Sounds good to me.
2017-11-08 10:48 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan :
> How about BaseNode?
>
> On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> > Dmitriy,
> >
> > An offline node is a node that was present in a cluster, but either
> > disconnected or fai
How about BaseNode?
On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Alexey Goncharuk wrote:
> Dmitriy,
>
> An offline node is a node that was present in a cluster, but either
> disconnected or failed and the corresponding event is fired by the
> discovery SPI. In this case, the cluster will not attempt to rebal
Hello Denis,
My JIRA id is of.salakhutdinov and I am planning to resolve bugs.
Best regards,
Oleg Salakhutdinov.
>Среда, 8 ноября 2017, 3:09 +03:00 от Denis Magda :
>
>Hello Oleg,
>
>What’s your JIRA id and what kind of contribution are you planning to do for
>Ignite?
>
>—
>Denis
>
>> On N
Vladimir Ozerov created IGNITE-6840:
---
Summary: SQL: Parser: support CREATE INDEX command
Key: IGNITE-6840
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6840
Project: Ignite
Issue Type:
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/2956
---
Dmitriy,
An offline node is a node that was present in a cluster, but either
disconnected or failed and the corresponding event is fired by the
discovery SPI. In this case, the cluster will not attempt to rebalance data
and change affinity assignments until it is either confirmed manually via
conf
On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Vladimir Ozerov
wrote:
> Dima,
>
> What is the problem you are trying to solve? I am not sure I understand.
> You cannot force maintainers to do a review. And you cannot force release
> manager to do this either. Because this role is only about following
> mandator
Dima,
What is the problem you are trying to solve? I am not sure I understand.
You cannot force maintainers to do a review. And you cannot force release
manager to do this either. Because this role is only about following
mandatory ASF steps to make release happen, nothing more.
ср, 8 нояб. 2017
Andrey,
Special collection types support was our mistake when we designed binary
protocol in the first place.
As far as BinaryObject idea - makes sense. But I would avoid any kind of
implicit conversions. Special method for byte array should be enough.
вт, 7 нояб. 2017 г. в 22:01, Andrey Kornev
Denis/Yury,
Upon review of your previous comments, please respond to my feedback :
1. I believe GA Grid can be implemented in separate package within ML
library and operate independently of other algorithms for use cases where
/only /GA is required.
2. I am still not totally clear concerni
Dev -
I have a use case that is not able to be addressed with the existing
JMSStreamer functionality so I would like to propose an enhancement.
The use case is such that I have a series of database tables and am writing
messages into a shared JMS queue for each table update. These messages are
On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 8:08 AM, Denis Magda wrote:
> > However, if the release version was assigned properly, the
> > release manager or component owners would have no choice but to do the
> > review.
>
> There is actually an alternative the release managers tend to follow. They
> simply move all
*cross-posting to dev*
Hi Chris,
This is a regression due to this fix:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6485. For some reason, since
2.3 it is looking for readResolve/writeReplace methods only in exact class
that is being serialized, but not in the whole hierarchy.
*Andrey G*, since
Hello Oleg,
What’s your JIRA id and what kind of contribution are you planning to do for
Ignite?
—
Denis
> On Nov 7, 2017, at 5:46 AM, Олег Салахутдинов wrote:
>
>
>
>
> --
> С Уважением
> Салахутдинов Олег Федорович
> т. 8(925)060-43-02
> skype: oleja_raevskiy
Dev -
I have a use case that is not able to be addressed with the existing
JMSStreamer functionality so I would like to propose an enhancement.
The use case is such that I have a series of database tables and am writing
messages into a shared JMS queue for each table update. These messages are th
> However, if the release version was assigned properly, the
> release manager or component owners would have no choice but to do the
> review.
There is actually an alternative the release managers tend to follow. They
simply move all the unresolved tickets to the next version blindly. This
happ
On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 6:06 AM, Vladimir Ozerov
wrote:
> Dima,
>
> As I already mentioned, the whole community more or less followed this
> process for years already with no success. My suggestion is to ask
> component maintainers to perform regular review of relevant tickets.
>
Your suggestion
Dima,
As I already mentioned, the whole community more or less followed this
process for years already with no success. My suggestion is to ask
component maintainers to perform regular review of relevant tickets.
On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 12:15 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at
--
С Уважением
Салахутдинов Олег Федорович
т. 8(925)060-43-02
skype: oleja_raevskiy
Looks like this issue would be linked too.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5602
--
Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 7:16 PM, Vladimir Ozerov
wrote:
> Dima,
>
> When ticket is assigned to a version and doesn't guarantee that anyone will
> look at it either. When it is time to release we usually have hundreds of
> unresolved tickets on current version and it doesn't help us anyhow.
Why i
Alexey, can you explain what an offline node means, if it is not an
endpoint? Can it become an online node? If you could describe the
transition steps of how a node goes offline and online, it would help.
D.
On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Alexey Goncharuk wrote:
> Why not? To me, the endpoint
Yury,
Please see inline
> On Nov 7, 2017, at 12:11 PM, Yury Babak wrote:
>
> Denis,
>
> Let me clarify.
>
> Firstly, here gene is a single model coefficient(neuron weight, etc),
> chromosomes - whole model representation.
>
Sounds good. Actually a chromosome can be see as a model.
> Second
Denis,
Let me clarify.
Firstly, here gene is a single model coefficient(neuron weight, etc),
chromosomes - whole model representation.
Secondly GA should be implementation of Trainer API for each ML algorithm
such as regression, clusterization, NNs, etc.
And last but not least genetic algorithm
Yuri, Turik,
Considering the concept the ML is built around, it should be straightforward to
adopt the genetic algorithms to it.
To be more specific, Genes and Chromosomes which are the central building
blocks of GA turn out to be basic ML Models. All the standard genetic
operations/algorithm
Igor,
Thanks for the clarification. Please file a ticket if nobody else shares a
feedback soon.
—
Denis
> On Nov 7, 2017, at 1:23 AM, Igor Sapego wrote:
>
> Hi Denis,
>
>> Could you explain the difference between “allow, prefer and require”
> modes?
> allow - Client will first try connecting
Vladimir,
I appreciate your taking the time to reply. Thank you for sharing your thoughts!
I have to admit I'm still not convinced there is anything inherently wrong
about having the Binary protocol support ByteBuffers as first class citizen.
The Binary marshaller already supports specific coll
GitHub user agura opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/2993
ignite-gg-12877 Compact consistent node IDs in WAL
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/agura/incubator-ignite ignite-gg-12877
Altern
GitHub user kotamrajuyashasvi opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/2992
IGNITE-6500 Bug in ignite's CassandraCacheStoreFactory
POJO fields of java wrapper type are not retaining null values from
Cassandra persistent store, while using ignite's CassandraCacheS
This seems to be incorrect place for implementing it. I would think of
something more generic like IgniteClusterMBean. It should also work for any
implementation of discovery SPI if one ever appears =)
--Yakov
Hello, Igniters.
For some monitoring tasks we need to access these metrics through JMX:
1. Total server nodes in cluster.
2. Current topology version.
We can’t access them via JMX for now. Do you mind if I create a ticket
to add them?
I believe, they should be added to TcpDiscoverySpiMBean.
@M
GitHub user dolphin1414 opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/2991
ignite-6837 Create a CREATE INDEX benchmark
Benchmark implemented
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/gridgain/apache-ignite ign
GitHub user dspavlov opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/2990
IGNITE-6839: delete binary meta before tests, PDS compatibility tests
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/gridgain/apache-ignite
Dmitriy Pavlov created IGNITE-6839:
--
Summary: Ignite Compatibility: flaky test
testFoldersReuseCompatibility_2_1 & 2_2
Key: IGNITE-6839
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6839
Project:
Andrew Mashenkov created IGNITE-6838:
Summary: .NET: Add CacheConfiguration.EvictionPolicyFactory
Key: IGNITE-6838
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6838
Project: Ignite
I
GitHub user zaleslaw opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/2989
IGNITE-5846: Add support of distributed matrices for OLS regression.
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/gridgain/apache-ignite ig
Roman Kondakov created IGNITE-6837:
--
Summary: Create a CREATE INDEX benchmark
Key: IGNITE-6837
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6837
Project: Ignite
Issue Type: Improvement
Alexey Popov created IGNITE-6836:
Summary: ODBC: Add support for SQL_ATTR_QUERY_TIMEOUT
Key: IGNITE-6836
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6836
Project: Ignite
Issue Type: Imp
Alexey Popov created IGNITE-6835:
Summary: ODBC driver should handle ungraceful tcp disconnects
Key: IGNITE-6835
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6835
Project: Ignite
Issue T
GitHub user ilantukh opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/2988
2.1.7-p1
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/gridgain/apache-ignite ignite-2.1.7-p1
Alternatively you can review and apply these
GitHub user ilantukh opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/2987
2.1.5-p1
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/gridgain/apache-ignite ignite-2.1.5-p1
Alternatively you can review and apply these
Turik,
Basically we have two main concepts the model and the trainer. Each machine
learning method generates some model which could predict some result based
on learning dataset. This model is just a function and model training is
minimization of loss function, difference between model predictions
GitHub user zstan opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/2986
IGNITE-5955: IgniteCacheContinuousQueryClientReconnectTest fix
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/gridgain/apache-ignite ignite-5955
GitHub user ptupitsyn opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/2985
IGNITE-5343 .NET: Work with JNI directly, get rid of C++ layer
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/gridgain/apache-ignite ignite-
Dima,
When ticket is assigned to a version and doesn't guarantee that anyone will
look at it either. When it is time to release we usually have hundreds of
unresolved tickets on current version and it doesn't help us anyhow. This
is community, so there is little to no instruments for direct ticket
Hi Denis,
> Could you explain the difference between “allow, prefer and require”
modes?
allow - Client will first try connecting without SSL, and then fallback to
SSL if it is not allowed to connect without SSL;
prefer - Client will first try connecting using SSL, and then fallback to
non-SSL if S
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/2965
---
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/2960
---
Pavel Tupitsyn created IGNITE-6834:
--
Summary: .NET: Distributed Set
Key: IGNITE-6834
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6834
Project: Ignite
Issue Type: New Feature
Secu
Regarding "sefl-imposed rules":
1) Binary protocol is essentially ignite's type system. It is used in many
places: Java, .NET, CPP, SQL (native, JDBC, ODBC), thin client. Of those 5
parties only Java has "ByteBuffer" concept. How other platforms should work
with this type?
2) We compare objects usi
Why not? To me, the endpoint in the name suggests that this is something
intended to connect to, however, the interface just denotes a node that can
be offline, so I think it still has to be a 'Node'.
2017-11-06 22:52 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan :
> Got it. In that case, I do not think that Basel
51 matches
Mail list logo
