Re: Apache Ignite - New Release

[Dmitriy Setrakyan]

On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 9:17 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn 
wrote:

> Guys, I can handle upcoming 1.7 release and send the vote next week, if
> there are no objections.
>

Thanks Pavel! I don't think anyone will have any objections.

Given that you will be a manager for this release, can you please take
charge of release notes and make sure that all the required functionality
is merged?


>
> Pavel.
>
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 12:36 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan  >
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 4:00 AM, Semyon Boikov 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Dmitry, all Ignite features are always thoroughly tested =)
> > >
> >
> > True, completely forgot about it :)
> >
> >
> > > I created branch ignite-1.7.0.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> > dsetrak...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 2:29 AM, Semyon Boikov  >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Sure Dmitry, we will run tests with large data set.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regarding 1.7. release: If there are no objections I'm going to cut
> > off
> > > > 1.7
> > > > > branch and start prepare it for release.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > In my opinion this is a great addition to Ignite and is definitely
> > worth
> > > a
> > > > release, again, assuming that we thoroughly test it.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> > > > dsetrak...@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 2:09 AM, Semyon Boikov <
> > sboi...@gridgain.com
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regarding distributed join testsing: we added tests verifying
> > > correct
> > > > > > join
> > > > > > > behavior and correct execution plan generation for various SQL
> > > > queries,
> > > > > > > tests for joins for various cache types (different number of
> > > backups,
> > > > > > > partitioned/replicated), there are tests verifying correct
> > > > distributed
> > > > > > > joins results on changing topology with nodes restarts. Also we
> > > added
> > > > > > > benchmarks which will be used to verify that there are no
> > > performance
> > > > > > > degradation in this functionality between releases. These
> > > benchmarks
> > > > > were
> > > > > > > executed on real clusters, and in next few days we are going to
> > run
> > > > > more
> > > > > > > load tests.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks Semyon, sounds great! I would also test it on larger data
> > sets
> > > > to
> > > > > > see how a join query will take, say, on 10GB of data. Is it
> > possible?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> > > > > > dsetrak...@apache.org>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 7:10 AM, Semyon Boikov <
> > > > sboi...@gridgain.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Today I merged into master 'distributed join'
> implementation
> > -
> > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1232 (thanks
> to
> > > > > Sergi,
> > > > > > he
> > > > > > > > > implemented this feature). I think this together with
> recent
> > > > > bugfixes
> > > > > > > > worth
> > > > > > > > > 1.7 release. Do you think we can cut off 1.7 release branch
> > > from
> > > > > > > master?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Great news. Can you describe that amount of testing we did
> for
> > > this
> > > > > > > > feature?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Alexandre Boudnik <
> > > > > > > > > alexander.boud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Sorry, I missed the typo:
> > > > > > > > > > To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has
> > > > demonstrated
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
> > > > > > > > > > - they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
> > > > > > > > > > - they do not appear in select * list unless they are
> > > specified
> > > > > > > > > explicitly
> > > > > > > > > > Take care,
> > > > > > > > > > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > call me via Google Voice:
> > > > > > > > > > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > > > > > > > > > 1(405) 283-6452
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Alexandre Boudnik
> > > > > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has
> > > > > demonstrated
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
> > > > > > > > > > > - they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
> > > > > > > > > > > - they appear in select * 

Re: Apache Ignite - New Release

[Pavel Tupitsyn]

Guys, I can handle upcoming 1.7 release and send the vote next week, if
there are no objections.

Pavel.

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 12:36 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan 
wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 4:00 AM, Semyon Boikov 
> wrote:
>
> > Dmitry, all Ignite features are always thoroughly tested =)
> >
>
> True, completely forgot about it :)
>
>
> > I created branch ignite-1.7.0.
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> dsetrak...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 2:29 AM, Semyon Boikov 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Sure Dmitry, we will run tests with large data set.
> > > >
> > > > Regarding 1.7. release: If there are no objections I'm going to cut
> off
> > > 1.7
> > > > branch and start prepare it for release.
> > > >
> > >
> > > In my opinion this is a great addition to Ignite and is definitely
> worth
> > a
> > > release, again, assuming that we thoroughly test it.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> > > dsetrak...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 2:09 AM, Semyon Boikov <
> sboi...@gridgain.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Regarding distributed join testsing: we added tests verifying
> > correct
> > > > > join
> > > > > > behavior and correct execution plan generation for various SQL
> > > queries,
> > > > > > tests for joins for various cache types (different number of
> > backups,
> > > > > > partitioned/replicated), there are tests verifying correct
> > > distributed
> > > > > > joins results on changing topology with nodes restarts. Also we
> > added
> > > > > > benchmarks which will be used to verify that there are no
> > performance
> > > > > > degradation in this functionality between releases. These
> > benchmarks
> > > > were
> > > > > > executed on real clusters, and in next few days we are going to
> run
> > > > more
> > > > > > load tests.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks Semyon, sounds great! I would also test it on larger data
> sets
> > > to
> > > > > see how a join query will take, say, on 10GB of data. Is it
> possible?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> > > > > dsetrak...@apache.org>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 7:10 AM, Semyon Boikov <
> > > sboi...@gridgain.com
> > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Today I merged into master 'distributed join' implementation
> -
> > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1232 (thanks to
> > > > Sergi,
> > > > > he
> > > > > > > > implemented this feature). I think this together with recent
> > > > bugfixes
> > > > > > > worth
> > > > > > > > 1.7 release. Do you think we can cut off 1.7 release branch
> > from
> > > > > > master?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Great news. Can you describe that amount of testing we did for
> > this
> > > > > > > feature?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Alexandre Boudnik <
> > > > > > > > alexander.boud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Sorry, I missed the typo:
> > > > > > > > > To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has
> > > demonstrated
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
> > > > > > > > > - they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
> > > > > > > > > - they do not appear in select * list unless they are
> > specified
> > > > > > > > explicitly
> > > > > > > > > Take care,
> > > > > > > > > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > call me via Google Voice:
> > > > > > > > > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > > > > > > > > 1(405) 283-6452
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Alexandre Boudnik
> > > > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has
> > > > demonstrated
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
> > > > > > > > > > - they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
> > > > > > > > > > - they appear in select * list unless they are specified
> > > > > explicitly
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I'll add some notices to the ticket
> > > > > > > > > > Take care,
> > > > > > > > > > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > call me via Google Voice:
> > > > > > > > > > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > > > > > > > > > 1(405) 283-6452
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 6:37 PM, Valentin Kulichenko
> > > > > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >> Agree.
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > 

Re: Apache Ignite - New Release

[Dmitriy Setrakyan]

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 4:00 AM, Semyon Boikov  wrote:

> Dmitry, all Ignite features are always thoroughly tested =)
>

True, completely forgot about it :)


> I created branch ignite-1.7.0.
>
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan 
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 2:29 AM, Semyon Boikov 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Sure Dmitry, we will run tests with large data set.
> > >
> > > Regarding 1.7. release: If there are no objections I'm going to cut off
> > 1.7
> > > branch and start prepare it for release.
> > >
> >
> > In my opinion this is a great addition to Ignite and is definitely worth
> a
> > release, again, assuming that we thoroughly test it.
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> > dsetrak...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 2:09 AM, Semyon Boikov  >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Regarding distributed join testsing: we added tests verifying
> correct
> > > > join
> > > > > behavior and correct execution plan generation for various SQL
> > queries,
> > > > > tests for joins for various cache types (different number of
> backups,
> > > > > partitioned/replicated), there are tests verifying correct
> > distributed
> > > > > joins results on changing topology with nodes restarts. Also we
> added
> > > > > benchmarks which will be used to verify that there are no
> performance
> > > > > degradation in this functionality between releases. These
> benchmarks
> > > were
> > > > > executed on real clusters, and in next few days we are going to run
> > > more
> > > > > load tests.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks Semyon, sounds great! I would also test it on larger data sets
> > to
> > > > see how a join query will take, say, on 10GB of data. Is it possible?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> > > > dsetrak...@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 7:10 AM, Semyon Boikov <
> > sboi...@gridgain.com
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Today I merged into master 'distributed join' implementation -
> > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1232 (thanks to
> > > Sergi,
> > > > he
> > > > > > > implemented this feature). I think this together with recent
> > > bugfixes
> > > > > > worth
> > > > > > > 1.7 release. Do you think we can cut off 1.7 release branch
> from
> > > > > master?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Great news. Can you describe that amount of testing we did for
> this
> > > > > > feature?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Alexandre Boudnik <
> > > > > > > alexander.boud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Sorry, I missed the typo:
> > > > > > > > To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has
> > demonstrated
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
> > > > > > > > - they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
> > > > > > > > - they do not appear in select * list unless they are
> specified
> > > > > > > explicitly
> > > > > > > > Take care,
> > > > > > > > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > call me via Google Voice:
> > > > > > > > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > > > > > > > 1(405) 283-6452
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Alexandre Boudnik
> > > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > > > To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has
> > > demonstrated
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
> > > > > > > > > - they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
> > > > > > > > > - they appear in select * list unless they are specified
> > > > explicitly
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I'll add some notices to the ticket
> > > > > > > > > Take care,
> > > > > > > > > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > call me via Google Voice:
> > > > > > > > > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > > > > > > > > 1(405) 283-6452
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 6:37 PM, Valentin Kulichenko
> > > > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> Agree.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > > > > > > >> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>> Looks like the ticket for removing _key and _value from
> > > selct *
> > > > > is
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > good
> > > > > > > > >>> candidate for 2.0.
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> 2016-07-15 5:12 GMT-07:00 Sergi Vladykin <
> > > > > sergi.vlady...@gmail.com
> > > > > > >:
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > We will 

Re: Apache Ignite - New Release

[Semyon Boikov]

Dmitry, all Ignite features are always thoroughly tested =)

I created branch ignite-1.7.0.

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan 
wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 2:29 AM, Semyon Boikov 
> wrote:
>
> > Sure Dmitry, we will run tests with large data set.
> >
> > Regarding 1.7. release: If there are no objections I'm going to cut off
> 1.7
> > branch and start prepare it for release.
> >
>
> In my opinion this is a great addition to Ignite and is definitely worth a
> release, again, assuming that we thoroughly test it.
>
>
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> dsetrak...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 2:09 AM, Semyon Boikov 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Regarding distributed join testsing: we added tests verifying correct
> > > join
> > > > behavior and correct execution plan generation for various SQL
> queries,
> > > > tests for joins for various cache types (different number of backups,
> > > > partitioned/replicated), there are tests verifying correct
> distributed
> > > > joins results on changing topology with nodes restarts. Also we added
> > > > benchmarks which will be used to verify that there are no performance
> > > > degradation in this functionality between releases. These benchmarks
> > were
> > > > executed on real clusters, and in next few days we are going to run
> > more
> > > > load tests.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Thanks Semyon, sounds great! I would also test it on larger data sets
> to
> > > see how a join query will take, say, on 10GB of data. Is it possible?
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> > > dsetrak...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 7:10 AM, Semyon Boikov <
> sboi...@gridgain.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Today I merged into master 'distributed join' implementation -
> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1232 (thanks to
> > Sergi,
> > > he
> > > > > > implemented this feature). I think this together with recent
> > bugfixes
> > > > > worth
> > > > > > 1.7 release. Do you think we can cut off 1.7 release branch from
> > > > master?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Great news. Can you describe that amount of testing we did for this
> > > > > feature?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Alexandre Boudnik <
> > > > > > alexander.boud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sorry, I missed the typo:
> > > > > > > To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has
> demonstrated
> > > the
> > > > > > > similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
> > > > > > > - they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
> > > > > > > - they do not appear in select * list unless they are specified
> > > > > > explicitly
> > > > > > > Take care,
> > > > > > > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > call me via Google Voice:
> > > > > > > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > > > > > > 1(405) 283-6452
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Alexandre Boudnik
> > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > > To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has
> > demonstrated
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
> > > > > > > > - they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
> > > > > > > > - they appear in select * list unless they are specified
> > > explicitly
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'll add some notices to the ticket
> > > > > > > > Take care,
> > > > > > > > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > call me via Google Voice:
> > > > > > > > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > > > > > > > 1(405) 283-6452
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 6:37 PM, Valentin Kulichenko
> > > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > >> Agree.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > > > > > >> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>> Looks like the ticket for removing _key and _value from
> > selct *
> > > > is
> > > > > a
> > > > > > > good
> > > > > > > >>> candidate for 2.0.
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> 2016-07-15 5:12 GMT-07:00 Sergi Vladykin <
> > > > sergi.vlady...@gmail.com
> > > > > >:
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> > We will not be able to just change this, because it will
> > > brake
> > > > > > > >>> > compatibility. Still I believe that an option to define
> our
> > > SQL
> > > > > > > tables
> > > > > > > >>> > without _key and _value fields. But this is another story
> > you
> > > > can
> > > > > > > file a
> > > > > > > >>> > ticket for it, can we fix somehow our JDBC for now? Like
> > > > > returning
> > > > > > > >>> > 

Re: Apache Ignite - New Release

[Dmitriy Setrakyan]

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 2:29 AM, Semyon Boikov  wrote:

> Sure Dmitry, we will run tests with large data set.
>
> Regarding 1.7. release: If there are no objections I'm going to cut off 1.7
> branch and start prepare it for release.
>

In my opinion this is a great addition to Ignite and is definitely worth a
release, again, assuming that we thoroughly test it.


>
>
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan 
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 2:09 AM, Semyon Boikov 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Regarding distributed join testsing: we added tests verifying correct
> > join
> > > behavior and correct execution plan generation for various SQL queries,
> > > tests for joins for various cache types (different number of backups,
> > > partitioned/replicated), there are tests verifying correct distributed
> > > joins results on changing topology with nodes restarts. Also we added
> > > benchmarks which will be used to verify that there are no performance
> > > degradation in this functionality between releases. These benchmarks
> were
> > > executed on real clusters, and in next few days we are going to run
> more
> > > load tests.
> > >
> >
> > Thanks Semyon, sounds great! I would also test it on larger data sets to
> > see how a join query will take, say, on 10GB of data. Is it possible?
> >
> >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> > dsetrak...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 7:10 AM, Semyon Boikov  >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Today I merged into master 'distributed join' implementation -
> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1232 (thanks to
> Sergi,
> > he
> > > > > implemented this feature). I think this together with recent
> bugfixes
> > > > worth
> > > > > 1.7 release. Do you think we can cut off 1.7 release branch from
> > > master?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Great news. Can you describe that amount of testing we did for this
> > > > feature?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Alexandre Boudnik <
> > > > > alexander.boud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Sorry, I missed the typo:
> > > > > > To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has demonstrated
> > the
> > > > > > similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
> > > > > > - they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
> > > > > > - they do not appear in select * list unless they are specified
> > > > > explicitly
> > > > > > Take care,
> > > > > > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> > > > > >
> > > > > > call me via Google Voice:
> > > > > > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > > > > > 1(405) 283-6452
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Alexandre Boudnik
> > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > > To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has
> demonstrated
> > > the
> > > > > > > similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
> > > > > > > - they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
> > > > > > > - they appear in select * list unless they are specified
> > explicitly
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'll add some notices to the ticket
> > > > > > > Take care,
> > > > > > > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > call me via Google Voice:
> > > > > > > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > > > > > > 1(405) 283-6452
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 6:37 PM, Valentin Kulichenko
> > > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > >> Agree.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > > > > >> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>> Looks like the ticket for removing _key and _value from
> selct *
> > > is
> > > > a
> > > > > > good
> > > > > > >>> candidate for 2.0.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> 2016-07-15 5:12 GMT-07:00 Sergi Vladykin <
> > > sergi.vlady...@gmail.com
> > > > >:
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> > We will not be able to just change this, because it will
> > brake
> > > > > > >>> > compatibility. Still I believe that an option to define our
> > SQL
> > > > > > tables
> > > > > > >>> > without _key and _value fields. But this is another story
> you
> > > can
> > > > > > file a
> > > > > > >>> > ticket for it, can we fix somehow our JDBC for now? Like
> > > > returning
> > > > > > >>> > BinaryObject instance or something?
> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >>> > Sergi
> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >>> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Valentin Kulichenko <
> > > > > > >>> > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > >>> > > IGNITE-3466 is not a JDBC-only issue. This happens
> because
> > > > > 'select
> > > > > > *'
> > > > > > >>> > query
> > > > > > >>> > > returns all the fields including _kay 

Re: Apache Ignite - New Release

[Dmitriy Setrakyan]

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 2:09 AM, Semyon Boikov  wrote:

> Regarding distributed join testsing: we added tests verifying correct join
> behavior and correct execution plan generation for various SQL queries,
> tests for joins for various cache types (different number of backups,
> partitioned/replicated), there are tests verifying correct distributed
> joins results on changing topology with nodes restarts. Also we added
> benchmarks which will be used to verify that there are no performance
> degradation in this functionality between releases. These benchmarks were
> executed on real clusters, and in next few days we are going to run more
> load tests.
>

Thanks Semyon, sounds great! I would also test it on larger data sets to
see how a join query will take, say, on 10GB of data. Is it possible?


>
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan 
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 7:10 AM, Semyon Boikov 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Today I merged into master 'distributed join' implementation -
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1232 (thanks to Sergi, he
> > > implemented this feature). I think this together with recent bugfixes
> > worth
> > > 1.7 release. Do you think we can cut off 1.7 release branch from
> master?
> > >
> >
> > Great news. Can you describe that amount of testing we did for this
> > feature?
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Alexandre Boudnik <
> > > alexander.boud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Sorry, I missed the typo:
> > > > To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has demonstrated the
> > > > similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
> > > > - they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
> > > > - they do not appear in select * list unless they are specified
> > > explicitly
> > > > Take care,
> > > > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> > > >
> > > > call me via Google Voice:
> > > > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > > > 1(405) 283-6452
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Alexandre Boudnik
> > > >  wrote:
> > > > > To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has demonstrated
> the
> > > > > similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
> > > > > - they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
> > > > > - they appear in select * list unless they are specified explicitly
> > > > >
> > > > > I'll add some notices to the ticket
> > > > > Take care,
> > > > > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> > > > >
> > > > > call me via Google Voice:
> > > > > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > > > > 1(405) 283-6452
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 6:37 PM, Valentin Kulichenko
> > > > >  wrote:
> > > > >> Agree.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > > >> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> Looks like the ticket for removing _key and _value from selct *
> is
> > a
> > > > good
> > > > >>> candidate for 2.0.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> 2016-07-15 5:12 GMT-07:00 Sergi Vladykin <
> sergi.vlady...@gmail.com
> > >:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> > We will not be able to just change this, because it will brake
> > > > >>> > compatibility. Still I believe that an option to define our SQL
> > > > tables
> > > > >>> > without _key and _value fields. But this is another story you
> can
> > > > file a
> > > > >>> > ticket for it, can we fix somehow our JDBC for now? Like
> > returning
> > > > >>> > BinaryObject instance or something?
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > Sergi
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Valentin Kulichenko <
> > > > >>> > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > > IGNITE-3466 is not a JDBC-only issue. This happens because
> > > 'select
> > > > *'
> > > > >>> > query
> > > > >>> > > returns all the fields including _kay and _val which are
> > created
> > > by
> > > > >>> > Ignite,
> > > > >>> > > not by user. This is actually a usability issue that pops up
> > > every
> > > > now
> > > > >>> > and
> > > > >>> > > then. This is very counterintuitive that we return the fields
> > > that
> > > > user
> > > > >>> > > never defined (unless he explicitly asks for them, of course)
> > and
> > > > that
> > > > >>> > > 'select *' requires class definitions on the client.
> > > > >>> > >
> > > > >>> > > Is it possible to fix this on SQL engine level instead of
> > fixing
> > > > only
> > > > >>> for
> > > > >>> > > JDBC? Sergi, what do you think?
> > > > >>> > >
> > > > >>> > > -Val
> > > > >>> > >
> > > > >>> > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 3:28 AM, Sergi Vladykin <
> > > > >>> > sergi.vlady...@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> > > wrote:
> > > > >>> > >
> > > > >>> > > > All these issues seem to be related to Jdbc driver rather
> > than
> > > > to SQL
> > > > >>> > > > engine. I think Andrey Gura was the last who 

Re: Apache Ignite - New Release

[Semyon Boikov]

Regarding distributed join testsing: we added tests verifying correct join
behavior and correct execution plan generation for various SQL queries,
tests for joins for various cache types (different number of backups,
partitioned/replicated), there are tests verifying correct distributed
joins results on changing topology with nodes restarts. Also we added
benchmarks which will be used to verify that there are no performance
degradation in this functionality between releases. These benchmarks were
executed on real clusters, and in next few days we are going to run more
load tests.


On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan 
wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 7:10 AM, Semyon Boikov 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Today I merged into master 'distributed join' implementation -
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1232 (thanks to Sergi, he
> > implemented this feature). I think this together with recent bugfixes
> worth
> > 1.7 release. Do you think we can cut off 1.7 release branch from master?
> >
>
> Great news. Can you describe that amount of testing we did for this
> feature?
>
>
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Alexandre Boudnik <
> > alexander.boud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry, I missed the typo:
> > > To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has demonstrated the
> > > similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
> > > - they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
> > > - they do not appear in select * list unless they are specified
> > explicitly
> > > Take care,
> > > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> > >
> > > call me via Google Voice:
> > > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > > 1(405) 283-6452
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Alexandre Boudnik
> > >  wrote:
> > > > To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has demonstrated the
> > > > similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
> > > > - they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
> > > > - they appear in select * list unless they are specified explicitly
> > > >
> > > > I'll add some notices to the ticket
> > > > Take care,
> > > > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> > > >
> > > > call me via Google Voice:
> > > > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > > > 1(405) 283-6452
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 6:37 PM, Valentin Kulichenko
> > > >  wrote:
> > > >> Agree.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > >> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Looks like the ticket for removing _key and _value from selct * is
> a
> > > good
> > > >>> candidate for 2.0.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> 2016-07-15 5:12 GMT-07:00 Sergi Vladykin  >:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> > We will not be able to just change this, because it will brake
> > > >>> > compatibility. Still I believe that an option to define our SQL
> > > tables
> > > >>> > without _key and _value fields. But this is another story you can
> > > file a
> > > >>> > ticket for it, can we fix somehow our JDBC for now? Like
> returning
> > > >>> > BinaryObject instance or something?
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > Sergi
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Valentin Kulichenko <
> > > >>> > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > > IGNITE-3466 is not a JDBC-only issue. This happens because
> > 'select
> > > *'
> > > >>> > query
> > > >>> > > returns all the fields including _kay and _val which are
> created
> > by
> > > >>> > Ignite,
> > > >>> > > not by user. This is actually a usability issue that pops up
> > every
> > > now
> > > >>> > and
> > > >>> > > then. This is very counterintuitive that we return the fields
> > that
> > > user
> > > >>> > > never defined (unless he explicitly asks for them, of course)
> and
> > > that
> > > >>> > > 'select *' requires class definitions on the client.
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > Is it possible to fix this on SQL engine level instead of
> fixing
> > > only
> > > >>> for
> > > >>> > > JDBC? Sergi, what do you think?
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > -Val
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 3:28 AM, Sergi Vladykin <
> > > >>> > sergi.vlady...@gmail.com>
> > > >>> > > wrote:
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > > All these issues seem to be related to Jdbc driver rather
> than
> > > to SQL
> > > >>> > > > engine. I think Andrey Gura was the last who worked on it.
> IMO
> > > they
> > > >>> > must
> > > >>> > > be
> > > >>> > > > easy to fix.
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > > Sergi
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Denis Magda <
> > > dma...@gridgain.com>
> > > >>> > > wrote:
> > > >>> > > >
> > > >>> > > > > Yakov,
> > > >>> > > > >
> > > >>> > > > > I'm not the one who is eligible for review of IGNITE-3389.
> > > Assigned
> > > >>> > it
> > > >>> > > on
> > > >>> > > > > Andrey Gura. Andrey please find time for review.

Re: Apache Ignite - New Release

[Dmitriy Setrakyan]

On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 7:10 AM, Semyon Boikov  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Today I merged into master 'distributed join' implementation -
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1232 (thanks to Sergi, he
> implemented this feature). I think this together with recent bugfixes worth
> 1.7 release. Do you think we can cut off 1.7 release branch from master?
>

Great news. Can you describe that amount of testing we did for this feature?


>
> Thanks
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Alexandre Boudnik <
> alexander.boud...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Sorry, I missed the typo:
> > To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has demonstrated the
> > similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
> > - they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
> > - they do not appear in select * list unless they are specified
> explicitly
> > Take care,
> > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> >
> > call me via Google Voice:
> > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > 1(405) 283-6452
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Alexandre Boudnik
> >  wrote:
> > > To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has demonstrated the
> > > similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
> > > - they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
> > > - they appear in select * list unless they are specified explicitly
> > >
> > > I'll add some notices to the ticket
> > > Take care,
> > > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> > >
> > > call me via Google Voice:
> > > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > > 1(405) 283-6452
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 6:37 PM, Valentin Kulichenko
> > >  wrote:
> > >> Agree.
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > >> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Looks like the ticket for removing _key and _value from selct * is a
> > good
> > >>> candidate for 2.0.
> > >>>
> > >>> 2016-07-15 5:12 GMT-07:00 Sergi Vladykin :
> > >>>
> > >>> > We will not be able to just change this, because it will brake
> > >>> > compatibility. Still I believe that an option to define our SQL
> > tables
> > >>> > without _key and _value fields. But this is another story you can
> > file a
> > >>> > ticket for it, can we fix somehow our JDBC for now? Like returning
> > >>> > BinaryObject instance or something?
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Sergi
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Valentin Kulichenko <
> > >>> > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > > IGNITE-3466 is not a JDBC-only issue. This happens because
> 'select
> > *'
> > >>> > query
> > >>> > > returns all the fields including _kay and _val which are created
> by
> > >>> > Ignite,
> > >>> > > not by user. This is actually a usability issue that pops up
> every
> > now
> > >>> > and
> > >>> > > then. This is very counterintuitive that we return the fields
> that
> > user
> > >>> > > never defined (unless he explicitly asks for them, of course) and
> > that
> > >>> > > 'select *' requires class definitions on the client.
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > Is it possible to fix this on SQL engine level instead of fixing
> > only
> > >>> for
> > >>> > > JDBC? Sergi, what do you think?
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > -Val
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 3:28 AM, Sergi Vladykin <
> > >>> > sergi.vlady...@gmail.com>
> > >>> > > wrote:
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > > All these issues seem to be related to Jdbc driver rather than
> > to SQL
> > >>> > > > engine. I think Andrey Gura was the last who worked on it. IMO
> > they
> > >>> > must
> > >>> > > be
> > >>> > > > easy to fix.
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > Sergi
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Denis Magda <
> > dma...@gridgain.com>
> > >>> > > wrote:
> > >>> > > >
> > >>> > > > > Yakov,
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > > > I'm not the one who is eligible for review of IGNITE-3389.
> > Assigned
> > >>> > it
> > >>> > > on
> > >>> > > > > Andrey Gura. Andrey please find time for review.
> > >>> > > > > Alexander B. when you need a review please send an email to
> > the dev
> > >>> > > list
> > >>> > > > > and someone will assist you.
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > > > As for IGNITE-3466, IGNITE-3467 and 3468 Sergi's opinion is
> > needed.
> > >>> > > Sergi
> > >>> > > > > please have a look.
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > > > --
> > >>> > > > > Denis
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <
> > >>> yzhda...@apache.org
> > >>> > >
> > >>> > > > > wrote:
> > >>> > > > >
> > >>> > > > > > Sasha, ignite-3389 is in resolved state and I suppose is
> > ready to
> > >>> > be
> > >>> > > > > > reviewed and merged. Denis, can you please do it? Make sure
> > to
> > >>> > check
> > >>> > > TC
> > >>> > > > > :)
> > >>> > > > > >
> > >>> > > > > > As far as Ignite-3466..3468, Igor, can you please provide
> > >>> feedback
> > >>> > to
> > >>> > > > the
> > >>> > > > > > issues and 

Re: Apache Ignite - New Release

[Semyon Boikov]

Hi,

Today I merged into master 'distributed join' implementation -
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1232 (thanks to Sergi, he
implemented this feature). I think this together with recent bugfixes worth
1.7 release. Do you think we can cut off 1.7 release branch from master?

Thanks


On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Alexandre Boudnik <
alexander.boud...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Sorry, I missed the typo:
> To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has demonstrated the
> similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
> - they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
> - they do not appear in select * list unless they are specified explicitly
> Take care,
> Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
>
> call me via Google Voice:
> 1(405) BUDNIKA
> 1(405) 283-6452
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Alexandre Boudnik
>  wrote:
> > To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has demonstrated the
> > similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
> > - they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
> > - they appear in select * list unless they are specified explicitly
> >
> > I'll add some notices to the ticket
> > Take care,
> > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> >
> > call me via Google Voice:
> > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > 1(405) 283-6452
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 6:37 PM, Valentin Kulichenko
> >  wrote:
> >> Agree.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> >> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Looks like the ticket for removing _key and _value from selct * is a
> good
> >>> candidate for 2.0.
> >>>
> >>> 2016-07-15 5:12 GMT-07:00 Sergi Vladykin :
> >>>
> >>> > We will not be able to just change this, because it will brake
> >>> > compatibility. Still I believe that an option to define our SQL
> tables
> >>> > without _key and _value fields. But this is another story you can
> file a
> >>> > ticket for it, can we fix somehow our JDBC for now? Like returning
> >>> > BinaryObject instance or something?
> >>> >
> >>> > Sergi
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Valentin Kulichenko <
> >>> > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > > IGNITE-3466 is not a JDBC-only issue. This happens because 'select
> *'
> >>> > query
> >>> > > returns all the fields including _kay and _val which are created by
> >>> > Ignite,
> >>> > > not by user. This is actually a usability issue that pops up every
> now
> >>> > and
> >>> > > then. This is very counterintuitive that we return the fields that
> user
> >>> > > never defined (unless he explicitly asks for them, of course) and
> that
> >>> > > 'select *' requires class definitions on the client.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Is it possible to fix this on SQL engine level instead of fixing
> only
> >>> for
> >>> > > JDBC? Sergi, what do you think?
> >>> > >
> >>> > > -Val
> >>> > >
> >>> > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 3:28 AM, Sergi Vladykin <
> >>> > sergi.vlady...@gmail.com>
> >>> > > wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > > All these issues seem to be related to Jdbc driver rather than
> to SQL
> >>> > > > engine. I think Andrey Gura was the last who worked on it. IMO
> they
> >>> > must
> >>> > > be
> >>> > > > easy to fix.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Sergi
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Denis Magda <
> dma...@gridgain.com>
> >>> > > wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > Yakov,
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > I'm not the one who is eligible for review of IGNITE-3389.
> Assigned
> >>> > it
> >>> > > on
> >>> > > > > Andrey Gura. Andrey please find time for review.
> >>> > > > > Alexander B. when you need a review please send an email to
> the dev
> >>> > > list
> >>> > > > > and someone will assist you.
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > As for IGNITE-3466, IGNITE-3467 and 3468 Sergi's opinion is
> needed.
> >>> > > Sergi
> >>> > > > > please have a look.
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > --
> >>> > > > > Denis
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <
> >>> yzhda...@apache.org
> >>> > >
> >>> > > > > wrote:
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > > Sasha, ignite-3389 is in resolved state and I suppose is
> ready to
> >>> > be
> >>> > > > > > reviewed and merged. Denis, can you please do it? Make sure
> to
> >>> > check
> >>> > > TC
> >>> > > > > :)
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > As far as Ignite-3466..3468, Igor, can you please provide
> >>> feedback
> >>> > to
> >>> > > > the
> >>> > > > > > issues and tell us if we can fit them as well.
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > --Yakov
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > 2016-07-12 23:33 GMT+03:00 Alexandre Boudnik <
> >>> > > > > alexander.boud...@gmail.com
> >>> > > > > > >:
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Yakov,
> >>> > > > > > >
> >>> > > > > > > Is it possible to include several probably easy-to-fix
> bugs and
> >>> > > > > > > improvements; they are very annoying and they decrease the
> >>> value
> >>> > of
> >>> > > 

Re: Apache Ignite - New Release

[Alexandre Boudnik]

Sorry, I missed the typo:
To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has demonstrated the
similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
- they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
- they do not appear in select * list unless they are specified explicitly
Take care,
Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik

call me via Google Voice:
1(405) BUDNIKA
1(405) 283-6452



On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Alexandre Boudnik
 wrote:
> To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has demonstrated the
> similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
> - they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
> - they appear in select * list unless they are specified explicitly
>
> I'll add some notices to the ticket
> Take care,
> Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
>
> call me via Google Voice:
> 1(405) BUDNIKA
> 1(405) 283-6452
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 6:37 PM, Valentin Kulichenko
>  wrote:
>> Agree.
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
>> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Looks like the ticket for removing _key and _value from selct * is a good
>>> candidate for 2.0.
>>>
>>> 2016-07-15 5:12 GMT-07:00 Sergi Vladykin :
>>>
>>> > We will not be able to just change this, because it will brake
>>> > compatibility. Still I believe that an option to define our SQL tables
>>> > without _key and _value fields. But this is another story you can file a
>>> > ticket for it, can we fix somehow our JDBC for now? Like returning
>>> > BinaryObject instance or something?
>>> >
>>> > Sergi
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Valentin Kulichenko <
>>> > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > IGNITE-3466 is not a JDBC-only issue. This happens because 'select *'
>>> > query
>>> > > returns all the fields including _kay and _val which are created by
>>> > Ignite,
>>> > > not by user. This is actually a usability issue that pops up every now
>>> > and
>>> > > then. This is very counterintuitive that we return the fields that user
>>> > > never defined (unless he explicitly asks for them, of course) and that
>>> > > 'select *' requires class definitions on the client.
>>> > >
>>> > > Is it possible to fix this on SQL engine level instead of fixing only
>>> for
>>> > > JDBC? Sergi, what do you think?
>>> > >
>>> > > -Val
>>> > >
>>> > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 3:28 AM, Sergi Vladykin <
>>> > sergi.vlady...@gmail.com>
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > All these issues seem to be related to Jdbc driver rather than to SQL
>>> > > > engine. I think Andrey Gura was the last who worked on it. IMO they
>>> > must
>>> > > be
>>> > > > easy to fix.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Sergi
>>> > > >
>>> > > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Denis Magda 
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > Yakov,
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > I'm not the one who is eligible for review of IGNITE-3389. Assigned
>>> > it
>>> > > on
>>> > > > > Andrey Gura. Andrey please find time for review.
>>> > > > > Alexander B. when you need a review please send an email to the dev
>>> > > list
>>> > > > > and someone will assist you.
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > As for IGNITE-3466, IGNITE-3467 and 3468 Sergi's opinion is needed.
>>> > > Sergi
>>> > > > > please have a look.
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > --
>>> > > > > Denis
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <
>>> yzhda...@apache.org
>>> > >
>>> > > > > wrote:
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > > Sasha, ignite-3389 is in resolved state and I suppose is ready to
>>> > be
>>> > > > > > reviewed and merged. Denis, can you please do it? Make sure to
>>> > check
>>> > > TC
>>> > > > > :)
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > As far as Ignite-3466..3468, Igor, can you please provide
>>> feedback
>>> > to
>>> > > > the
>>> > > > > > issues and tell us if we can fit them as well.
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > --Yakov
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > 2016-07-12 23:33 GMT+03:00 Alexandre Boudnik <
>>> > > > > alexander.boud...@gmail.com
>>> > > > > > >:
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > Yakov,
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > Is it possible to include several probably easy-to-fix bugs and
>>> > > > > > > improvements; they are very annoying and they decrease the
>>> value
>>> > of
>>> > > > > > > the product? We're working on Apache Ignite based BI solution
>>> > > > > > > accelerator, and these issues impact us.
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > I've opened them and I fix one and working on others.
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > IGNITE-3389 - metadata result set throws NPE when closed - Pull
>>> > > > Request
>>> > > > > > > #838
>>> > > > > > > IGNITE-3466 - select * causes NoClassDefFoundError with jdbc
>>> > query
>>> > > > > tools
>>> > > > > > > IGNITE-3467 - jdbc getTables() returns catalog as null
>>> > > > > > > IGNITE-3468 - Missing Primary Key flag in getColumns()
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > 

Re: Apache Ignite - New Release

[Alexandre Boudnik]

To support the point, I would add that PosgreSQL has demonstrated the
similar behavior (inspired by unix .dot files and ls):
- they have "hidden" column: xmin and xmax in any table
- they appear in select * list unless they are specified explicitly

I'll add some notices to the ticket
Take care,
Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik

call me via Google Voice:
1(405) BUDNIKA
1(405) 283-6452



On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 6:37 PM, Valentin Kulichenko
 wrote:
> Agree.
>
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Looks like the ticket for removing _key and _value from selct * is a good
>> candidate for 2.0.
>>
>> 2016-07-15 5:12 GMT-07:00 Sergi Vladykin :
>>
>> > We will not be able to just change this, because it will brake
>> > compatibility. Still I believe that an option to define our SQL tables
>> > without _key and _value fields. But this is another story you can file a
>> > ticket for it, can we fix somehow our JDBC for now? Like returning
>> > BinaryObject instance or something?
>> >
>> > Sergi
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Valentin Kulichenko <
>> > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > IGNITE-3466 is not a JDBC-only issue. This happens because 'select *'
>> > query
>> > > returns all the fields including _kay and _val which are created by
>> > Ignite,
>> > > not by user. This is actually a usability issue that pops up every now
>> > and
>> > > then. This is very counterintuitive that we return the fields that user
>> > > never defined (unless he explicitly asks for them, of course) and that
>> > > 'select *' requires class definitions on the client.
>> > >
>> > > Is it possible to fix this on SQL engine level instead of fixing only
>> for
>> > > JDBC? Sergi, what do you think?
>> > >
>> > > -Val
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 3:28 AM, Sergi Vladykin <
>> > sergi.vlady...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > All these issues seem to be related to Jdbc driver rather than to SQL
>> > > > engine. I think Andrey Gura was the last who worked on it. IMO they
>> > must
>> > > be
>> > > > easy to fix.
>> > > >
>> > > > Sergi
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Denis Magda 
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Yakov,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I'm not the one who is eligible for review of IGNITE-3389. Assigned
>> > it
>> > > on
>> > > > > Andrey Gura. Andrey please find time for review.
>> > > > > Alexander B. when you need a review please send an email to the dev
>> > > list
>> > > > > and someone will assist you.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > As for IGNITE-3466, IGNITE-3467 and 3468 Sergi's opinion is needed.
>> > > Sergi
>> > > > > please have a look.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > --
>> > > > > Denis
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <
>> yzhda...@apache.org
>> > >
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > Sasha, ignite-3389 is in resolved state and I suppose is ready to
>> > be
>> > > > > > reviewed and merged. Denis, can you please do it? Make sure to
>> > check
>> > > TC
>> > > > > :)
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > As far as Ignite-3466..3468, Igor, can you please provide
>> feedback
>> > to
>> > > > the
>> > > > > > issues and tell us if we can fit them as well.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > --Yakov
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > 2016-07-12 23:33 GMT+03:00 Alexandre Boudnik <
>> > > > > alexander.boud...@gmail.com
>> > > > > > >:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Yakov,
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Is it possible to include several probably easy-to-fix bugs and
>> > > > > > > improvements; they are very annoying and they decrease the
>> value
>> > of
>> > > > > > > the product? We're working on Apache Ignite based BI solution
>> > > > > > > accelerator, and these issues impact us.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I've opened them and I fix one and working on others.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > IGNITE-3389 - metadata result set throws NPE when closed - Pull
>> > > > Request
>> > > > > > > #838
>> > > > > > > IGNITE-3466 - select * causes NoClassDefFoundError with jdbc
>> > query
>> > > > > tools
>> > > > > > > IGNITE-3467 - jdbc getTables() returns catalog as null
>> > > > > > > IGNITE-3468 - Missing Primary Key flag in getColumns()
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Take care,
>> > > > > > > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > call me via Google Voice:
>> > > > > > > 1(405) BUDNIKA
>> > > > > > > 1(405) 283-6452
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Yakov Zhdanov <
>> > > yzhda...@apache.org
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > Guys,
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > We have recently found and fixed several issues in the
>> product
>> > > > along
>> > > > > > with
>> > > > > > > > number of smaller fixes and optimizations and I would like to
>> > > > release
>> > > > > > > these
>> > 

Re: Apache Ignite - New Release

[Sergi Vladykin]

We will not be able to just change this, because it will brake
compatibility. Still I believe that an option to define our SQL tables
without _key and _value fields. But this is another story you can file a
ticket for it, can we fix somehow our JDBC for now? Like returning
BinaryObject instance or something?

Sergi



On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Valentin Kulichenko <
valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:

> IGNITE-3466 is not a JDBC-only issue. This happens because 'select *' query
> returns all the fields including _kay and _val which are created by Ignite,
> not by user. This is actually a usability issue that pops up every now and
> then. This is very counterintuitive that we return the fields that user
> never defined (unless he explicitly asks for them, of course) and that
> 'select *' requires class definitions on the client.
>
> Is it possible to fix this on SQL engine level instead of fixing only for
> JDBC? Sergi, what do you think?
>
> -Val
>
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 3:28 AM, Sergi Vladykin 
> wrote:
>
> > All these issues seem to be related to Jdbc driver rather than to SQL
> > engine. I think Andrey Gura was the last who worked on it. IMO they must
> be
> > easy to fix.
> >
> > Sergi
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Denis Magda 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Yakov,
> > >
> > > I'm not the one who is eligible for review of IGNITE-3389. Assigned it
> on
> > > Andrey Gura. Andrey please find time for review.
> > > Alexander B. when you need a review please send an email to the dev
> list
> > > and someone will assist you.
> > >
> > > As for IGNITE-3466, IGNITE-3467 and 3468 Sergi's opinion is needed.
> Sergi
> > > please have a look.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Denis
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Yakov Zhdanov 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Sasha, ignite-3389 is in resolved state and I suppose is ready to be
> > > > reviewed and merged. Denis, can you please do it? Make sure to check
> TC
> > > :)
> > > >
> > > > As far as Ignite-3466..3468, Igor, can you please provide feedback to
> > the
> > > > issues and tell us if we can fit them as well.
> > > >
> > > > --Yakov
> > > >
> > > > 2016-07-12 23:33 GMT+03:00 Alexandre Boudnik <
> > > alexander.boud...@gmail.com
> > > > >:
> > > >
> > > > > Yakov,
> > > > >
> > > > > Is it possible to include several probably easy-to-fix bugs and
> > > > > improvements; they are very annoying and they decrease the value of
> > > > > the product? We're working on Apache Ignite based BI solution
> > > > > accelerator, and these issues impact us.
> > > > >
> > > > > I've opened them and I fix one and working on others.
> > > > >
> > > > > IGNITE-3389 - metadata result set throws NPE when closed - Pull
> > Request
> > > > > #838
> > > > > IGNITE-3466 - select * causes NoClassDefFoundError with jdbc query
> > > tools
> > > > > IGNITE-3467 - jdbc getTables() returns catalog as null
> > > > > IGNITE-3468 - Missing Primary Key flag in getColumns()
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Take care,
> > > > > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> > > > >
> > > > > call me via Google Voice:
> > > > > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > > > > 1(405) 283-6452
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Yakov Zhdanov <
> yzhda...@apache.org
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > Guys,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We have recently found and fixed several issues in the product
> > along
> > > > with
> > > > > > number of smaller fixes and optimizations and I would like to
> > release
> > > > > these
> > > > > > changes. Issue list follows (complete change list can be obtained
> > via
> > > > git
> > > > > > log).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ignite-3428 Fixed message recovery handling on reconnect
> > > > > > ignite-3418 Avoid unnecessary discovery messages
> > > > > > IGNITE-2949 - Replaced JCache dependency with Geronimo
> > > > > > ignite-3372: IgniteDataStreamer: pre-loading starvation if
> multiple
> > > > > > streamers preload the same cache
> > > > > > IGNITE-3305 - Fixed SYNC rebalance mode for dynamically started
> > > cache.
> > > > > > + Lots of changes and fixes for IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Does everyone agree this list is worth making new release?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --Yakov
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Apache Ignite - New Release

[Valentin Kulichenko]

IGNITE-3466 is not a JDBC-only issue. This happens because 'select *' query
returns all the fields including _kay and _val which are created by Ignite,
not by user. This is actually a usability issue that pops up every now and
then. This is very counterintuitive that we return the fields that user
never defined (unless he explicitly asks for them, of course) and that
'select *' requires class definitions on the client.

Is it possible to fix this on SQL engine level instead of fixing only for
JDBC? Sergi, what do you think?

-Val

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 3:28 AM, Sergi Vladykin 
wrote:

> All these issues seem to be related to Jdbc driver rather than to SQL
> engine. I think Andrey Gura was the last who worked on it. IMO they must be
> easy to fix.
>
> Sergi
>
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Denis Magda  wrote:
>
> > Yakov,
> >
> > I'm not the one who is eligible for review of IGNITE-3389. Assigned it on
> > Andrey Gura. Andrey please find time for review.
> > Alexander B. when you need a review please send an email to the dev list
> > and someone will assist you.
> >
> > As for IGNITE-3466, IGNITE-3467 and 3468 Sergi's opinion is needed. Sergi
> > please have a look.
> >
> > --
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Yakov Zhdanov 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Sasha, ignite-3389 is in resolved state and I suppose is ready to be
> > > reviewed and merged. Denis, can you please do it? Make sure to check TC
> > :)
> > >
> > > As far as Ignite-3466..3468, Igor, can you please provide feedback to
> the
> > > issues and tell us if we can fit them as well.
> > >
> > > --Yakov
> > >
> > > 2016-07-12 23:33 GMT+03:00 Alexandre Boudnik <
> > alexander.boud...@gmail.com
> > > >:
> > >
> > > > Yakov,
> > > >
> > > > Is it possible to include several probably easy-to-fix bugs and
> > > > improvements; they are very annoying and they decrease the value of
> > > > the product? We're working on Apache Ignite based BI solution
> > > > accelerator, and these issues impact us.
> > > >
> > > > I've opened them and I fix one and working on others.
> > > >
> > > > IGNITE-3389 - metadata result set throws NPE when closed - Pull
> Request
> > > > #838
> > > > IGNITE-3466 - select * causes NoClassDefFoundError with jdbc query
> > tools
> > > > IGNITE-3467 - jdbc getTables() returns catalog as null
> > > > IGNITE-3468 - Missing Primary Key flag in getColumns()
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Take care,
> > > > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> > > >
> > > > call me via Google Voice:
> > > > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > > > 1(405) 283-6452
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Yakov Zhdanov  >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Guys,
> > > > >
> > > > > We have recently found and fixed several issues in the product
> along
> > > with
> > > > > number of smaller fixes and optimizations and I would like to
> release
> > > > these
> > > > > changes. Issue list follows (complete change list can be obtained
> via
> > > git
> > > > > log).
> > > > >
> > > > > ignite-3428 Fixed message recovery handling on reconnect
> > > > > ignite-3418 Avoid unnecessary discovery messages
> > > > > IGNITE-2949 - Replaced JCache dependency with Geronimo
> > > > > ignite-3372: IgniteDataStreamer: pre-loading starvation if multiple
> > > > > streamers preload the same cache
> > > > > IGNITE-3305 - Fixed SYNC rebalance mode for dynamically started
> > cache.
> > > > > + Lots of changes and fixes for IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator
> > > > >
> > > > > Does everyone agree this list is worth making new release?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks!
> > > > >
> > > > > --Yakov
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Apache Ignite - New Release

[Sergi Vladykin]

All these issues seem to be related to Jdbc driver rather than to SQL
engine. I think Andrey Gura was the last who worked on it. IMO they must be
easy to fix.

Sergi

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Denis Magda  wrote:

> Yakov,
>
> I'm not the one who is eligible for review of IGNITE-3389. Assigned it on
> Andrey Gura. Andrey please find time for review.
> Alexander B. when you need a review please send an email to the dev list
> and someone will assist you.
>
> As for IGNITE-3466, IGNITE-3467 and 3468 Sergi's opinion is needed. Sergi
> please have a look.
>
> --
> Denis
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Yakov Zhdanov 
> wrote:
>
> > Sasha, ignite-3389 is in resolved state and I suppose is ready to be
> > reviewed and merged. Denis, can you please do it? Make sure to check TC
> :)
> >
> > As far as Ignite-3466..3468, Igor, can you please provide feedback to the
> > issues and tell us if we can fit them as well.
> >
> > --Yakov
> >
> > 2016-07-12 23:33 GMT+03:00 Alexandre Boudnik <
> alexander.boud...@gmail.com
> > >:
> >
> > > Yakov,
> > >
> > > Is it possible to include several probably easy-to-fix bugs and
> > > improvements; they are very annoying and they decrease the value of
> > > the product? We're working on Apache Ignite based BI solution
> > > accelerator, and these issues impact us.
> > >
> > > I've opened them and I fix one and working on others.
> > >
> > > IGNITE-3389 - metadata result set throws NPE when closed - Pull Request
> > > #838
> > > IGNITE-3466 - select * causes NoClassDefFoundError with jdbc query
> tools
> > > IGNITE-3467 - jdbc getTables() returns catalog as null
> > > IGNITE-3468 - Missing Primary Key flag in getColumns()
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Take care,
> > > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> > >
> > > call me via Google Voice:
> > > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > > 1(405) 283-6452
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Yakov Zhdanov 
> > > wrote:
> > > > Guys,
> > > >
> > > > We have recently found and fixed several issues in the product along
> > with
> > > > number of smaller fixes and optimizations and I would like to release
> > > these
> > > > changes. Issue list follows (complete change list can be obtained via
> > git
> > > > log).
> > > >
> > > > ignite-3428 Fixed message recovery handling on reconnect
> > > > ignite-3418 Avoid unnecessary discovery messages
> > > > IGNITE-2949 - Replaced JCache dependency with Geronimo
> > > > ignite-3372: IgniteDataStreamer: pre-loading starvation if multiple
> > > > streamers preload the same cache
> > > > IGNITE-3305 - Fixed SYNC rebalance mode for dynamically started
> cache.
> > > > + Lots of changes and fixes for IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator
> > > >
> > > > Does everyone agree this list is worth making new release?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > --Yakov
> > >
> >
>

Re: Apache Ignite - New Release

[Denis Magda]

Yakov,

I'm not the one who is eligible for review of IGNITE-3389. Assigned it on
Andrey Gura. Andrey please find time for review.
Alexander B. when you need a review please send an email to the dev list
and someone will assist you.

As for IGNITE-3466, IGNITE-3467 and 3468 Sergi's opinion is needed. Sergi
please have a look.

--
Denis


On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Yakov Zhdanov  wrote:

> Sasha, ignite-3389 is in resolved state and I suppose is ready to be
> reviewed and merged. Denis, can you please do it? Make sure to check TC :)
>
> As far as Ignite-3466..3468, Igor, can you please provide feedback to the
> issues and tell us if we can fit them as well.
>
> --Yakov
>
> 2016-07-12 23:33 GMT+03:00 Alexandre Boudnik  >:
>
> > Yakov,
> >
> > Is it possible to include several probably easy-to-fix bugs and
> > improvements; they are very annoying and they decrease the value of
> > the product? We're working on Apache Ignite based BI solution
> > accelerator, and these issues impact us.
> >
> > I've opened them and I fix one and working on others.
> >
> > IGNITE-3389 - metadata result set throws NPE when closed - Pull Request
> > #838
> > IGNITE-3466 - select * causes NoClassDefFoundError with jdbc query tools
> > IGNITE-3467 - jdbc getTables() returns catalog as null
> > IGNITE-3468 - Missing Primary Key flag in getColumns()
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Take care,
> > Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
> >
> > call me via Google Voice:
> > 1(405) BUDNIKA
> > 1(405) 283-6452
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Yakov Zhdanov 
> > wrote:
> > > Guys,
> > >
> > > We have recently found and fixed several issues in the product along
> with
> > > number of smaller fixes and optimizations and I would like to release
> > these
> > > changes. Issue list follows (complete change list can be obtained via
> git
> > > log).
> > >
> > > ignite-3428 Fixed message recovery handling on reconnect
> > > ignite-3418 Avoid unnecessary discovery messages
> > > IGNITE-2949 - Replaced JCache dependency with Geronimo
> > > ignite-3372: IgniteDataStreamer: pre-loading starvation if multiple
> > > streamers preload the same cache
> > > IGNITE-3305 - Fixed SYNC rebalance mode for dynamically started cache.
> > > + Lots of changes and fixes for IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator
> > >
> > > Does everyone agree this list is worth making new release?
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > --Yakov
> >
>

Re: Apache Ignite - New Release

[Yakov Zhdanov]

Sasha, ignite-3389 is in resolved state and I suppose is ready to be
reviewed and merged. Denis, can you please do it? Make sure to check TC :)

As far as Ignite-3466..3468, Igor, can you please provide feedback to the
issues and tell us if we can fit them as well.

--Yakov

2016-07-12 23:33 GMT+03:00 Alexandre Boudnik :

> Yakov,
>
> Is it possible to include several probably easy-to-fix bugs and
> improvements; they are very annoying and they decrease the value of
> the product? We're working on Apache Ignite based BI solution
> accelerator, and these issues impact us.
>
> I've opened them and I fix one and working on others.
>
> IGNITE-3389 - metadata result set throws NPE when closed - Pull Request
> #838
> IGNITE-3466 - select * causes NoClassDefFoundError with jdbc query tools
> IGNITE-3467 - jdbc getTables() returns catalog as null
> IGNITE-3468 - Missing Primary Key flag in getColumns()
>
>
>
>
>
> Take care,
> Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik
>
> call me via Google Voice:
> 1(405) BUDNIKA
> 1(405) 283-6452
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Yakov Zhdanov 
> wrote:
> > Guys,
> >
> > We have recently found and fixed several issues in the product along with
> > number of smaller fixes and optimizations and I would like to release
> these
> > changes. Issue list follows (complete change list can be obtained via git
> > log).
> >
> > ignite-3428 Fixed message recovery handling on reconnect
> > ignite-3418 Avoid unnecessary discovery messages
> > IGNITE-2949 - Replaced JCache dependency with Geronimo
> > ignite-3372: IgniteDataStreamer: pre-loading starvation if multiple
> > streamers preload the same cache
> > IGNITE-3305 - Fixed SYNC rebalance mode for dynamically started cache.
> > + Lots of changes and fixes for IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator
> >
> > Does everyone agree this list is worth making new release?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > --Yakov
>

Re: Apache Ignite - New Release

[Alexandre Boudnik]

Yakov,

Is it possible to include several probably easy-to-fix bugs and
improvements; they are very annoying and they decrease the value of
the product? We're working on Apache Ignite based BI solution
accelerator, and these issues impact us.

I've opened them and I fix one and working on others.

IGNITE-3389 - metadata result set throws NPE when closed - Pull Request #838
IGNITE-3466 - select * causes NoClassDefFoundError with jdbc query tools
IGNITE-3467 - jdbc getTables() returns catalog as null
IGNITE-3468 - Missing Primary Key flag in getColumns()





Take care,
Alexandre "Sasha" Boudnik

call me via Google Voice:
1(405) BUDNIKA
1(405) 283-6452



On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Yakov Zhdanov  wrote:
> Guys,
>
> We have recently found and fixed several issues in the product along with
> number of smaller fixes and optimizations and I would like to release these
> changes. Issue list follows (complete change list can be obtained via git
> log).
>
> ignite-3428 Fixed message recovery handling on reconnect
> ignite-3418 Avoid unnecessary discovery messages
> IGNITE-2949 - Replaced JCache dependency with Geronimo
> ignite-3372: IgniteDataStreamer: pre-loading starvation if multiple
> streamers preload the same cache
> IGNITE-3305 - Fixed SYNC rebalance mode for dynamically started cache.
> + Lots of changes and fixes for IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator
>
> Does everyone agree this list is worth making new release?
>
> Thanks!
>
> --Yakov

Re: Apache Ignite - New Release

[Konstantin Boudnik]

Yup, looks like having a minor bump is totally warranted.

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 10:11PM, Sergi Vladykin wrote:
> Yakov,
> 
> Good idea.
> 
> Alexey,
> 
> Why not just bump it to 1.7 as we do usually?
> 
> Sergi
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 9:21 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > There were also numerous contributions merged with small API improvements.
> > +1 for making a new release.
> >
> > Since the changes are mostly bugfixes, should we make it a point release?​
> >

Re: Apache Ignite - New Release

[Alexey Goncharuk]

There were also numerous contributions merged with small API improvements.
+1 for making a new release.

Since the changes are mostly bugfixes, should we make it a point release?​

Apache Ignite - New Release

[Yakov Zhdanov]

Guys,

We have recently found and fixed several issues in the product along with
number of smaller fixes and optimizations and I would like to release these
changes. Issue list follows (complete change list can be obtained via git
log).

ignite-3428 Fixed message recovery handling on reconnect
ignite-3418 Avoid unnecessary discovery messages
IGNITE-2949 - Replaced JCache dependency with Geronimo
ignite-3372: IgniteDataStreamer: pre-loading starvation if multiple
streamers preload the same cache
IGNITE-3305 - Fixed SYNC rebalance mode for dynamically started cache.
+ Lots of changes and fixes for IGFS and Hadoop Accelerator

Does everyone agree this list is worth making new release?

Thanks!

--Yakov