Re: [DISCUSSION] Apache Ignite Release 2.10 (time, scope, manager)

gards, > > Nikita > > > > сб, 19 дек. 2020 г. в 11:39, Maxim Muzafarov : > > > > > Denis, Nikita > > > > > > Yes, the list of important documentation issues will be ready prior to > > > the scope freeze date. I'll prepare it. > &

Re: [DISCUSSION] Allowing commits to a released branch for documentation purposes

re no questions > about why the branch moved forward after release. > And possibly add some checks (on TC, for instance), that the changes in > released branches are only about documentation, and do not touch other part > of the project. > > > > > On 22 Dec 2020, at 00:47,

[DISCUSSION] Allowing commits to a released branch for documentation purposes

Igniters, After we release a version, we create a docs-specific branch out of the release branch for inevitable documentation improvements (feedback; generic changes that are committed to the master, and the last published version). For instance, once 2.9 was released from the "ignite-2.9"

Re: [DISCUSSION] 3.0.0 Alpha release

great idea! I'm thinking, however, that it makes sense to > take a pause after the release and let people try it out on their own so > that the experience is as close to real-life as possible. How about closer > to the end of January? > > -Val > > On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 8:53

Re: [DISCUSSION] 3.0.0 Alpha release

Hi Val, That's the pace, I'll be happy to play with the alpha and share feedback. Also, what if we arrange a community gathering after the holidays to demonstrate what alpha does and get more details from the involved contributors on what's coming next? As for the release process, yes, that

Re: Query on ignite-kafka artifact (ignite-kafka-ext)

Hi Vishwas, Kafka and all other extensions I being moved to that separate repository and will be released independently. We'll update and release new versions of extensions whenever is needed. In the meantime, the Kafka extension should be compatible with all Ignite version. So, just update your

Re: [DISCUSSION] Apache Ignite Release 2.10 (time, scope, manager)

Maxim, Presently, there are 70 documentation tickets. Probably, these are all the tickets that we are moving from a release to a release. Could you help to prepare a list of 2.10-specific tickets (features, enhancements, required updates due to a change in the behavior)? As before, we can track

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.9.1 RC1

eached. > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 9:24 PM Yaroslav Molochkov > wrote: > > > Will do. > > > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 9:15 PM Denis Magda wrote: > > > >> +1 (binding). Reverting my previous -1. We agreed that the release won't > >> be

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.9.1 RC1

with the review! - Denis On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 10:12 AM Yaroslav Molochkov wrote: > Hello everyone! > > Yeah, guys, sorry, absolutely my mishap with docs. > > Denis, of course, i will see to it that docs are ready first and foremost. > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 8:30 PM Denis Magda

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.9.1 RC1

> checkstyle issues weren't for 2.9.0. Isn't it? > > On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 at 17:14, Denis Magda wrote: > > > > Yaroslav, thanks for checking, > > > > - 1 (binding) - I have to cast this vote as long as the docs need to be > > ready by the time of th

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.9.1 RC1

Molochkov > wrote: > > > Denis, hello! > > > > Since it's a minor bug-fixing release the update is not needed > > > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 9:38 PM Denis Magda wrote: > > > >> Hi Yaroslav, > >> > >> Do we need to update documen

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.9.1 RC1

Hi Yaroslav, Do we need to update documentation? - Denis On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 11:34 PM Yaroslav Molochkov wrote: > Dear Community, > > I have uploaded release candidate to > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/2.9.1-rc1/ >

Re: Pull request for minor fix in index page documentation

ue, Dec 8, 2020 at 11:35 PM Denis Magda wrote: > >> Hi Sumit, >> >> Thanks for catching the issue and preparing a pull-request! The >> pull-request merges changes to your Ignite master branch rather than to the >> Ignite master. Not a bid deal. I see where th

Re: Pull request for minor fix in index page documentation

Hi Sumit, Thanks for catching the issue and preparing a pull-request! The pull-request merges changes to your Ignite master branch rather than to the Ignite master. Not a bid deal. I see where the problem is. @Nikita Safonov , @Viktor Chemodanov , could any of your correct the broken link on the

