Re: Gradle build broken?

> > jar. If anyone knows what would cause this, let me know! > > > > On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 5:49 PM Galen O'Sullivan > > wrote: > > > > > I'm getting the following failure building Geode on the latest develop. > > > I've tried `rm -r .gradle ~/.gra

Re: Gradle build broken?

I tried cleaning as well. It turns out that the directory I needed to remove was `~/.m2`. I guess the package cache was corrupted. Transient failure? On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 5:49 PM Galen O'Sullivan wrote: > I'm getting the following failure building Geode on the latest develop. > I've

Gradle build broken?

I'm getting the following failure building Geode on the latest develop. I've tried `rm -r .gradle ~/.gradle`, to no avail. Any ideas? Thanks, Galen --- ./gradlew dev > Task :geode-core:compileIntegrationTestJava FAILED FAILURE: Build failed with an exception. * What went wrong: Execution

Re: Preventing new build warnings

I'm for failing CI on warnings. It would be nice to reduce or eliminate our existing build warnings as well. Thanks, Galen On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 12:33 PM Peter Tran wrote: > Hello! > > I've noticed that there is no mechanism in which we prevent new PRs from > introduce new build warnings.

Re: [Proposal] Adding Micrometer to Apache Geode

The plan is to use tagged metrics, so for example, you could slice metrics on puts by region, or server, or both. On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 10:06 AM Udo Kohlmeyer wrote: > I agree with Jacob here. Great to see such great strides forward > > +1 deprecating old Stats APIs > > It would be good to

Re: [Proposal] adding a new type of PdxInstance

I suspect Udo is remembering something we both had to deal with, which is that the lack of values to get/put PDXInstances on Regions make some patterns difficult. In internal code, we have to set some thread-locals to get serialized values out, and in general, I think that setting

Re: [DISCUSS] Replace @TestingOnly with @VisibleForTesting

Sounds good to me. On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 1:04 PM Owen Nichols wrote: > Sounds good, I would be happy to +1 a PR for this > > > On Dec 17, 2018, at 12:22 PM, Kirk Lund wrote: > > > > We have a custom annotation in geode-common called @TestingOnly: > > > >

Re: Two copies of ExtendsFunctionAdapter.java

I don't understand our build or IntelliJ that well, but it seems weird to me that these classes would be getting built at all since they're in the resources section rather than java. I don't see compiled versions of these classes in my geode directory. Perhaps it's an IntelliJ configuration issue?

Pull Request builder timing out

On the PR for https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2938, the StressNewTest and (in two different runs of the same code) other jobs fail occasionally. I'm inclined to think that the Upgrade and Acceptance test failures were caused by flaky tests, and I can keep rerunning the PR build. The

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.8.0 RC2

>From the release notes: > ConfigurationProperties.ssl-enabled-components supports `none` option as advertised. This is incorrect. The fix for GEODE-5830 was to remove "none" as an option. Signatures and digests look good, gfsh works. Speaking of verifying commits, does it make sense to sign

Re: PowerMock and mock ClassLoader

Can we just remove PowerMock from our dependencies and skip the rule? I'd like to hope we can control our dependencies reasonably well. On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 4:45 PM Ryan McMahon wrote: > +1 to a spotless rule. Unless anyone objects, I’ll look into doing that > after PowerMock is eliminated.

Re: Third Iteration of Java Modules Support

Jake, This is awesome! I do have a question, though: would releasing such a module info make it hard to improve upon later by giving the expectation of one set of modules? Thanks, Galen On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 4:44 PM Jacob Barrett wrote: > Yeah that would fix one of a dozen “leaked” internal

Re: Serializing Internal Classes

This would be a good addition to the AnalzeSerializablesJUnitTest. Banning non-DSFID DataSerializables in product code seems like a good idea. On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 2:12 PM Michael Stolz wrote: > Jake thanks for bringing this up. > Could have been a big waste of effort if you hadnt. > > -- >

Re: [DISCUSS] Geode packages mustn't span Jigsaw modules

> > If you want to > maintain an API as internal, then you should properly protect that API with > the appropriate *Java* access modifiers (private, package-private and > protected). > Hopefully modules will allow us to do this better, by restricting which *classes* are visible outside the

Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecating JUnit4CacheTestCase (and maybe JUnit4DistributedTestCase?)

are bad? Rules just encapsulate common befores and afters to > avoid > > > duplicate code in every tests. I don't see why we should avoid using > it. > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 9, 2018, 3:44 PM Galen O'Sullivan > > wrote: > > > > > > > I wo

A small proposal: Not Sorting in AnalyzeSerializablesJUnitTest

Hi all, I wrote a PR (GEODE-5800) recently to remove redundant cases from DataSerializer.readObject etc. calls. This changed the bytecode size (but not the behavior) of a number of DataSerializables, and I realized that the task of updating the list (or viewing the diff) was made harder by the

Re: [DISCUSS] Disable merge for failing pull requests

I'm in favor of this change, but only if we have a way to restart failing PR builds without being the PR submitter. Any committer should be able to restart the build. The pipeline is still flaky enough and I want to avoid the situation where a new contributor is asked repeatedly to push empty

Re: [DISCUSS] Deprecating JUnit4CacheTestCase (and maybe JUnit4DistributedTestCase?)

feel the Users' pain if our API is painful. If the reason to use a > > > Rule > > > > is > > > > >> because our User API is overly-verbose of difficult, then that's > > even > > > > more > > > > >> reason to use the Geod

[DISCUSS] Deprecating JUnit4CacheTestCase (and maybe JUnit4DistributedTestCase?)

I was looking at a test recently that extended JUnit4CacheTestCase and only used a single server, and changed it to use ClusterStartupRule. JUnit4CacheTestCase adds additional complexity to JUnit4DistributedTestCase and with the move to ClusterStartupRule for distributed tests, rather than class

Re: Apache Geode Branch Housekeeping

I'm pretty sure we want to keep the release tags for every release we've made, in case someone wants to check something against old releases. On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 5:04 PM Anthony Baker wrote: > Notes: > > - Older release/* branches may be removed. > - Do not remove branches like

Re: [PROPOSAL] Add getCache and getLocator to Launchers

I'm with Bill and John on this one. Give the top-level object only and let users move down the object heirarchy. On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 9:38 AM John Blum wrote: > Well, ServerLauncher may or may not create a CacheServer instance when it > starts a server. A server can be created without a

Re: [PROPOSAL] --add-opens for Java 11 support

I did a little more reading, and it sounds like we should create an module-info.java to reserve the proper name for those customers who are using Java 9+. See this article[1] for a description of what can go wrong if people start using the automatic package without us having declared a name. I

Re: StressNewTest issues

Thanks for keeping us updated and fixing this, Dan! Galen On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 3:48 PM Dan Smith wrote: > Should be fixed now, if you rebase/merge on the latest develop. > > -Dan > > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 3:10 PM Dan Smith wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > It looks like some recent changes

Re: proposing reduced default for "membership-port-range"

Would it be feasible to reserve chosen ports before selecting ephemeral ports? I think this would resolve the collision issue described above. On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 9:58 AM Brian Rowe wrote: > I agree that we should have defaulted everything to using ephemeral ports > and forced clients to

Re: Running compatibility and upgrade tests using jdk9+

I think we should run some sort of backwards-compatibility tests between Java 8 and Java 9/11+. We need testing of Geode (both old and current versions) on older JVMs talking to Geode on newer JVMs. (for example, what if Java built-in serialization changes in a way that breaks our code somehow?)

Re: [DISCUSS] permit-reflect vs --add-opens for Java 11 support

er, lost the end of that first sentence there. I think that reducing dependencies on Unsafe is a good goal regardless. On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 1:51 PM Galen O'Sullivan wrote: > #1 sounds awesome but may be unrealistic given our advertised feature set. > I think that reducing depend

Re: [DISCUSS] permit-reflect vs --add-opens for Java 11 support

#1 sounds awesome but may be unrealistic given our advertised feature set. I think that reducing dependencies on Unsafe If we can conditionally use Jigsaw modules for Java versions later than 8 while maintaining Java 8 compatiblity, that seems like the best solution. +2 to Dan's idea if it

Re: goodbye LogWriterI18n

This is excellent. Thanks for this improvement, Bruce. On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 4:14 PM Jacob Barrett wrote: > Maybe because you have too many Ps in your url. ;) > > > On Oct 5, 2018, at 3:56 PM, Bruce Schuchardt > wrote: > > > > I think there's already one listing all of the deprecated APIs.

