegionsResponse to contain strings 
> > instead of Regions, which also seems like an improvement).

I'll do that


- Bruce


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/60523/#review179202
---


On June 28, 2017, 4:06 p.m., Bruce Schuchardt wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/60523/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 28, 2017, 4:06 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for geode, Alexander Murmann, Galen O'Sullivan, Hitesh 
> Khamesra, Udo Kohlmeyer, and Brian Rowe.
> 
> 
> Bugs: GEODE-3141
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-3141
> 
> 
> Repository: geode
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> Added a GetRegion(regionName) API.  More details about the server region can 
> be added if needed.  This implementation just has a success flag and flag 
> saying whether the region is destroyed.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/ProtobufOpsProcessor.java
>  4318fb444dd0eb5f5d07175a466e26f03933cc4d 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/ProtobufStreamProcessor.java
>  4e76de4a15d1ff0cfeddcc2c7115c7c18c2e14ba 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/operations/GetRegionRequestOperationHandler.java
>  PRE-CREATION 
>   geode-protobuf/src/main/proto/clientProtocol.proto 
> 0c192950a4e750f7c55e186c18a79a6c52716bf0 
>   geode-protobuf/src/main/proto/region_API.proto 
> d3af17acb1ee45c134837c321b2009c8532817cc 
>   geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/MessageUtil.java 
> dc897241fc229da53a5ff7a0e2df1678b8bceb6d 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/RoundTripCacheConnectionJUnitTest.java
>  77b984f7e28a7bfa21b8e1c8c6a83467e9a37242 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/operations/GetRegionRequestOperationHandlerJUnitTest.java
>  e8f1e651a71240474a793d005164df1ba5d4cda7 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/operations/GetRegionsRequestOperationHandlerJUnitTest.java
>  PRE-CREATION 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60523/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> new unit tests
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bruce Schuchardt
> 
>

Re: Review Request 60523: GEODE-3141 New flow: GetRegion

2017-06-29 Thread Bruce Schuchardt 


> On June 28, 2017, 6:27 p.m., Udo Kohlmeyer wrote:
> > geode-protobuf/src/main/proto/region_API.proto
> > Lines 117 (patched)
> > 
> >
> > What does this service do? Just check if a region exists? If so, should 
> > we not rename it to `RegionExistsRequest` and `RegionExistsResponse`.
> > If this is supposed to do more than just true/false, should we maybe 
> > have some extra info that we return? Maybe a `Region` object that contains 
> > some region information

I think I'll change it to be consistent with GetRegions and return a Region 
object.  Then we can fill in more details about the region by expanding the 
definition of Region.


- Bruce


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/60523/#review179218
---


On June 28, 2017, 4:06 p.m., Bruce Schuchardt wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/60523/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 28, 2017, 4:06 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for geode, Alexander Murmann, Galen O'Sullivan, Hitesh 
> Khamesra, Udo Kohlmeyer, and Brian Rowe.
> 
> 
> Bugs: GEODE-3141
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-3141
> 
> 
> Repository: geode
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> Added a GetRegion(regionName) API.  More details about the server region can 
> be added if needed.  This implementation just has a success flag and flag 
> saying whether the region is destroyed.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/ProtobufOpsProcessor.java
>  4318fb444dd0eb5f5d07175a466e26f03933cc4d 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/ProtobufStreamProcessor.java
>  4e76de4a15d1ff0cfeddcc2c7115c7c18c2e14ba 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/main/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/operations/GetRegionRequestOperationHandler.java
>  PRE-CREATION 
>   geode-protobuf/src/main/proto/clientProtocol.proto 
> 0c192950a4e750f7c55e186c18a79a6c52716bf0 
>   geode-protobuf/src/main/proto/region_API.proto 
> d3af17acb1ee45c134837c321b2009c8532817cc 
>   geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/MessageUtil.java 
> dc897241fc229da53a5ff7a0e2df1678b8bceb6d 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/RoundTripCacheConnectionJUnitTest.java
>  77b984f7e28a7bfa21b8e1c8c6a83467e9a37242 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/operations/GetRegionRequestOperationHandlerJUnitTest.java
>  e8f1e651a71240474a793d005164df1ba5d4cda7 
>   
> geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/operations/GetRegionsRequestOperationHandlerJUnitTest.java
>  PRE-CREATION 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60523/diff/1/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> new unit tests
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bruce Schuchardt
> 
>

[GitHub] geode pull request #613: GEODE-3151: Internal Region Registration in JMX as ...

2017-06-29 Thread dineshpune2006 
GitHub user dineshpune2006 opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/613

GEODE-3151: Internal Region Registration in JMX as per config parameter

Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache Geode.

In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
to ensure the following steps have been taken:

### For all changes:
- [X ] Is there a JIRA ticket associated with this PR? Is it referenced in 
the commit message?

- [X ] Has your PR been rebased against the latest commit within the target 
branch (typically `develop`)?

- [ X] Is your initial contribution a single, squashed commit?

- [X ] Does `gradlew build` run cleanly?

- [ X] Have you written or updated unit tests to verify your changes?

- [ ] If adding new dependencies to the code, are these dependencies 
licensed in a way that is compatible for inclusion under [ASF 
2.0](http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-a)?

### Note:
Please ensure that once the PR is submitted, you check travis-ci for build 
issues and
submit an update to your PR as soon as possible. If you need help, please 
send an
email to dev@geode.apache.org.


You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/dineshpune2006/geode feature/GEODE-3151

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/613.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #613


commit 5098e58360c31d3e44954010c4ed7263e60186f3
Author: dineshpune2006 
Date:   2017-06-29T13:40:51Z

GEODE-3151: Internal Region Registration in JMX as per config parameter




---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Question regarding the next release

2017-06-29 Thread Roi Apelker 
Hi,

Is there an expected date for release of 1.2?

Are there any backward compatibility issues in this version? If so, are they 
documented separately from the other issues?

Thanks,

Roi
This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and 
confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,

you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer