Re: [DISCUSS] log4j errors/warnings

2019-10-18 Thread John Blum
Be careful to only add logging dependencies as testRuntime dependencies. Do not add any logger implementation/provider (e.g. log4j-core, or otherwise) in either the compile-time or runtime scope. This also means that when users are using and running Apache Geode applications (regardless of

Re: [DISCUSS] Add GEODE-7261 and GEODE-7241 to release/1.9.2

2019-10-14 Thread John Blum
+1 On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 11:19 AM Udo Kohlmeyer wrote: > +1 to including both. > > On 10/14/19 10:52 AM, Dick Cavender wrote: > > +1 for both fixes and the original list > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 5:00 PM Owen Nichols wrote: > > > >> Sounds like a big win for convenience, and clearly

Re: Token based authentication support added in Geode Develop

2019-10-07 Thread John Blum
got it On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 10:33 AM Joris Melchior wrote: > Yes, at the moment the we only support receiving a token provided in the > Authentication header field. We don't provide the standard endpoints for > token acquisition and refresh. > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 4:14 PM J

Re: Token based authentication support added in Geode Develop

2019-10-04 Thread John Blum
So application developer's will need to know to code their application client's to lookup the JWT token (from some store) and set HTTP request headers to send the token, or will this be handled automatically by a geode client? On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:37 AM Jinmei Liao wrote: > yes, correct,

Re: [DISCUSS] Support For LTS Version Of Geode

2019-09-30 Thread John Blum
Geode needs to do any of what I am suggesting just for the Spring Data bits. But, it would make our lives simpler overall, which is why I am advocating for it. Final $0.02, -j On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 6:13 PM John Blum wrote: > Well, release durations are subjective to begin with. What

Re: [DISCUSS] Support For LTS Version Of Geode

2019-09-30 Thread John Blum
; > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 8:09 PM John Blum wrote: > > > Put simply, from my perspective, I would like to see LTS versions of > Apache > > Geode align with the *Spring Data* (*Release Trains*) support for Apache > > Geode. > > > > For example: > > >

Re: [DISCUSS] Support For LTS Version Of Geode

2019-09-30 Thread John Blum
Put simply, from my perspective, I would like to see LTS versions of Apache Geode align with the *Spring Data* (*Release Trains*) support for Apache Geode. For example: SDG Lovelace/2.1 is based on Apache Geode 1.6.x. SDG Moore/2.2 is based on Apache Geode 1.9.x. Therefore, both Apache Geode

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Geode 1.10.0

2019-09-26 Thread John Blum
Congrats!!! Nice work! On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 2:08 PM Dick Cavender wrote: > The Apache Geode community is pleased to announce the availability of > Apache Geode 1.10.0. > > Apache Geode is a data management platform that provides a database-like > consistency model, reliable transaction

Re: [DISCUSS] Geode 1.11.0 dependency update

2019-09-26 Thread John Blum
Hi Dick- Thanks for the reminder on an important topic. On quick review of *Nick's* proposal, which I like (well done), I would only add that if a patch release is cut (e.g. 1.9.1, 1.9.2) that dependencies be reviewed for updated patch releases as well. While different patch versions of

Re: Spring Boot with Geode 1.10

2019-09-25 Thread John Blum
This section of Spring Boot's Maven/Gradle Plugin explains it best... https://docs.spring.io/spring-boot/docs/2.1.7.RELEASE/gradle-plugin/reference/html/#managing-dependencies -j On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 1:24 PM John Blum wrote: > There is no version of Spring Boot (SBDG) currently built on Apa

Re: Spring Boot with Geode 1.10

2019-09-25 Thread John Blum
There is no version of Spring Boot (SBDG) currently built on Apache Geode 1.10 at the moment. In general, you should understand 2 things. 1. First, the Apache Geode version that Spring Boot, or SBDG, is dependent on is indirectly (transitively) determined by upstream dependencies. SBDG ->

Re: [DISCUSS] GEODE-7241 - make Jar not War?

2019-09-25 Thread John Blum
@Jake - Ah, indeed it was https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gwar. I never heard of them until now. Gotta love the 80s Rock/Heavy Metal Era. On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 12:22 PM Jacob Barrett wrote: > Udo, > > I didn’t say we shouldn’t fix it for the future. I said I don’t believe it > warrants a

Re: [DISCUSS] GEODE-7241 - make Jar not War?

2019-09-25 Thread John Blum
It occurred to me after *Charlie* shared the link to installing *Pulse* in a standalone Servlet Container (e.g. Apache Tomcat) that we don't properly describe how to handle the Geode dependencies (e.g. geode-core). Again, this is not bundled as part of the Geode WAR files. -1 to publishing a

Re: [DISCUSS] GEODE-7241 - make Jar not War?

2019-09-25 Thread John Blum
Actually, to clarify 2 points. 1. Technically, it is a bit more involved than simply just validating the "format". For instance, the web.xml file must be valid and well-formed. 2. There was a reason why the geode-core and other Apache Geode libs were not bundled in WEB-INF/lib of the WAR files,

Re: [DISCUSS] GEODE-7241 - make Jar not War?

2019-09-25 Thread John Blum
Bundling "all" dependencies in a WAR file is a rather subjective topic since, typically, in practice developers did not bundle things like JDBC drivers in a WAR file for their Web app. Common practice was to put "shared" libs in the Servlet Containers global libs directory (using the Common

Re: [DISCUSS] - Cutting of release 1.9.2

2019-09-20 Thread John Blum
+1 for releasing Apache Geode 1.9.2 and including the fix for GEDOE-7121. On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 1:11 PM Kirk Lund wrote: > +1 for creating 1.9.x with the fix for GEODE-7121 > > > On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 1:09 PM John Blum wrote: > > > Hi Kirk - SDG 2.3/Neuman, which

Re: [DISCUSS] - Cutting of release 1.9.2

2019-09-20 Thread John Blum
-Geode-and-Pivotal-GemFire-Version-Compatibility-Matrix ). On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 1:09 PM John Blum wrote: > Hi Kirk - SDG 2.3/Neuman, which is only after SDG 2.2/Moore GAs, which is > tentatively scheduled for Monday, Sept. 30th. > > On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 1:01 PM Kirk Lund wrote:

Re: [DISCUSS] - Cutting of release 1.9.2

2019-09-20 Thread John Blum
Hi Kirk - SDG 2.3/Neuman, which is only after SDG 2.2/Moore GAs, which is tentatively scheduled for Monday, Sept. 30th. On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 1:01 PM Kirk Lund wrote: > Hi Udo, SDG cannot upgrade to Geode 1.10.x until which version? SDG 2.2.0? > > On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 12:45 PM Udo

Re: [Proposal] Make gfsh "stop server" command synchronous

2019-09-11 Thread John Blum
+1 to Bruce's comments as well. This is exactly the kind of thing I needed to do (handle) inside of the *Spring Test for Apache Geode* (STDG) project from a framework perspective, to ensure that other projects relying on STDG (e.g. SBDG, SSDG) for their integration testing purposes (e.g.

Re: [Proposal] Make gfsh "stop server" command synchronous

2019-09-10 Thread John Blum
we should consider that nearly all gfsh commands are not blocking, > and rather, have a way to determine which ones are still waiting for > completion? > > -- > Mike Stolz > Principal Engineer, Pivotal Cloud Cache > Mobile: +1-631-835-4771 > > > > On Tue, Sep

Re: [Proposal] Make gfsh "stop server" command synchronous

2019-09-10 Thread John Blum
ve a change that seems viable that waits for the pid file to > disappear from the subdirectory of the server. I am not a fan. I would > prefer to wait for the pid to disappear, but that doesn’t seem like it will > be cross-platform friendly. > > Thanks, > Mark > > &

Re: [Proposal] Make gfsh "stop server" command synchronous

2019-09-10 Thread John Blum
`stop server` is synchronous (with an option to break out of the wait using CTRL^C) AFAIR. Way deep down inside, it simply relies on GemFireCache.close() to return (in-process). As Darrel mentioned, there is not "true" signal the the server was successfully stopped. -j On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Geode 1.9.1

2019-09-06 Thread John Blum
Congrats Geode Community! On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 11:04 AM Owen Nichols wrote: > The Apache Geode community is pleased to announce the availability of > Apache Geode 1.9.1. > > Apache Geode is a data management platform that provides a database-like > consistency model, reliable transaction

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.9.1.RC3

2019-09-03 Thread John Blum
ought. -John On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 10:40 AM John Blum wrote: > +1 > > Ran SDG build against Apache Geode 1.9.1 build snapshots (for RC3). > > However, can we seriously reconsider logging the follow message at ERROR? > Ugh! > > ERROR StatusLogger Log4j2 could not find a loggi

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.9.1.RC3

2019-09-03 Thread John Blum
+1 Ran SDG build against Apache Geode 1.9.1 build snapshots (for RC3). However, can we seriously reconsider logging the follow message at ERROR? Ugh! ERROR StatusLogger Log4j2 could not find a logging implementation. Please add log4j-core to the classpath. Using SimpleLogger to log to the

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.9.1 RC2

2019-08-29 Thread John Blum
+1 On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 5:40 PM Udo Kohlmeyer wrote: > +1 > > On 8/29/19 5:02 PM, Owen Nichols wrote: > > Hello Geode dev community, > > > > This is a release candidate for Apache Geode, version 1.9.1.RC2. > > Thanks to all the community members for their contributions to this > release! > >

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.9.1 RC1 (new vote)

2019-08-29 Thread John Blum
Final SD[G] Moore-RELEASE/2.2 GA is (tentatively) scheduled for Thurs, Sept 19th. Even still, any SD[G] Moore service release post GA (e.g. 2.2.1, 2.2.2, ..., 2.2.N) can pick up any patch release of Apache Geode 1.9.x (e.g. 1.9.1, 1.9.2, ..., 1.9.N). Additionally, SBDG 1.2 cannot go GA before

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.9.1 RC1

2019-08-29 Thread John Blum
FWIW, I don't think 1.9.1 clients (or any combination of patch versions) should be incompatible with servers 1.9.patch-1 (e.g. 1.9.0). IMO, that would be very bad! major.minor client/servers, regardless of patch versions, should remain interoperable. On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 11:41 AM Owen

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.9.1 RC1 (new vote)

2019-08-29 Thread John Blum
+1 On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 9:41 AM Kirk Lund wrote: > +1 (just in case my vote counts) > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 9:02 AM Kirk Lund wrote: > > > Hello Geode dev community, > > > > This is a release candidate for Apache Geode, version 1.9.1.RC1. > > Thanks to all the community members for

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.9.1 RC1

2019-08-28 Thread John Blum
+1 On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 2:51 PM Dan Smith wrote: > I missed this vote email as well - if we reopen the vote I'll cast one. I > don't really have much context on why we want a 1.9.1 but I'm happy to > double check the bits. > > One comment on this RC - I noticed that we bumped the ordinal in

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Geode 1.9.1 with logging improvements

2019-08-28 Thread John Blum
> > -Owen > > > > > >> On Aug 18, 2019, at 7:52 AM, Anthony Baker wrote: > >> > >> Yep. Get a release manager, identify and cherry pick all the changes, > then do the release. > >> > >> Anthony > >> > >>> On Aug 16, 20

Re: [DISCUSS] Controlling event dispatch to AsyncEventListener (review by Aug 22)

2019-08-20 Thread John Blum
FTR, I am not opposed to *Naba's* idea either. +1 I kind of like the idea of having a global, cache-wide call that can coordinate the background initialization/processing of all other Geode objects that have lifecycle processes starting in the background (e.g. Gateways, AEQs, etc). On Tue,

Re: [DISCUSS] Controlling event dispatch to AsyncEventListener (review by Aug 22)

2019-08-20 Thread John Blum
After talking with *Alexander* this morning (and taking *Mike's* concerns into consideration), and to not adversely affect users/customers today, I think... 1). AEQ's can (should) have a configuration setting to "manually" start the queue's background processor (i.e. Thread) to begin processing

Re: Proposal to Include GEODE-7079 in 1.10.0

2019-08-15 Thread John Blum
+1 On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 5:30 AM Ju@N wrote: > Hello team, > > I'd like to propose including the *fix [1]* for *GEODE-7079 [2]* in release > 1.10.0. > Long story short: a *NullPointerException* can be continuously thrown > and flood the member's logs if a serial event processor (either >

Re: [DISCUSS] Geode dependency update process (review by 8/28/2019)

2019-08-14 Thread John Blum
+1 to Nick's proposal! While you cannot always guarantee that a dependency for whatever version, whether a new major, an updated minor or simply a patch release won't introduce problems (regressions, performance issues, or worse, CVEs), it is extremely important to keep dependencies up-to-date,

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Geode 1.9.1 with logging improvements

2019-08-13 Thread John Blum
Sorry, corrections below... On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 1:54 PM John Blum wrote: > Stated slightly a different way... > > If *SBDG 1.2 *were to be (re)based on *Apache Geode 1.10* directly, then > it would *defy* the dependency on Apache Geode pulled in by SDG Moore/2.2 > (which

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Geode 1.9.1 with logging improvements

2019-08-13 Thread John Blum
at that time (e.g. 1.10, maybe 1.11) and continue to be upgraded until 2.3 reaches RC status. Cheers, John On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 1:45 PM John Blum wrote: > For clarification... > > 1. SBDG 1.1 is the "*current*" development line (on > <https://github.com/spring-

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Geode 1.9.1 with logging improvements

2019-08-13 Thread John Blum
For clarification... 1. SBDG 1.1 is the "*current*" development line (on master [1]); SBDG 1.2 is *not* yet

Re: Fix for ClassCastException when using Logback for 1.10.0

2019-08-08 Thread John Blum
+1 On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 11:31 AM Juan José Ramos wrote: > +1 > > On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 7:26 PM Mark Hanson wrote: > > > +1 > > > > I think it is valuable to make life easier for Spring Boot users. > > > > Thanks, > > Mark > > > > > On Aug 8, 2019, at 11:24 AM, Kirk Lund wrote: > > > > > >

Re: Fix for NPE during forceDisconnect candidate for 1.10.0

2019-08-08 Thread John Blum
+1 for Kirk's changes in 1.10. This will be critical for SD Neuman and SBDG 1.3. On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 10:57 AM Owen Nichols wrote: > Hi Kirk and Mark, thank you for bringing your concern. > > Our “critical fixes” rule allows critical fixes to be brought to the > release branch by proposal on

Re: Another change for 1.10.0 release

2019-08-08 Thread John Blum
+1 for Dan's changes. On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 10:28 AM Owen Nichols wrote: > Hi Dan, thank you for bringing your concern. > > Our “critical fixes” rule allows critical fixes to be brought to the > release branch by proposal on the dev list [as you have just done]. If > there is consensus from

Re: [DISCUSS] Time to cut Geode 1.10.0?

2019-08-06 Thread John Blum
A couple of clarifications: 1. First, and most importantly, Pivotal GemFire, specifically (Apache Geode was never officially on *Spring Initializer*, actually) was removed from *Spring Initializer* because *Spring Boot* *1.5.x* has finally reached *End of Life*.Pivotal GemFire existed as an

[RELEASE] Spring for Apache Geode Release & Feature Update

2019-07-03 Thread John Blum
Greetings Apache Geode community- I wanted to take this opportunity and let you all know about the recent developments in the *Spring* ecosystem as it relates to Apache Geode for all you *Spring* users out there. ~~ 1. *Spring Data for Apache Geode* (SDG) Lovelace-SR9 (2.1.9.RELEASE)

Re: [DISCUSS] Add a test dependency to geode-core - ArchUnit

2019-06-21 Thread John Blum
Of equal importance to uni-directional dependencies in a "modular" design is, classes in package A should not refer directly to classes in package B when A depends on B, or alternately, when module A depends on module B. All interactions are only ever through interfaces and all implementations are

Spring Boot for Apache Geode 1.1.0.M1 Released!

2019-05-07 Thread John Blum
I am pleased to announce the release of *Spring Boot for Apache Geode* (SBDG) 1.1.0.M1. See the official release announcement here: https://spring.io/blog/2019/05/07/spring-boot-for-apache-geode-pivotal-gemfire-1-1-0-m1-released The 1.1 Milestone 1 (M1) release primarily rebases SBDG on the

[ANNOUNCE] Spring Boot for Apache Geode 1.0.0.RELEASE Available!

2019-05-06 Thread John Blum
It is my pleasure to announce the first GA release of Spring Boot for Apache Geode (SBDG) 1.0.0.RELEASE. See the official release announcement on spring.io for more details: https://spring.io/blog/2019/05/07/spring-boot-for-apache-geode-pivotal-gemfire-1-0-0-release-available Feedback

[ANNOUNCE] Spring Boot for Apache Geode 1.0.0.RC2 Available!

2019-05-01 Thread John Blum
I am pleased to announce the release of *Spring Boot for Apache Geode* (SBDG) 1.0.0.RC2. You can read more details in the official release announcement on the spring.io/blog [1]. Given feedback from the Boot team, I decided to postpone the 1.0 GA and push out 1 more release candidate. The final

[ANNOUNCE] Spring Boot for Apache Geode 1.0.0.RC1 Released!

2019-04-24 Thread John Blum
I am pleased to announce the release of *Spring Boot for Apache Geode* (SBDG) 1.0.0.RC1. You can read more details in the official release announcement on the spring.io/blog [1]. I have tentatively scheduled the final GA release of SBDG 1.0 on Monday, April 29th, 2019. Any feedback between now

Re: How to publish client stats on server

2019-04-16 Thread John Blum
Or alternatively, when using Spring, you can just use @EnableStatistics [1]. [1] https://docs.spring.io/spring-data/geode/docs/current/api/org/springframework/data/gemfire/config/annotation/EnableStatistics.html On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 10:44 AM Darrel Schneider wrote: >

Re: [Discuss] Removal of Thread Local Connection Pooling

2019-04-05 Thread John Blum
Well articulated and a wise decision; Jake. +1 On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 8:24 AM Anthony Baker wrote: > One question: if I’m using thread-local connections ho does that affect > pool sizing? Are thread-local connections included in the overall pool > size or accounted for separately? > > We may

[ANNOUNCE] Spring Boot for Apache Geode 1.0.0.M4 Available!

2019-03-22 Thread John Blum
Greetings Apache Geode community and Spring users- I am pleased to bring you the *Spring Boot for Apache Geode* (SBDG) 1.0.0.M4 release. You can read the official announcement on the Spring Blog [1] to find out more details. Next up will be SBDG 1.0.0.RC1 followed shortly by a final 1.0.0.GA as

Re: [DISCUSS] Changing many geode-core dependencies from compile to runtime

2019-03-15 Thread John Blum
If users will be explicitly declaring such dependencies in their applications, then I might also suggest declaring/generating a Maven section in the POM to ensure that the user is getting and using the right version of these dependencies, especially when they don't care about the version (i.e.

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving redis to a separate module

2019-03-12 Thread John Blum
Definitely a reasonable change. Perhaps, for consistency sake, the same should be applied to Geode's Memcached support? (in another PR). On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 4:23 PM Dan Smith wrote: > I created a PR to move our redis support to a separate module. Let me know > what you think: > >

Re: Dependency review for release 1.9.0

2019-02-28 Thread John Blum
ns /Library/Java/Extensions /Network/Library/Java/Extensions /System/Library/Java/Extensions /usr/lib/java . System Properties: PID = 16326 awt.toolkit = sun.lwawt.macosx.LWCToolkit ... On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 10:52 AM John Blum wrote: > As an example of #1... > >

Re: Dependency review for release 1.9.0

2019-02-28 Thread John Blum
[3] https://github.com/jxblum/spring-session-data-gemfire-serialization-example/blob/master/native-gemfire-server/src/main/java/example/app/gemfire/server/NativeGemFireServerApplication.java On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 10:35 AM John Blum wrote: > Dan- > > 2 things: > > 1) Users and cust

Re: Dependency review for release 1.9.0

2019-02-28 Thread John Blum
hed > through gfsh start server unless we provide a way to configure which geode > modules are present on the server's classpath. > > -Dan > > On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 10:03 AM John Blum wrote: > > > Well, that just requires that you appropriately declare dependencies wi

Re: Dependency review for release 1.9.0

2019-02-28 Thread John Blum
Well, that just requires that you appropriately declare dependencies with the "optionality" and "scope" (e.g. "compile", "test", "provided", etc). Additionally, Geode modules could selectively pull in the required deps as needed. For example, `geode-lucene` would only pull in the Apache Lucene

Re: Core tenets of Geode

2018-11-28 Thread John Blum
w the next. Correctness does not take a day off. If you can only optimize for 1 thing, opt to be correct. Users will silently be thanking you, especially during the holidays when they don't have to worry about keeping the lights on at work. + $0.02 more, -John On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 11:42 AM John B

Re: Core tenets of Geode

2018-11-28 Thread John Blum
There is only 1 thing I would add to this list is, above all others... 1. Correctness Of course, this ought to go without saying, but do the right thing, always, even at the peril of all the other things combined. It is all too easy to focus on the shinny things (e.g. performance, latency, high

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

2018-11-26 Thread John Blum
@Galen - If a method is added to a Java interface (e.g. CacheListener), then classes implementing the interface must define the method, or a compile error will occur. This is true in the case where 1) the class implements CacheListener directly rather than extending CacheListenerAdapter and 2)

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

2018-11-26 Thread John Blum
*> Most of these are in internal packages, which means we can change the package of these classes without breaking users.* I don't agree with this. Some functionality in Geode required by an application, or framework, is only available in an "internal" package, unfortunately. This has to do

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

2018-11-26 Thread John Blum
I need more time to think about this clearly (currently juggling multiple things), but I would say this... I don't think there should be "internal" APIs, as in o.a.g.*.internal. There are only APIs/SPIs and implementations, period. If you want to maintain an API as internal, then you should

Re: Questions about Poms and Publishing

2018-11-16 Thread John Blum
he native Gradle DSL > > https://docs.gradle.org/current/userguide/managing_transitive_dependencies.html > as an *eventual* replacement for the dependency-management-plugin you > reference? > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 9:09 AM John Blum wrote: > > > If you'd like Maven dependen

Re: Questions about Poms and Publishing

2018-11-13 Thread John Blum
If you'd like Maven dependencyManagement like behavior in Gradle, then you should have a look at... https://github.com/spring-gradle-plugins/dependency-management-plugin -j On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 8:10 AM, Bill Burcham wrote: > @Patrick Rhomberg I've never seen the > dependencyManagement

Re: [PROPOSAL] Add getCache and getLocator to Launchers

2018-11-02 Thread John Blum
ache.geode.distributed.ServerLauncher.start(ServerLauncher.java:749) ... 2 more Cheers, -John On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 5:49 PM, John Blum wrote: > Damn it! Correction to my previous email... > > '--disable-default-port' should read '--disable-default-server' in my > *Gfsh* `start serve

Re: [PROPOSAL] Add getCache and getLocator to Launchers

2018-11-02 Thread John Blum
Damn it! Correction to my previous email... '--disable-default-port' should read '--disable-default-server' in my *Gfsh* `start server` command examples. Apologies, John On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 5:41 PM, John Blum wrote: > Bruce- > > Regarding... > > > "... *but it's

Re: [PROPOSAL] Add getCache and getLocator to Launchers

2018-11-02 Thread John Blum
ache.xml or something. > > Be that as it may I think the recent talk about this convinces me that > Kirk's original proposal is sound and we should go with it. Servers can be > fished out of the cache so it's not a big deal if the launcher API doesn't > have a getCacheServer method. >

Re: Testing tip: Use IgnoredException as an AutoCloseable

2018-11-02 Thread John Blum
With IDE highlighting things as unused, you can either @SuppressWarnings("unused") on the method or statement highlighted or adjust your IDE inspections (perhaps more advisable), which is per project. On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 1:27 PM, Kirk Lund wrote: > The easiest way to use IgnoredException is

Re: [PROPOSAL] Add getCache and getLocator to Launchers

2018-11-01 Thread John Blum
Well, ServerLauncher may or may not create a CacheServer instance when it starts a server. A server can be created without a CacheServer, for instance, when in *Gfsh* `start server --disable-default-server` option is specified. In addition, you can always find or get the list of CacheServers (if

Re: [Discuss] showcasing community work

2018-10-11 Thread John Blum
This is a very nice idea Sai. Perhaps a page with a table containing... * Project Name * Project Description (Summary) * Project License * Project URL (to GitHub page, Website, etc, where users can find out more information) Food for thought. On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 12:04 PM, Sai Boorlagadda

Re: [DISCUSS] Predictable minor release cadence

2018-10-08 Thread John Blum
+1; a time-based approach also helps to keep scope in check (i.e. smaller changes and change sets), which leads to faster feedback (either fail faster, sooner or find out you are on the right track), and shows users/customers active progress/forward momentum, which is only a good thing. Also, a

Re: [Discuss] Transitive dependencies and internal .pom changes

2018-09-28 Thread John Blum
Agreed, plus many times you can declare that a dependency is either (appropriately) "test" scope (for test dependencies only), "optional", or (in certain cases) "provided", which will (should) have no impact to end users, e.g. like conflicting dependencies. However, I am in favor of reducing

Spring Boot for Apache Geode 1.0.0.M3 Released!

2018-09-21 Thread John Blum
It is my pleasure to announce [1] the release of *Spring Boot for Apache Geode* 1.0.0.M3. This release builds on the latest GA version of *Spring Boot*, 2.0.5.RELEASE, and adds extensive support for using *Spring Boot Actuator* [2] (specifically, providing HealthIndicators [3]) with Apache Geode,

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

2018-09-11 Thread John Blum
I think any arguments about what optimizations the (JIT enabled) compiler (HotSpot or otherwise) will perform at runtime is questionable at best. HotSpot can "inline" certain [frequent/hot] code paths both at compile/runtime thereby reducing the number of method invocations (which also depends on

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

2018-09-07 Thread John Blum
Grrr, meant... logger.debug("Logging in user {}", user); On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 11:37 AM, John Blum wrote: > Technically, I think that is SLF4J syntax (but maybe Log4J2 supports this > format now as well; anyway). > > Still, you should be careful with log statements lik

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

2018-09-07 Thread John Blum
Technically, I think that is SLF4J syntax (but maybe Log4J2 supports this format now as well; anyway). Still, you should be careful with log statements like... logger.debug("Logging in user {}" + user); Assuming the User class itself and an "informative" and properly constructed toString()

Re: [Discuss] Hosting nightly Geode snapshots

2018-09-05 Thread John Blum
; > > > > > > > > > On 9/5/18 15:16, Dan Smith wrote: > > > >> Hi John, > > > >> > > > >> We are publishing nightly snapshots from the develop branch. See > > > >> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups

Re: Concerning Apache Geode 1.7.0

2018-09-05 Thread John Blum
> > [DISCUSS] -> [VOTE] , then implemented. > > Currently, it is out of scope for the 1.7.0 release process. > > > > Regards > > Nabarun Nag > > > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 3:10 PM John Blum wrote: > > > > > I just need nightly build snap

Re: [Discuss] Hosting nightly Geode snapshots

2018-09-05 Thread John Blum
gradle build for the examples repo for an example of > >> build that is consuming these nightly snapshots: > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/geode-examples/blob/master/build.gradle > >> > >> -Dan > >> > >> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 a

Re: Concerning Apache Geode 1.7.0

2018-09-05 Thread John Blum
versions 1.8.0+ will continue in the > way you mentioned. For 1.7.0 there were some unforeseen circumstances, > which is causing some issues with the release process. > I apologize for the inconvenience and hopefully you will soon have a stable > branch to test. > > Regards >

Re: [Discuss] Hosting nightly Geode snapshots

2018-09-05 Thread John Blum
+1 On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 3:00 PM, Udo Kohlmeyer wrote: > Hi there Geode Dev-list, > > I would like to suggest that Geode starts making nightly build snapshots > available for downstream consumption. > > Would it be possible to start uploading nightly snapshots to the >

Re: Concerning Apache Geode 1.7.0

2018-09-05 Thread John Blum
ers to run their experiments on a branch with > issues. It will be up as soon as the issues are resolved. I'm working on > resolving them at the moment. Hopefully soon we will send out the mail and > the updated release branch. > > Regards > Nabarun Nag > > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018

Re: Concerning Apache Geode 1.7.0

2018-09-05 Thread John Blum
dy. > > Regards > Nabarun Nag > > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 2:10 PM John Blum wrote: > > > I see that the branch for Apache Geode 1.7.0 (release/1.7.0 [1]) has been > > created in preparation for the upcoming the 1.7 release. > > > > I am trying to get an e

Concerning Apache Geode 1.7.0

2018-09-05 Thread John Blum
I see that the branch for Apache Geode 1.7.0 (release/1.7.0 [1]) has been created in preparation for the upcoming the 1.7 release. I am trying to get an early sense/feel for the required changes in SDG when I rebase it on 1.7. Previously, I was able to obtain Geode snapshots from...

Re: Testing code in geode-junit and geode-dunit src/main

2018-08-10 Thread John Blum
If you haven't seen this, you should have a look at *Spring Test for Apache Geode* (STDG) [1] I have much work to do yet to round this project out: docs, more "formalized" integration test support (think JUnit Rules and custom Runners over extension, etc) and so on. However, mocking for Geode

Re: Assertions in Geode

2018-07-19 Thread John Blum
While powerful, the problem with Java assertions is that they must be explicitly enabled (e.g. with the JVM switch, -ea), as Jake already pointed out, which makes them dangerous to rely on. Additionally, in general, there is nothing about Assertions that require they only be used for testing

Spring Boot for Apache Geode 1.0.0.M1 Released!

2018-06-25 Thread John Blum
Apache Geode Community- It is my please to announce the first milestone release of Spring Boot for Apache Geode, version 1.0.0.M1. See the official Spring Blog Post [1] for more details. Documentation [2] is available as are a couple of Examples [3]. Feedback appreciated and welcomed. Much

Re: Quarterly report - DRAFT for your review

2018-05-08 Thread John Blum
HI Dave- I just recently gave a Webinar to the community on using Spring Session and Apache Geode to manage (HTT) Session State. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIBseFSQUuc Cheers, John On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 10:52 AM, Michael Stolz wrote: > Looks fine to me > > -- >

Re: [Proposal] add isBound() to CacheServer API

2018-05-03 Thread John Blum
Kirk- Please see your other email thread and my response [1] to that as 1 potential way to handle this situation. As I mentioned, I use this in the Spring Session client/server integration tests as a way to mitigate the NoSubscriptionsServersAvailableException. -j [1]

Re: NoSubscriptionServersAvailableException

2018-05-03 Thread John Blum
Kirk- Follow this logic... [1] https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-session-data-geode/blob/master/samples/boot/gemfire/src/main/java/sample/client/IntegrationTestConfiguration.java#L70-L71 Which is based on the Registration of a ClientMembershipListener... [2]

Re: [Proposal]: behavior change when region doesn't exist in cluster configuration

2018-04-27 Thread John Blum
Hi Jinmei- Regarding this... " *So the current behavior is, when a customer starts a server with cache.xmlthat has a region defined, and then later on issues a gfsh command `createindex` on that region, the command output would be something like:* *>create index .Member |

Re: [Proposal]: behavior change when region doesn't exist in cluster configuration

2018-04-27 Thread John Blum
I would also ask/remind us to carefully consider anything that might be needed, or required, in the API as well. We must thoughtfully compliment the, or a, API (i.e. programmatically) with anything you can do in/from *Gfsh*. The API is a first class citizen and how most users will consume

Re: [Proposal] Changes to the experimental cluster configuration API.

2018-04-20 Thread John Blum
Perhaps a reference to the "experimental" interface would be helpful. This "specification" page ( https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Public+Interface+to+Cluster+Configuration+Service) contains no links. *Main question... again, why should the ClusterConfigurationService interface

Re: Index on Region

2018-04-17 Thread John Blum
Well, the way I handle this in *Spring Data for Apache Geode* is, and to *Kirk's* point, the schema (XSD) version matches the SDG version. I.e. in SDG 2.0.0 [1] there is a spring-geode-2.0.0.xsd, and in SDG 2.1.0 [2] there now exists a spring-geode-2.1.0.xsd. So, you could have a cache-1.1.xsd,

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.5.0.RC2

2018-04-05 Thread John Blum
Thanks Anthony and team. On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 9:03 AM, Anthony Baker wrote: > +1 > > - checked signatures > - checked sha’s > - checked for binaries in source release > - builds from source > - examples run cleanly > > Let’s crowd source some release notes at

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.5.0.RC2

2018-04-04 Thread John Blum
+0 The Apache Geode *Log4j* dependency version *2.8.2* is or will cause significant issues for apps, and in particular *Spring Boot* 2.0 apps. This Geode Log4j version is already quite dated as *Log4j 2.11.0* is now already available [1] and *Spring Boot* 2.0 pulls in *Log4j 2.10.0* [2]. *Why

Re: [PROPOSAL] Deprecating DistributedSystem

2018-03-29 Thread John Blum
at have to do with clients? -j On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 3:33 PM, Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org> wrote: > We should probably consider moving ServerLauncher and LocatorLauncher from > org.apache.geode.distributed to a different package (maybe > or

Re: [PROPOSAL] Deprecating DistributedSystem

2018-03-29 Thread John Blum
@Patrick - have a look at... http://gemfire-93-javadocs.docs.pivotal.io/org/apache/geode/cache/execute/FunctionService.html#onMember-org.apache.geode.distributed.DistributedMember- On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 2:23 PM, Patrick Rhomberg wrote: > +1 to deprecation. > > @John,

Re: [PROPOSAL] Deprecating DistributedSystem

2018-03-29 Thread John Blum
Yes, framework and tooling. I see no reason why the functionality in o.a.g.distributed.DistributedSystem [1] should be hidden or internal. I would certainly remove the deprecated methods by now. A few other methods are questionable as to whether they really belong on the DistributedSystem

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.5.0 RC1

2018-03-23 Thread John Blum
The same could be said of GEODE-4787. On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 2:58 PM, Anthony Baker wrote: > Thanks for catching this Diane. I agree; we shouldn't break something that > used to work. > > Anthony > > > On Mar 23, 2018, at 11:27 AM, Diane Hardman wrote:

  1   2   3   >