Re: Requesting Access to Concourse

Hi, I still haven't heard back about this. Can I have access? Who grants it? If not, what are the criteria for inclusion? Thanks, Galen On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 10:57 AM Galen O'Sullivan wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to have admin access to Concourse at > https://concourse.apacheg

[DISCUSS] test code style (particularly logging)

I was reviewing a PR recently and noticed that we have some test code that uses Logger (or LogWriter). If I understand correctly, anything logged to stdout will be included in the test output, and anything logged in a DUnit VM will be logged with the appropriate VM number prepended in the output.

Requesting Access to Concourse

Hi, I would like to have admin access to Concourse at https://concourse.apachegeode-ci.info/ so that I can help maintain the pipelines. Thanks, Galen

Re: Updating instructions to run tests

+1 to separate files. It's probably worth referencing the other files in the README. On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 12:16 PM, Jacob Barrett wrote: > I prefer creating a TESTING.md to create a clear physical grouping around > the subject. I like my read me files like my source, small and well >

Debugging Multiple DUnit VMs with IntelliJ

Hi all, I remembered a couple email threads discussing how it was possible to debug multiple DUnit processes from IntelliJ, but couldn't find a wiki article or a very complete description, so I wrote a wiki article. It's a little barebones right now, but there it is. Please edit or comment with

Re: [DISCUSS] Wrapping log calls in Conditionals like isDebugEnabled, isTraceEnabled, etc.

endar()); > > >3. } > > > > > > > > > Log4j2 lets you pass a format string, so you can just do this: > > > > > > logger.debug("Logging in user {} with birthday {}", user.getName(), > > > user.getBirthdayCalendar()); > > > > > > > >

[DISCUSS] Wrapping log calls in Conditionals like isDebugEnabled, isTraceEnabled, etc.

Hi all, I've noticed a pattern in Geode where we wrap a log call in a check at the same level, such as: if (logger.isDebugEnabled()) { logger.debug("cleaning up incompletely started DistributionManager due to exception", r); } Is there any reason to do this? To my mind,

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove CatchException testing dependency

+1 On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Kirk Lund wrote: > Jira ticket as been filed for this: > > GEODE-5639: Replace usage of CatchException with AssertJ and remove > CatchException dependency > > On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 4:03 PM, Kirk Lund wrote: > > > I goofed on #1. We should be using*

Re: Proposed API for a ConcurrencyTestHelper

I like this API. I think it saves a lot of boilerplate, and a lot of subtle possible mistakes. I think the new API would be a bit cleaner than the RegionVersionVectorTest.doesNotHangIfOtherThreadChangedVersion that Kirk mentions. I would like to see generics, especially for `public void

Assertions in Geode

Hi all, I'm wondering what the collective's opinion of assertions is. I notice there's an org.apache.geode.internal.Assert class, which is used some places, and that plain old Java assertions are used in other places. Can we remove one of these and use the other? Should we be including assertions

Re: DISCUSS: Refactor test source set for integrationTest and distributedTest

+1 to the new test organization. And I agree with Patrick's explanation of which is the more stable test category. On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 9:47 AM, Patrick Rhomberg wrote: > @Dale > It seems to me that the Unit / Distributed / etc would be the more stable > purpose, and as importantly, each

Re: Apache Geode Logo

Hi Mike, The attachment doesn't seem to have attached to your email. Thanks, Galen On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Michael Stolz wrote: > Can someone who has sufficient mojo please update the Apache Geode logo on > geode.apache.org with the attached version with the TM

Re: Value Serialization Proposal for the New Client Protocol

: Hi Galen, I put a bunch of comments inline in your wiki page. One general question - is the a proposal to change the default value encoding with the protobuf protocol from JSON to this new format? -Dan On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 5:06 PM, Galen O'Sullivan <gosulli...@pivotal.io> wrote: Hi all,

Value Serialization Proposal for the New Client Protocol

fleshed out, so if there are details you can think of that we might have missed or any other feedback you can give, I would love to hear it! https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Protobuf+Value+Encoding+Scheme+Proposal Thanks, Galen O'Sullivan

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.6.0 RC1

YS [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/geode/KEYS [4] https://mirror-vm.apache.org/~henkp/checker/faq.html On Apr 30, 2018, at 10:31 AM, Galen O'Sullivan <gosulli...@pivotal.io> wrote: -1 I don't see Mike's key in the KEYS file on either rel/v1.6.0.RC1 (5ce726bd7b4f8d2648fd011a807a1bcc624dd

Re: Reviewing our JIRA's

I'm for it. Less noise is a good thing, and I don't think they're likely to get prioritized anyways. If we close as WONTFIX or similar, we can always look back for them later if we want. On 4/26/18 10:39 AM, Anthony Baker wrote: Thanks Lynn! As I first step I’d like to focus on issues

Re: [Discuss] Scope of the CacheElement interface with the respect to the public cluster configuration API

It looks like there are two classes called CacheElement in the codebase; am I correct in thinking that you're referring to org.apache.geode.cache.configuration.CacheElement? This class doesn't have a Javadoc, so it's a little hard as an outsider to understand exactly what it is or how it's

[PROPOSAL] Deprecating DistributedSystem

It looks like there are a few JIRA tasks open to deprecate methods on DistributedSystem, and it doesn't really have much functionality that would be useful to a user. I propose that we deprecate DistributedSystem itself, and keep the system management functionality internal. Is there any reason

New APIs, read-serialized and CacheListeners, PostProcessor etc

Hi all, We're working on a new protocol for Geode, which means wrapping Geode APIs and exposing them via the new protocol. For performance and to avoid class/serialization logic, we want to get these objects in serialized form. This means calling cache.setReadSerializedForCurrentThread(true)

Re: [DISCUSS] New List for Commit and CI Emails

Yeah, I think I'm sending myself convinced by Swapnil's argument. How about muting the "nightly build succeeded" email? On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 9:58 AM, Sean Goller wrote: > Concourse sends mail whenever a job fails. > > On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Swapnil Bawaskar

Re: [Discussion] Improving Spotless to be Even More Beautiful

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 9:06 AM, Patrick Rhomberg wrote: > > @Galen, I had thought it already did that. > I guess it does. I never knew. Excellent!

[DISCUSS] New List for Commit and CI Emails

Hi all, I'm wondering if it would be possible to have a separate list for commit announcements, CI emails and similar automated messages, and keep this mailing list for discussion. It would make it easier to filter email, and I think it might help improve the discussion. I know I've missed

Re: [Discussion] Improving Spotless to be Even More Beautiful

+1 to all of the above. Will Spotless also reorder imports according to our canonical ordering? On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 4:17 PM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote: > +1 > > On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 4:03 PM, Kirk Lund wrote: > > > +1 > > > > On Mon, Mar 19, 2018

Reverted PutIfAbsent

Hopefully this will fix the pipeline failures. Sorry for the inconvenience. Best, Galen

Broken Integration Tests due to putIfAbsent

Hi all, I committed some code recently that looks like it broke the CI. However, based on the failure, I think it will still fail if I revert the commit. I'm currently testing a small hotfix and will apply it if it passes tests. Sorry for the inconvenience. Thanks, Galen GEODE-4836

Re: FunctionService Proposal

+1 for making the function service not static, and splitting servers from clients. Also +1 for Dan's suggestion. On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 2:51 PM, Patrick Rhomberg wrote: > I did not know that! And then, yes, onRegion is much better. > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 2:43 PM, Dan

Re: Proposal: GEODE-4367 - Return PDXInstance when Domain Object can't be found

lize it & return it? > What > > > > if it isn't PDX-serialized? Do we return a byte array? > > > > > > > > > > > > On 1/24/18 12:21 PM, Dan Smith wrote: > > > > > Is this really just a workaround for the fact that the > > re

Re: Proposal: GEODE-4367 - Return PDXInstance when Domain Object can't be found

Hi Addison, What kind of setup do you have that is causing you to have PDX serialized objects that cannot be deserialized? Do you have classes that are present on some servers but not others? This change would break the contract of region.get() , which is that it returns a value of a type that

Re: Font for geode.apache.org

If you're talking about "Performance is Key. Consistency is a must", it looks like the font is "Klavika Web Basic Light". I see the following in the CSS for that element: font-family: 'klavika-web', 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif !important; On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at

Re: ':geode-client-protocol' could not be found in project ':geode-assembly'

Can you show me the particular error? Does it persist? As far as I can remember, we haven't changed that module this week. On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 9:24 AM, Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org> wrote: > Precheckin last night failed to compile. > > On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 9:22 AM, Galen O'Su

Re: ':geode-client-protocol' could not be found in project ':geode-assembly'

It may be that we missed one of the places where a module gets linked in. Where did you see this error? On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Kirk Lund wrote: > Anyone know why the build is failing in geode-assembly? > > * What went wrong: > A problem occurred evaluating project

Thinking about a "Public API" module

Hi all, I'm thinking about the possibility of making a "Geode public API" module, mostly containing interfaces that Geode implements. Why would one do this, you may ask? Here are some reasons. * It makes clear what is our public API (as opposed to "internal" type packages). * Users only have to

Re: Rebase and squash before merging PRs

On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Jinmei Liao wrote: > Not sure if this is useful to everyone, but when I push a subsequent commit > to my feature branch, I always use "force push", so that it's only one commit > I need to rebase to develop. > > I use force push when I've made

Re: New client protocol configuration

I don't care too much about exactly what the configuration looks like, but I want it to be unified, and I want it to be set when the cache starts. Checking system properties throughout the codebase whenever we feel like is a bit too magic for me. In addition, it seems that in order to add a new

New client protocol configuration

Currently, we have a setting for the new client protocol that controls whether authentication is required or not. We expect to expand this in the future, and also that there may be more configuration options for the protocol. We would like to namespace the settings for this protocol but don't

JPF breaking IntelliJ build?

I'm having trouble running tests in IntelliJ because of errors with compilation. Does anyone know why? I've done a clean build and reloaded Gradle configuration in IntelliJ. Thanks, Galen Information:java: Errors occurred while compiling module 'geode-core' Information:javac 1.8.0_111 was used

Re: New Geode PMC Member: Galen O'Sullivan

t; > > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 10:48 AM, Mark Bretl <mbr...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > The Apache Geode Project Management Committee has invited Galen > > > O'Sullivan to join the Geode PMC and we are pleased to announce he has > > > accepted. >

Re: New client/server protocol - seeking feedback

Replies inline. On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 12:13 PM, Udo Kohlmeyer wrote: > Replies inline > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Dan Smith wrote: > > > This actually brings up another point I was going to ask about. I don't > see > > any version information

Re: Please don't commit broken javadocs

We'll move everything to internal soon, before public release. We have a ticket to fix the Javadocs and the links will be removed soon as well. The broken links are for generated files that don't seem to have been created when the javadoc task runs. On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Dan Smith

Re: [DISCUSS] Framework for concurrency tests

+1 This is great! I'll take a look at your PR when I get the time. We may want to think carefully about how often we run these tests, because unlike regular unit tests, they will take forever to run. On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 1:42 PM, Michael William Dodge wrote: > +1 for unit

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode release - v1.2.1 RC2

Looks like the repos have moved to gitbox. It should be as simple as changing the three git-wip-us.apache.org links to gitbox.apache.org . On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Karen Miller wrote: > A guarded +1 based on limited testing of the RC: > > Built the Geode RC from

Re: Review Request 62088: GEODE-3249 Validate internal client/server messages

think `allow` would be clearer than `disallow` because it avoids double-negatives. Can we use `allow-internal-messages-without-credentials` and have it default to `true`? - Galen O'Sullivan On Sept. 5, 2017, 5:57 p.m., Bruce Schuchardt wrote

Re: git repo is gone

It looks like it's moved. If you go to the URL in a browser it will give you a hint. This command should work to update your remote: git remote set-url https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/geode.git running `git remote -v` after should confirm the

Re: Review Request 61978: GEODE-3059: LoadMonitor.connectionClosed incrementing statistics only for client-server connection

549> This comparison is changed with byte vs int rules. Probably better to use the int comparison. Thismight be even better as a method implemented on CommunicationMode. - Galen O'Sullivan On Aug. 30, 2017, 8:48 p.m., Bruce Schuchardt

Re: GMSJoinLeaveJUnitTest failing on develop

I just filed GEODE- for GMSJoinLeaveJUnitTest. testViewNotSentWhenShuttingDown . I've gotten a failure from the command line, but not when I run it from within IntelliJ (even repeatedly). On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 4:12 PM, Bruce Schuchardt wrote: > (GEODE-3155)

Re: Avoid mutating standard Java System Properties (even in tests)

I have had a lot of tests fail because mcast-port is nonzero. So now I set that system property in a lot of new tests. Maybe the tests that set it to something other than the default should be passing a Properties object to CacheFactory rather than messing with system properties. I think the

Re: Review Request 60834: GEODE-3051: Remove unreachable exception handling in AcceptorImpl.accept

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60834/#review180546 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Galen O'Sullivan On July 13, 2017, 12

Re: No nulls

What's the general opinion of @NotNull annotations? Would they be useful? On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 9:23 AM, John Blum wrote: > +1 as well. > > However, I will caution this... use Java 8's new java.util.Optional class > in your codebase judiciously. Using it everywhere,

Re: Review Request 60718: GEODE-2997: New flow getAll/putAll

he mock here. Would a spy be easier to understand? geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/protocol/protobuf/operations/PutAllRequestOperationHandlerJUnitTest.java Lines 68 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/60718/#comment255537> The serialization service is stateless. Would a spy

Re: Review Request 60570: GEODE-3153 Client receives duplicate events during rolling upgrade

bility tests, but do we want to be testing agains current version and testing version or current and 9.0? Will backwards compatibility set `testVersion` to 9.0 among other versions? - Galen O'Sullivan On June 30, 2017, 4:33 p.m., Bruce Schu

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

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

> On June 27, 2017, 6:19 p.m., Galen O'Sullivan wrote: > > The diff doesn't apply cleanly on develop on my machine. What's the base > > commit? Or better, can you merge or rebase on develop please? - Galen --- This is a

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

the base commit? geode-assembly/build.gradle Lines 143 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/60312/#comment253398> It's a nit, but it would be nice to remove trailing whitespace. - Galen O'Sullivan On June 21, 2017, 9:35 p.m., Hitesh Khamesra

Re: Review Request 60442: GEODE-3130: Refactoring AcceptorImpl communication mode switch

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60442/#review179007 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Galen O'Sullivan On June 26, 2017, 6:31

Re: Review Request 60446: Events do not get removed from the client queue for 1.0 clients

/geode/internal/cache/ha/ThreadIdentifierJUnitTest.java Lines 40 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/60446/#comment253364> Is it possible for a Membership ID to be less than 17 bytes and this to be negative? - Galen O'Sullivan On June 26, 2017, 10:24 p.m., Bruce Schu

Re: Review Request 60394: GEODE-3075 and GEODE-2995: merge of new protobuf protocol work.

gradle/rat.gradle 1bea5843b settings.gradle c0fdb6e4f Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60394/diff/2/ Testing --- Precheckin passed on v1 (with the serializable in `excludeClasses.txt` instead of `sanctionedSerializables.txt`). Thanks, Galen O'Sullivan

Re: Review Request 60394: GEODE-3075 and GEODE-2995: merge of new protobuf protocol work.

settings.gradle c0fdb6e4f Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60394/diff/2/ Changes: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60394/diff/1-2/ Testing --- Precheckin passed on v1 (with the serializable in `excludeClasses.txt` instead of `sanctionedSerializables.txt`. Thanks, Galen O'Sullivan

Review Request 60394: GEODE-3075 and GEODE-2995: merg

in `excludeClasses.txt` instead of `sanctionedSerializables.txt`. Thanks, Galen O'Sullivan

Re: Review Request 60217: GEODE-2995: adding in protocol handler for protobuf messages

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60217/#review178541 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Galen O'Sullivan On June 21, 2017, 7:01

Re: Review Request 60217: GEODE-2995: adding in protocol handler for protobuf messages

> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/60217/ > --- > > (Updated June 21, 2017, 12:02 a.m.) > > > Review request for geode, Alexander Murmann, Bruce Schuchardt, Galen &g

Re: Review Request 60217: GEODE-2995: adding in protocol handler for protobuf messages

ws.apache.org/r/60217/#comment252365> Do you know what this ignore does? geode-protobuf/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/serialization/registry/CodecRegistryJUnitTest.java Lines 58 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/60217/#comment252367> This test can have an expected except

Re: Review Request 60217: GEODE-2995: adding in protocol handler for protobuf messages

, though. settings.gradle Line 39 (original), 39 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/60217/#comment252339> `geode-protobuf` will also need to be added to `geode-assembly` before this is functional, but we can do that in the work that combines this with the `ServerConnection` wor

Re: Review Request 60157: GEODE-3075: initial work for feature flag and creation of a new subclass of `ServerConnection`.

, but I'd consider it pretty much equivalent. If you want me to run again, I will.) Thanks, Galen O'Sullivan

Re: Review Request 60157: GEODE-3075: initial work for feature flag and creation of a new subclass of `ServerConnection`.

o reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60157/#review178279 --- On June 20, 2017, 12:53 a.m., Galen O'Sullivan wrote: > > --- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To

Re: Review Request 60157: GEODE-3075: initial work for feature flag and creation of a new subclass of `ServerConnection`.

reviews.apache.org/r/60157/diff/2/?file=1752476#file1752476line58> > > > > surely we don't need this here... How do we handle the case if we have > > another client protocol handler... this would fail. We can test this at the factory level. I hadn't been thinking of thi

Re: Review Request 60157: GEODE-3075: initial work for feature flag and creation of a new subclass of `ServerConnection`.

equivalent. If you want me to run again, I will.) Thanks, Galen O'Sullivan

Review Request 60157: GEODE-3075: initial work for feature flag and creation of a new subclass of `ServerConnection`.

, but I'd consider it pretty much equivalent. If you want me to run again, I will.) Thanks, Galen O'Sullivan

Re: Review Request 59850: GEODE-3023: TcpServer thread can be blocked in processRequest

- > > (Updated June 8, 2017, 12:20 a.m.) > > > Review request for geode, Alexander Murmann, Bruce Schuchardt, Galen > O'Sullivan, Hitesh Khamesra, and Brian Rowe. > > > Repository: geode > > > Description > ---

Re: Review Request 59925: GEODE-3052 Restarting 2 locators within 1s of each other causes potential locator split brain

> On June 8, 2017, 11:45 p.m., Galen O'Sullivan wrote: > > This makes sense to me: we remove the locators if we can't connect to them. > > > > I wonder what happens if the two locators can't talk to each other (at > > first, anyways) but can talk to the res

Re: Review Request 59850: GEODE-3023: TcpServer thread can be blocked in processRequest

through the tests. - Galen O'Sullivan On June 6, 2017, 11:21 p.m., Udo Kohlmeyer wrote: > > --- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache

Re: Review Request 59866: GEODE-2555: Region Management docs page refers to the wrong field (id= should be refid=)

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/59866/#review177196 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Galen O'Sullivan On June 6, 2017, 10:50

Re: Review Request 59542: GEODE-2974: rename ResultBuilder methods: GemFire -> Geode

> On May 25, 2017, 11:06 p.m., Darrel Schneider wrote: > > I think in this case it would have been better to just drop GemFire instead > > of renaming it to Geode. > > I see no reason why the product name should be included in these messages. > > The gfsh message can just say "Could not process

  1   2   3   >