Re: Joining the community

Hi Nikita, Welcome to the community! We've been waiting for professionals like you for a while ;) Sharing extra resources: - Our documentation contribution process, you're welcome to suggest changes: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Document - Our Slack

Re: swapping the blocks on the website https://ignite.apache.org/download.cgi: SOURCE RELEASES and BINARY RELEASES

+1 - Denis On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 10:58 AM kpushenko wrote: > Hello, igniters! > > I suggest swapping the blocks on the website > https://ignite.apache.org/download.cgi: SOURCE RELEASES > and BINARY RELEASES. > It is more predictable for the user. > https://ignite.apache.org/download.cgi > >

Re: Website related tickets on JIRA

Hi Mauricio, Glad to receive a note from you. The community needs to know its heroes ;) I've used your advice and labeled some important tasks appropriately. As you might have noticed, the community voted to define Ignite as a distributed database. Which means there are some tasks for the two of

Re: [VOTE] Define Apache Ignite as a Distributed Database

; > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> +1 > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 4:55 PM Valentin Kulichenko < > >>>> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> +1 > >

[RESULT][VOTE] Define Apache Ignite as a Distributed Database

The community held a majority vote on defining Apache Ignite as a "distributed database": http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-Define-Apache-Ignite-as-a-Distributed-Database-td50269.html The results are as follows: [+1] - 5 votes [-1] - 1 vote [0] - 0 votes The majority

Re: Migrating NodeJS client to TypeScript

Hi Semyon, Is there any value in keeping both versions - the plain JavaScript one and the TypeScript specific? - Denis On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 12:16 PM Данилов Семён wrote: > Hello Igniters! > > I'd like to propose a big change for the nodejs thin client: a full > rewrite from JavaScript to

Re: IEP-54: Schema-first approach for 3.0

good idea to expose any internal > classes to the public. > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 2:55 AM Denis Magda wrote: > > > Andrey, thanks for the update, > > > > Does any of the serializers take into consideration the > > native-image-generation feature of GraalVM? >

Re: IEP-54: Schema-first approach for 3.0

te-13618/modules/commons > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13616 > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 9:21 AM Ivan Pavlukhin > wrote: > > > Folks, > > > > Please do not ignore history. We had a thread [1] with many bright > > ideas. We can resume it. &

Re: [VOTE][EXTENSION] Release Apache Ignite Streaming extensions 1.0.0 RC1

+1 Alex, could you please update Maven artifactIds and versions on the documentation pages of the integrations? Commit to the master and cherry-pick to ignite-2.9-docs, and I'll publish the changes to the website. - Denis On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 10:52 AM Alexey Goncharuk wrote: > Dear Ignite

[VOTE] Define Apache Ignite as a Distributed Database

Igniters, With this vote, I'd like to formally wrap up our discussion on defining Ignite as a "distributed database" instead of an "in-memory computing" platform. See the following discussion for the rationale and context:

Re: Hello [ New to apache ignite]

Hello Amit, Welcome to the community! Glad to see you are ready to contribute to Ignite. Please check the "Code Contributions" and "Contributing to Ignite Core" sections on this page: https://ignite.apache.org/community/contribute.html We put and grouped together some tasks that you might be

Re: Ignite extensions - ignite-spring-data release.

;> > >> [1] - > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/ignite-extensions/tree/master/ > modules/spring-data-2.2-ext > >> > >> [2] - > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/ignite-extensions/tree/master/ > modules/spring-data-2.0-ext >

Re: Ignite extensions - ignite-spring-data release.

Are we keeping the original names of theses Spring modules? In separate threads I saw that the names of other extensions end with “ext”. Also, how about making a single release of all the extensions that were migrated from the main Ignite repo. There are many of them waiting for this to happen.

Alex Plehanov joins Ignite Project Management Committee

Igniters, The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Ignite has invited Alex to become a PMC member and we are pleased to announce that he has accepted. Alex joined our community back in 2018 and became one of the key community members. He made numerous contributions

Re: IGNITE-12951 Update documents for migrated extensions

thoughts are that these README.txt files will be published as part of > source releases for Ignite Extensions. > > Regards, > Saikat > > On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 5:28 PM Denis Magda wrote: > > > Hi Saikat, > > > > Please go ahead with the merge. Do we need to publish this for the

Re: IGNITE-12951 Update documents for migrated extensions

Hi Saikat, Please go ahead with the merge. Do we need to publish this for the Ignite 2.9 docs at some point? Guess, after the extensions are released under different names. - Denis On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 9:57 AM Saikat Maitra wrote: > Hi, > > As discussed I have updated the PR >

Re: [REVIEW REQUEST] IEP-47 Native Persistence Defragmentation, core logic

Ivan, Nice! Is the plan to get it added to Ignite 2.10? - Denis On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 7:11 AM Ivan Bessonov wrote: > Hi Igniters, > > Core functionality of defragmentation is finally implemented in [1]. > There's no public API in it > for now, patch is already very big and had to be split

Ignite documentation: things to pay attention to

Igniters, It's a pleasure to see that many more of us started contributing to the Ignite documentation once we migrated from readme.io. The new docs plus a growing number of contributors willing to keep the docs accurate, complete, and valuable for the users is a significant achievement for our

Re: Ignite 2.9 Announcement Blog Post

apache.org/ignite/entry/apache-ignite-2-9-released > > > > пт, 25 сент. 2020 г. в 11:04, Alex Plehanov : > > > > > Denis, > > > > > > Ok, I will prepare the text soon. > > > > > > чт, 24 сент. 2020 г. в 23:36, Denis Magda : &

Re: Apache Ignite Board Report, Nov 11

Looks good to me. Thanks for sharing the draft. - Denis On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 1:55 PM Dmitriy Pavlov wrote: > Hi Igniters, > > The report for the Board meeting on Nov 18 is due today. > > I've appended the current version of the report at the end of the email. > The same report has been

Re: delete is too slow, sometimes even causes OOM

Frank, The ticket doesn't suggest the lazy flag as a workaround. The flag is supposed to be used to address the performance issue. How about a workaround on your application side while you're waiting for this improvement? - Query all the records for a deletion - "SELECT record_primary_key

Why WAL archives enabled by default?

Folks, In my understanding, you need the archives only for features such as PITR. Considering, that the PITR functionality is not provided in Ignite why do we have the archives enabled by default? How about having this feature disabled by default to prevent the following issues experienced by

Re: delete is too slow, sometimes even causes OOM

Hi Frank, Thanks for starting this discussion. Our contributors with SQL experience should step in. Generally, I came across this performance issue a week or so ago while doing training about Ignite. In my case, a simple DELETE was running for a minute over a table of negligible size. - Denis

Re: [DISCUSSION] Changes in Ignite release process related to documentation

ag pointing to the release commit. Is it safe > changing docs right from ignite-2.9 branch? Why should we keep it > frozen? > > On Fri, 30 Oct 2020 at 23:02, Denis Magda wrote: > > > > Maxim, > > > > The approach you're suggesting (to keep the docs in a separate re

Re: [DISCUSSION] Changes in Ignite release process related to documentation

"ignite-2.9-docs" branch and cherry-picked documentation > > related commits from master. > > If you changing documentation in master branch and this fix should affect > > Ignite 2.9, please cherry-pick this commit to "ignite-2.9-docs" branch > t

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Ignite streamer extensions

Alex, Should we create a dedicated ticket for the documentation changes or can we reuse IGNITE-13634? As a bare minimum, we need to update maven artifacts' names and versions: https://github.com/apache/ignite/tree/master/docs/_docs/extensions-and-integrations - Denis On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at

Re: [Micronaut] pubsub support

Michael, glad to see you back! Could you please explain in a few words what this integration does and what it enables for Ignite and Micronaout? So that we are as a community are on the same page. - Denis On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 3:05 PM Michael Pollind wrote: > I've started to work on adding

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Ignite 2.9.0 Released

We made it! Congrats, community! Thanks, Alex for pushing the release till the end, that was a long road ;) I decided to record a quick video featuring top-3 changes in the release. Those are my top-3 additions while you can have yours. Anyway, check it out: https://youtu.be/ewwjq8SIk-s - Denis

Re: Apache Ignite 2.9.0 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

need to tweak anything: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Document#HowtoDocument-PublishingtotheWebsite - Denis On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 12:57 PM Denis Magda wrote: > Saikat, Alex, > > Based on your inputs here, it sounds like once Ignite 2.9 gets released, >

Video overview of eight Ignite-specific talks scheduled for the IMCS Summit 2020

Igniters, We've got eight (!!!) Ignite-specific sessions scheduled for the In-Memory Computing Summit 2020. I've gone ahead and produced a quick overview of those sessions. Check and weigh up which one to join: https://youtu.be/SCqd4qfBY6Q The sessions are delivered by our community folks:

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.9.0 RC4

+1 (binding) - Denis On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 5:04 AM Alex Plehanov wrote: > Dear Community, > > > I have uploaded a release candidate to: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/2.9.0-rc4/ > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/packages_2.9.0-rc4/ > > The following staging

Re: Ignite license checker rejects MIT-licensed files

Alright, I've enabled the default license matcher for our license checker as part of this work: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13574 - Denis On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 9:30 PM Denis Magda wrote: > Instead of using the "addDefaultLicenseMatchers" setting, we developed

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.9.0 RC3

+1 (binding) Started a two-node Ignite cluster using the binary package and the ignite.sh script. - Denis On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 7:18 AM Alex Plehanov wrote: > Dear Community, > > > I have uploaded a release candidate to: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/2.9.0-rc3/ >

Re: Apache Ignite 2.9.0 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

d extensions 1.0.0 to be > released together. I am thinking depending on the voting process and > testing cycles we can release the extensions 1.0.0 together with Apache > Ignite 2.9.0 or right after within days of Apache Ignite 2.9.0 release. > > > Regards, > Saikat > >

Re: Ignite license checker rejects MIT-licensed files

gnite/blob/ignite-13574/parent/pom.xml#L842 Have we ever tried to use the "addDefaultLicenseMatchers" setting instead? - Denis On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 3:25 PM Denis Magda wrote: > Igniters, > > I was adding a missing license header to some sources that were included

Ignite license checker rejects MIT-licensed files

Igniters, I was adding a missing license header to some sources that were included in our repository and found that the license checker rejects the MIT license (it's compliant with Apache 2.0 ). Take these files as an example that are

Re: Apache Ignite 2.9.0 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

>> So what do you think? Should we proceed with a 'hacked' version > of > >> >>> the > >> >>>>>> message factory in 2.9 and go for the runtime message generation > in > >> >>> later > >> >>>>>> r

Re: Instance of IgniteClient in Multi threaded application

Also, as long as you're on Java, you can add the Ignite thick client to the comparison list. It can behave faster for your workload. - Denis On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 6:14 AM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > It depends. The only way to tell is to measure and profile your specific > use case. > > What

Re: Instance of IgniteClient in Multi threaded application

It's preferable to use a single client connection. The clients are multi-threaded, if I'm not mistaken. Btw, what type of the client you use (.NET, Java, ...)? - Denis On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 7:53 AM midulaj wrote: > Hi Igniters, > > If we are using ignite in a web service,can we reuse single

Re: Apache Ignite 2.9.0 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

gt; IGNITE-13426 - Command to print system view content > IGNITE-13422 - Parameter to explicitly enable experimental commands > > IGNITE-13380 - Output IgniteSystemProperties via ignite.sh > > New system views: > > IGNITE-13409 Metastorage and DistributedMetastorage viewы. >

Re: Migration of spring-data modules to ignite-extensions

How do we release all the modules that have already been moved to the extensions repository? https://github.com/apache/ignite-extensions/tree/master/modules For instance, when 2.9 comes out and the users start bumping up their Ignite versions in pom.xml, what should they set for Kafka, camel,

Re: Apache Ignite 2.9.0 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

PM Alexey Goncharuk > >> >>>>>> wrote: > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> Alexey, Andrey, Igniters, > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> So wha

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [5643882] needs to be handled

buted-computing/load-balancing.adoc > > docs/_docs/code-deployment/deploying-user-code.adoc > > docs/_docs/code-deployment/peer-class-loading.adoc > > docs/_docs/extensions-and-integrations/streaming/rocketmq-streamer.adoc > > docs/_docs/extensions-and-integrations/s

