Unfortunately not. There doesn’t seem to be a recovery option that worked for
me.
Anthony
> On May 6, 2020, at 3:29 PM, Alexander Murmann wrote:
>
> Anthony, thank you for looking into this! Did you have any luck recovering
> the account?
>
> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 12:04 PM Anthony Baker
Anthony, thank you for looking into this! Did you have any luck recovering
the account?
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 12:04 PM Anthony Baker wrote:
> We may be able to use the account from the ApacheGeode YouTube channel.
> If not, I would suggest creating a google account whose creds are managed
>
I recently spent some of my spare time attempting some code clean-up and
improved consistency as regards using Region.SEPARATOR instead of hardcoded
"/" in region names/paths, and have the changes up for review here:
https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/5049
It'll be a very tedious process, but
It's done now. The fix is included in both Geode support/1.13 and Geode
support/1.12 branch now.
Eric
On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 1:34 PM Dave Barnes wrote:
> OK, Eric, looks like you have the 3 votes needed - go ahead and add the fix
> to support/1.13.
>
> Dave
>
>
> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 11:43
OK, Eric, looks like you have the 3 votes needed - go ahead and add the fix
to support/1.13.
Dave
On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 11:43 AM Xiaojian Zhou wrote:
> +1
> This bug reproduced again in today's regression. It's better to backport to
> 1.13.
>
> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 11:42 AM Jinmei Liao
+1
This bug reproduced again in today's regression. It's better to backport to
1.13.
On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 11:42 AM Jinmei Liao wrote:
> +1
>
> On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 11:40 AM Owen Nichols wrote:
>
> > +1 to fix this NPE on support/1.13 and also support/1.12
> >
> > > On May 6, 2020, at 11:19
+1
On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 11:40 AM Owen Nichols wrote:
> +1 to fix this NPE on support/1.13 and also support/1.12
>
> > On May 6, 2020, at 11:19 AM, Eric Shu wrote:
> >
> > GEODE-8073
>
>
--
Cheers
Jinmei
+1 to fix this NPE on support/1.13 and also support/1.12
> On May 6, 2020, at 11:19 AM, Eric Shu wrote:
>
> GEODE-8073
I'd like to propose bringing GEODE-8073 to the support/1.13 branch. The
issue is not recently introduced, but recent changes make it easier to show
up. I think this is a critical issue and would like this fix to be included.
Eric
+1 to quick reverts. echoing @Donal its best if the committer of the
offending commit does the revert
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 1:28 AM Ju@N wrote:
> I'm in favour of quick reverts as well.
> Even though a failure might seem easy to fix at a first glance, experience
> has proven otherwise in
This is a great reminder that for the first time in Geode history, we have
multiple active support branches.
It's not necessary to create multiple proposals to backport the same fix to
multiple support branches. Just mention “all support branches” or
“support/1.13 and support/1.12” in your
I would like to include the fix for GEODE-8055 in the 1.12 support branch.
This would allow users to use gfsh to create an index on sub regions.
--
Cheers
Jinmei
Never mind that last email – I see that Owen already reverted it.
The initial PR for GEODE-8020 is in the support/1.12 branch but has proven to
reduce performance. We’ve since found that the buffer corruption that this PR
was addressing was due to the test in question using TLSv1 as the ssl-protocol.
Changing the test to use TLSv1.2 fixed the problem, so
14 matches
Mail list logo
