[MTCGA]: new failures in builds [5251854, 5251851] needs to be handled

2020-04-23 Thread dpavlov . tasks 
Hi Igniters,

 I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are more than 
welcomed to help.

 If your changes can lead to this failure(s): We're grateful that you were a 
volunteer to make the contribution to this project, but things change and you 
may no longer be able to finalize your contribution.
 Could you respond to this email and indicate if you wish to continue and fix 
test failures or step down and some committer may revert you commit. 

 *New Critical Failure in master Platform .NET (NuGet)* 
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_PlatformNetNuGet?branch=%3Cdefault%3E
 Changes may lead to failure were done by 
 - igor sapego  
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=900989
 - pavel pereslegin  
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=900984
 - nikita amelchev  
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=900986

 *New Critical Failure in master Platform .NET (Inspections)* 
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_PlatformNetInspections?branch=%3Cdefault%3E
 Changes may lead to failure were done by 
 - igor sapego  
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=900989
 - pavel pereslegin  
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=900984
 - nikita amelchev  
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=900986

 - Here's a reminder of what contributors were agreed to do 
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute 
 - Should you have any questions please contact dev@ignite.apache.org 

Best Regards,
Apache Ignite TeamCity Bot 
https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot
Notification generated at 06:07:28 24-04-2020

ML RandomForest - creating Mdl.predict(Vector) from One_hot dataset

2020-04-23 Thread kencottrell 
Hello all,

I've searched through examples and so far have seen examples on how to do to
use one-hot-encoder only for model fitting or for evaluator, but can't
figure out how to do this for the predict call. For example, we see use of
one-hot as inputs to :

1. RF_MODEL = trainer.fit(
,
,  // this has category column before
one-hot
split.getTrainFilter(),
  // this does one-hot inside the model
- how do I get the cache with additional columns?
);

OR ALSO here:

2.RegressionMetricValues regMetrics = Evaluator.evaluateRegression(
,
split.getTestFilter(),


);


But rfmodel.predict(Vector features) requires the original Vector with
categorical columns be already converted into all doubles. What is best way
to do this intermediate step. 




--
Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/

Re: Unable to deploy Ignite Web Console in Kubernetes

2020-04-23 Thread Evgenii Zhuravlev 
Hi,

Usually it means that backend wasn't fully started yet. Have you checked
logs?

Evgenii

чт, 23 апр. 2020 г. в 07:27, Lovell Mathews :

> *Hi, *
>
> *I am trying to deploy Apache Ignite web console in Google Kubernetes
> Engine. I have been following the instructions in the gridgain developer
> forum for kubernetes installation. I am able to successfully bring up the
> frontend and backend servers. However when trying to signup it gives me a
> 404 error. Any suggestions?*
>
> *Cheers,*
> *Lovell*
>

Unable to deploy Ignite Web Console in Kubernetes

2020-04-23 Thread Lovell Mathews 
*Hi, *

*I am trying to deploy Apache Ignite web console in Google Kubernetes
Engine. I have been following the instructions in the gridgain developer
forum for kubernetes installation. I am able to successfully bring up the
frontend and backend servers. However when trying to signup it gives me a
404 error. Any suggestions?*

*Cheers,*
*Lovell*

Re: [DISCUSSION] Major changes in Ignite in 2020

2020-04-23 Thread Dmitriy Pavlov 
Hi Denis,

Thank you for driving this.

Igniters,

I would suggest to stress that Apache Ignite community does not guarantee
these features to be available.

Can we add some kind of disclaimer that says Ignite Roadmap does not imply
any obligations regarding availability and timeline. A number of
contributions can be done on best efforts principle, it is always tricky to
make a promise.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

чт, 23 апр. 2020 г. в 00:06, Denis Magda :

> Igniters,
>
> Here is a draft of our very first roadmap. I decided to make it damp simple
> but descriptive:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+Roadmap
>
> What we need to do next is to:
>
>- Fill in the "Readiness Estimated Time" column with your best guess of
>when an improvement is to be ready for a release.
>- Add references to JIRAs or IEPs to the first column.
>- Add the names of those contributors who will be cooperating with you
>during development. Goes to the "Contributors" column.
>
> Once this step is complete, we'll see how many features converge around the
> same date/months and we'll plan through 2.9, 2.10, etc. releases
> accordingly.
>
> Please don't put this aside for a while, let's move on quicker. If the
> roadmap misses any contributions that you are going to add, then edit the
> wiki page.
>
> -
> Denis
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 3:35 AM Nikita Amelchev 
> wrote:
>
> > Hello, Igniters.
> >
> > I am going to contribute a new feature - profiling tool and
> > performance report. This is part of IEP-35. [1]
> >
> > The tool will be able to collect performance statistics and create a
> > human-readable report. It will help to analyze workload and to tune
> > configuration and applications.
> >
> > Example of report [2, 3, 4].
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Cluster+performance+profiling+tool
> > [2]
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Cluster+performance+profiling+tool?preview=/145723859/148647581/p1.png
> > [3]
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Cluster+performance+profiling+tool?preview=/145723859/148647582/p2.png
> > [4]
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Cluster+performance+profiling+tool?preview=/145723859/148647583/p3.png
> >
> > сб, 11 апр. 2020 г. в 13:54, Alexei Scherbakov <
> > alexey.scherbak...@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > Folks,
> > >
> > > I keep working on tasks related to data consistency.
> > >
> > > This includes:
> > >
> > > Lost partitions handling overhaul (almost done) and tombstones support
> > > aforementioned by Ivan Rakov
> > > Atomic protocol overhaul (see [1])
> > >
> > > The ultimate goal of the year is to prepare Ignite for passing Jepsen
> > tests.
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-12+Make+ATOMIC+Caches+Consistent+Again
> > >
> > >
> > > пт, 10 апр. 2020 г. в 18:49, Denis Magda :
> > >
> > > > Steven,
> > > >
> > > > Please start a dedicated discussion for the Golang support. At the
> > moment,
> > > > I'm not aware if anybody from the community planned to provide
> support
> > > > out-of-the-box. However, that's not a tricky task thanks to Ignite's
> > binary
> > > > protocol that lets enable any programming language support easily.
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > > Denis
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 8:43 AM smeadows-abb <
> > steven.mead...@us.abb.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > First thanks for your quick response.
> > > > >
> > > > > I looked at  https://github.com/amsokol/ignite-go-client and its
> NOT
> > > > > completed and nothing has been for last 16 months. Initial test
> with
> > > > > package
> > > > > failed, so trying to determine your project roadmap with regards to
> > > > Golang
> > > > > and maybe Rust support.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm NOT sure of 'AFAIK' ?
> > > > >
> > > > > We may need to implement your Restful API to provide support for
> > Golang
> > > > and
> > > > > Rust, provided it's complete?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >   Steve
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Alexei Scherbakov
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best wishes,
> > Amelchev Nikita
> >
>

Re: Apache Ignite 2.8.1 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

2020-04-23 Thread Mikhail Petrov 

Hello, Igniters.

I propose to cherry-pick to 2.8.1 ticket [1].


In addition to adding a new metric, it fixes a bug when, after deactivation, 
GridDhtPartitionsExchangeFuture#rebalanced flag was not reset. And therefore, 
it can be different on nodes that are already in the cluster from newly joined 
ones.

[1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12788

Regards,
Mikhail.

On 22.04.2020 14:03, Nikolay Izhikov wrote:

Hello, Ivan.

I think we can include this improvements.
Please, go ahead.


22 апр. 2020 г., в 10:21, Ivan Bessonov  написал(а):

Hi Igniters,

I'm continuing with IGNITE-12756 PR creation. It turned out that we need 3
more cherry-picks
to avoid massive code changes. Tests started failing after my initial
attempt to create that PR.

So, in total I have PR with 6 commits in it. Some of them fix components
and tests for them,
others are required for new tests to compile and run without changes in
2.8.1 branch.
RunAll is in progress now and I'll reply with news if I have any.

Andrey Gura, Nikolay Izhikov, are you OK with 3 more commits in the scope?
If you don't,
then I won't be able to port IGNITE-12756 to 2.8.1 properly by myself, I
guess it would be
easier to reimplement it from the scratch.

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12735
[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12568
[3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12756

[4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12285
[5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12668
[6] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12682
[7] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/7708


вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 19:36, Pavel Pereslegin :


Hello, Nikolay.

This has been fixed by increasing the test timeout in IGNITE-12683 [1][2].

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12683
[2]
https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/bf394a77e1de6432e493eb2818243a82b577f11e

вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 18:28, Nikolay Izhikov :

Hello, Igniters.

While cherry-picking to 2.8.1 I found flaky test regarding BPlusTree

[1], [2]

All failures of this tests relates to PR’s based on 2.8.
It seems we hav fix in master but doesn’t have it in 2.8 and 2.8.1

Can someone suggest, what commit fixes this tests?

[1]

https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8==testDetails=-7895536196794411367=TEST_STATUS_DESC_IgniteTests24Java8=__all_branches__=50

[2]

https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8==testDetails=-3485591522651012009=TEST_STATUS_DESC_IgniteTests24Java8=__all_branches__=50



21 апр. 2020 г., в 17:49, Ivan Bessonov 

написал(а):

Sure, here's PR with 3 cherry-picked commits that I mentioned:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/7708

вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 17:17, Nikolay Izhikov :


OK then, let’s include it in the 2.8.1

Ivan, can you, please, prepare PR in the ignite-2.8.1 branch that

contain

cherry-pick for all required commits?


21 апр. 2020 г., в 17:01, Andrey Gura  написал(а):

Hi


IGNITE-12735 - Metric exporter implementation could lead to

NullPointerException from gauge which invoke communication

IGNITE-12568 - MessageFactory implementations refactoring
Personally, I’m against any refactoring improvements in bug fix

release.

So, I propose to exclude IGNITE-12756 from 2.8.1
Andrey, what do you think as a committer of this improvements?

Mainly IGNITE-12756 brings some improvements related with TCP
communication metrics (performance, memory footprint,

IgniteSpiContext

improved in order to provide ability to implement metrics related
SPI's without using internal API's, code improvements)

But! It also fixes potential NPE's which can be thrown on node start.
So it would be great to include this fix to 2.8.1 release.

On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 11:12 AM Nikolay Izhikov <

nizhi...@apache.org>

wrote:

I've cherry-picked IGNITE-12734 to 2.8.1 branch.


Thanks!


considering commit "683f22e64f IGNITE-12756 TcpCommunication SPI

metrics

improvement" - it depends
on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12735 and
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12568,
both were targeted to 2.9, but this has to be changed probably.

IGNITE-12735 - Metric exporter implementation could lead to

NullPointerException from gauge which invoke communication

IGNITE-12568 - MessageFactory implementations refactoring

Ivan,
Personally, I’m against any refactoring improvements in bug fix

release.

So, I propose to exclude IGNITE-12756 from 2.8.1

Andrey, what do you think as a committer of this improvements?



21 апр. 2020 г., в 10:44, Alex Plehanov 

написал(а):

Nikolay,

I've cherry-picked IGNITE-12734 to 2.8.1 branch.

вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 10:02, Ivan Bessonov 
:

Hello, Igniters,

considering commit "683f22e64f IGNITE-12756 TcpCommunication SPI

metrics

improvement" - it depends
on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12735 and
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12568,
both were targeted