Re: New Ignite Docs: Status and Incomplete Items

is the background color of the code > snippet, not the background color of codeblock. > > 在 2020/10/6 上午7:31, Denis Magda 写道: > > Hey, thanks for keep checking the content and behavior of the new docs. > > This helps a lot! > > > > https://ignite.apache.org/docs

Re: New Ignite Docs: Status and Incomplete Items

ide cannot be linked with the > document body normally. When a document is displayed, the menu item on > the left side should be expanded and selected. But now the logic seems > confused, especially when the current page is jumping from external links. > > 在 2020/10/3 上午11:43, Denis Magda 写

Re: New Ignite Docs: Status and Incomplete Items

when the current page is jumping from external links. > > 在 2020/10/3 上午11:43, Denis Magda 写道: > > Hi, > > > > Thanks for finding the time and walking through the documentation pages. > We > > didn't intend to copy the docs as is. There are a lot of structural

Re: [Announcement] New Ignite docs merged to the master

is served :) - Denis On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 3:00 PM Denis Magda wrote: > Igniters, > > Just a shout-out that the new docs made it to the master (sources in > AsciiDoc format) with the latest version published to the website (HTML > format): https://ignite.apache.org/docs/lat

[Announcement] New Ignite docs merged to the master

Igniters, Just a shout-out that the new docs made it to the master (sources in AsciiDoc format) with the latest version published to the website (HTML format): https://ignite.apache.org/docs/latest/ Thanks to everyone involved. Special thanks go to @Artem Budnikov and @Mauricio Stekl who were

Re: New Ignite Docs: Status and Incomplete Items

ls-tuning > > https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/async-support This page seems redundant. It should be enough to open JavaDocs and see sync and async versions of the APIs. -- Denis > > 在 2020/10/3 上午4:44, Denis Magda 写道: > > Thanks Pavel! Merged. > > > > Alright,

Re: [DISCUSSION] Renaming Ignite's product category

t are the changes we will need to make? Will it only > affect the website and documentation? I can't think of any code changes > that might be required. > > -Val > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 12:01 PM Denis Magda wrote: > > > If "Apache Ignite" remains then anot

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.9.0 RC1

Alex, I'm getting the error below when starting an Ignite node with the ignite.sh script. Don't get this exception on Ignite 2.8. Running on macOS Catalina 10.15.6. Just in case, I double-checked the security permissions of the OS and didn't spot any suspicious. Anyway, don't have the issue on

Re: New Ignite Docs: Status and Incomplete Items

vel Tupitsyn > wrote: > > > Denis, > > > > Thanks a lot for porting those changes, great job! > > I'm working on IGNITE-13331, sorry for the delay. > > > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 2:15 AM Denis Magda wrote: > > > >> You might need to empty

Re: A stall in our review pipeline

I do acknowledge that the problem exists - a number of contributions and pull-requests are piling up while we don't have any community-wide practice to shorten the backlog. Let's use this conversation to see how we can turn things upside-down. I'll contemplate on my end. Btw, Ilya, just curious,

Re: New Ignite Docs: Status and Incomplete Items

You might need to empty the browser cache to see the latest changes such as the "C# and .NET Specific" section that was published today. There is some CSS issue that doesn't invalidate browsing caches. It will be fixed soon. - Denis On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 4:12 PM Denis Magda wrote

Re: New Ignite Docs: Status and Incomplete Items

t;. - Denis On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:49 PM Denis Magda wrote: > Pavel, > > Alright, I'll do the porting of those pages and you'll take care of > IGNITE-13331 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13331>. Let's > split the job. > > Nikolay, I'll review y

Re: New Ignite Docs: Status and Incomplete Items

r legacy technologies. > We are going to remove them in 3.0 [1] and, hopefully, replace them with > modern equivalents later. > > [1] > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+3.0+Wishlist > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 2:20 AM Denis Magda wrote: > &

Re: New Ignite Docs: Status and Incomplete Items

IGNITE-13459 > > > > пт, 18 сент. 2020 г. в 09:59, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > > > Hello, Denis. > > > > > > > • @Nikolay Izhikov, is there any chance you can document the > new > > > management commands the next week? Use me as a reviewer. >

Ignite 2.9 Announcement Blog Post

@Alex Plehanov Are you interested in writing a blog post that covers the major improvements of the 2.9 release? It will be referenced from the announcement email and distributed through other channels. Examples of previous articles: https://blogs.apache.org/ignite/ It happened that I was the

Re: [DISCUSSION] Renaming Ignite's product category

what you are > trying to achieve. > > Regards > > > > Adam Carbone | Director of Innovation – Intelligent Platform Team | > Bottomline Technologies > Office: 603-501-6446 | Mobile: 603-570-8418 > www.bottomline.com > > > > > > > > *From:

Re: [DISCUSSION] Renaming Ignite's product category

; I think this is a great question. Explaining what Ignite does is > >>> always a > >>> > challenge, so having a useful “tag line” would be very valuable. > >>> > > >>> > I’m not sure what the answer is but I think calling it a &g

Re: [DISCUSSION] Renaming Ignite's product category

database". It clearly > states > > that Ignite is a database (which is true at this point), while still > > emphasizing the in-memory computing power endorsed by the platform. > > > > The "in-memory computing platform" is an ambiguous term an

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

other important thing - we already use term “table”, and it > is > > > > always > > > > > > > hard to explain our users how it relates to “cache”. If “cache” > > is > > > > > > dropped, > > > > > > > then a single term “ta

New Ignite Docs: Status and Incomplete Items

Folks, While Artem is unavailable, Mauricio and I keep pushing the new docs project to the finish line: https://ignite.apache.org/docs/latest/preface Overall, we hope to copy the last bits from the readme.io to the new engine, document the release and contribution process, and settle down with

[DISCUSSION] Renaming Ignite's product category

Igniters, Throughout the history of our project, we could see how the addition of certain features required us to reassess the project's name and category. Before Ignite joined the ASF, it supported only compute APIs resembling the MapReduce engine of Hadoop. Those days, it was fair to define

Re: Ignite 3.0 meetups

The Calcilte-based engine will be released gradually in 2.x releases. As far as I know, we don't need for Ignite 3.0. - Denis On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 7:43 PM 18624049226 <18624049...@163.com> wrote: > It seems that the new Calcite based SQL Engine is not included in the > plan, and this

Re: Micronaut/Ignite

t;>> out I think. can't think of anything off the top of my head with tweaking >>> the ignite cache module but i'm sure a few adjustments can be made. >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 10:41 AM Denis Magda wrote: >>> >>>> Michael, congrats, it was a pleasure w

Re: Micronaut/Ignite

-getting-started Are you planning to work on the Micronaut Caching module? Or is it already enabled and we just need to prepare examples on how to use Ignite as a Micronaut cache? - Denis On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 9:17 AM Michael Pollind wrote: > With some help from @Denis Magda , we were a

Re: Proposal of new event QUERY_EXECUTION_EVENT

> > > > > > Can we change the EVT_CACHE_QUERY_EXECUTED to fire earlier? Or > should > > > > > there be an EVT_CACHE_QUERY_EXECUTION_STARTED for the query start, > while > > > > > the old event would continue to work for query finish? > > >

Re: IEP-54: Schema-first approach for 3.0

ble" is tightly associated with SQL, but > SQL is optional in our case. Do you want to create a separate discussion > about this? > > -Val > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 4:37 PM Denis Magda wrote: > >> Val, >> >> I've checked the IEP again and have a few quest

Re: Limit/Offset index scan

Vladimir, What do you think about my high-level solution shared in the previous email? What if we implement the SortedSet they way I suggested? - Denis On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 4:15 AM Vladimir Pligin wrote: > Denis, > > I absolutely agree with you that a SortedSet doesn't need to be >

Re: Limit/Offset index scan

far as I know, Redis' SortedSet is not shared. Is this correct? Is it > even possible to support similar functionality for a partitioned dataset? > > -Val > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 8:58 AM Denis Magda wrote: > > > Hi Vladimir, > > > > Usually, LSM-storage engine

Re: Limit/Offset index scan

Hi Vladimir, Usually, LSM-storage engines serve the range searches the best (Cassandra is one of the examples). The SortedSet of Redis is one of the typical components you can find in LSM-engines. Presently, Ignite neither supports an LSM store nor a SortedSet data structure. However, the range

Re: IEP-54: Schema-first approach for 3.0

this? In my understanding, all you need is SQL API which we already have. > Am I missing something? > > -Val > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 2:08 PM Denis Magda wrote: > > > Val, > > > > I would propose adding another point to the motivations list which is > >

Re: IEP-54: Schema-first approach for 3.0

Val, I would propose adding another point to the motivations list which is related to the ORM frameworks such as Spring Data, Hibernate, Micronaut and many others. Presently, the storage engine requires to distinguish key objects from the value ones that complicate the usage of Ignite with those

Re: IEP-52: Binary Delivery & Upgradability Enhancements

Petr, thanks, There is also a collection of modules located in our extensions repository: https://github.com/apache/ignite-extensions @Saikat Maitra is migrating all our existing integrations to that repository and, once this is done, the extensions will be released to Maven separately. Is it

Re: Apache Ignite 2.9.0 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

> > persistence. For other benchmarks drop is lower and it's harder to find > > problematic commit. > > > > ср, 26 авг. 2020 г. в 17:34, Denis Magda : > > > >> Alex, > >> > >> Thanks for sending an update. The drop is quite big. What are the types

Re: Micronaut/Ignite

nite/pull/33 > > -- > Michael Pollind > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 3:29 PM Denis Magda wrote: > > > Could you share the full path to the branch? Don't want to pick a wrong > one > > accidentally. > > > > > > - > > Denis > > >

Re: Editing rights

That's right. Sorry, didn't check what I sent ) -- Denis Magda On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 9:51 PM Ivan Pavlukhin wrote: > Denis, > > I suppose you meant dev-subscr...@ignite.apache.org. Right? > > 2020-08-26 21:55 GMT+03:00, Denis Magda : > > Evgeniy, done. > > >

Re: Micronaut/Ignite

that is > missing? > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 1:31 PM Denis Magda wrote: > > >  Nice catch! > > > > - > > Denis > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 12:16 PM Michael Pollind > > wrote: > > > > > One thing that just occurred

Re: Micronaut/Ignite

ration configuration = event.getBean(); > configuration.setIgniteInstanceName("instance-a"); > return configuration; > } > } > > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:31 AM Denis Magda wrote: > > > Michael, > > > > Looks terrific! I went ahead and grouped

Re: Editing rights

ou > > > could send a new password to my account e-mail, or delete my account? > In > > > that case, I would have the possibility to register one more time with > my > > > password, and then you'll give me editing rights once more? > > > > > > On 2020/08

Re: Micronaut/Ignite

the other for thin client > >> connections), and would try to avoid this route if possible. > >> > >> With the @CacheConfig annotation, Micronaut developers can create a > >> generic > >> implementation that is agnostic to the Ignite connectivity methods, > w

Re: Apache Ignite 2.9.0 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

Alex, Thanks for sending an update. The drop is quite big. What are the types of benchmarks you are observing the degradation for (atomic puts, transactions, sql, etc.)? Let us know if any help by particular committers is required. - Denis On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 12:26 AM Alex Plehanov

Re: Micronaut/Ignite

the existing issues here and jump on another call to finalize a solution if needed. Denis On Monday, August 24, 2020, Denis Magda wrote: > Michael, > > Great progress, thanks for your patience. I went ahead and pushed some > changes to your working branch. As you'll see, those cha

Re: First contribute to Ignite ML

Hi Mark, Welcome to the community! Hope you'll find it delightful to contribute to the Ignite ML component. I've added you to JIRA's contributors' list, so you're good to go. Just in case, @Alexey Zinoviev is our main ML maintainer, but, probably, you already know him. - Denis On Mon, Aug

Re: Micronaut/Ignite

2020 at 7:08 PM Michael Pollind >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Dennis, >>>> >>>> oh, so I made those adjustments. I must have missed it because that >>>> didn't occur to me. So DefaultIgniteConfiguration is fine, but >>>> ClientCo

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >