GitHub user Mmuzaf opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/4800
IGNITE-9652: fix missorted modifiers
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/Mmuzaf/ignite ignite-9652
Alternatively you can review
Dmitry,
I've had the same issues with using Upsource.
And we have another discussion [1] with almost the same.
[1]
http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/CRUD-issues-in-Ignite-Upsource-td35217.html
On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 at 23:18 Dmitriy Pavlov wrote:
> Hi Anton, do you know
Prachi,
I feel your struggle. It is easier for end user to perceive Python 2 and
Python 3 as different languages, not as versions of one language. They
usually installed alongside each other; their updates are handled
separately. On most systems they have their respective shell commands:
Hi Ignite Developer,
I am MTCGA.Bot, and I've detected some issue on TeamCity to be addressed. I
hope you can help.
*New test failure in master
org.apache.ignite.spark.IgniteOptimizationDateFuncSpec.Supported optimized date
functions - FORMATDATETIME
In general, I'm totally for the plan 2 - make sure Ignite works with Java
11 and release it in October. However, are we sure we'll be ready to adopt
JTA and Hibernate integrations? We can't release having them broken.
--
Denis
On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 4:00 PM Vladimir Ozerov
wrote:
> Igniters,
Hi Dmitry,
Sorry, I am not familiar with Python.
So there are more issues...
1. The version on my mac remains 2.7.10 even though I tried to link to the
new version.
~$ python --version
Python 2.7.10
~$ brew unlink python && brew link --overwrite python3
Unlinking
GitHub user Jokser opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/4799
Ignite 2.5.1 p12 pme speedup debug
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/gridgain/apache-ignite
ignite-2.5.1-p12-pme-speedup-debug
Small correction on in my second example about IoT: I meant moving average of
course because stream is endless. An example with a sum was probably better __
Regards,
Sven
On 20/09/2018, 16:55, "Sven Beauprez" wrote:
Hi Sergi,
Thanks for your thoughts on this.
I
Not because of Java (here I would like to relax :) ), but because of
- MVCC stabilization
- and service grid availability,
my vote goes to option 2.
But the final decision is up to Nikolay, as release manager. If he agrees
to make a wider-scope release, then ok, let's go to 2.
чт, 20 сент. 2018
Dmitry,
Migration to Java 9 started a year ago. In 4 months commercial users will
stop receiving Java 8 updates without buying commercial licence. This may
trigger a wave of migrations inside commercial organizations, sometimes
urgent. And the only migration option would be Java 11, as neither
Hi Vladimir,
Do you know if update notifier can get and record java version from a node
and send it to Apache Ignite site? Or/And what is the most popular version
now?
I guess most existing users will continue to use their current Java, most
likely Java 8. And they will also require a huge
Hi Anton, do you know someone else is facing with this issue?
Could it be a local problem?
чт, 20 сент. 2018 г. в 22:18, Anton Vinogradov :
> Still, see the same issues.
>
> Denis,
>
> Could you please prioritize the fix?
>
> вт, 18 сент. 2018 г. в 14:01, Anton Vinogradov :
>
> > Also, I see
Igniters, we have a problem.
*TL;DR;*
Ignite may be seriously broken in Java 11. This affects ignite.sh,
Hibernate integration, JTA integration. And we cannot test it before code
freeze due to Java 11 release schedule.
We need to understand whether we shift release, or plan immediate AI 2.8
Still, see the same issues.
Denis,
Could you please prioritize the fix?
вт, 18 сент. 2018 г. в 14:01, Anton Vinogradov :
> Also, I see following on each resolve attempt.
> UpsourceRequestExceptionImpl: 108: Internal error: An error occurred
> during flushing data to database
>
>
>
> вт, 18
Stop node handler is not very good choice. Some test will continue work as
usual even if some node failed. E.g. SQL queries with backups may continue
function in some cases, especially if these are test with REPLICATED cache.
New test-scope handler looks like a better candidate to me.
чт, 20
GitHub user slukyano opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/4798
Ignite 2.4.10
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/gridgain/apache-ignite ignite-2.4.10
Alternatively you can review and apply
I meant the first comment in [1]. We are to decide first whether we'll do
it or not.
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-8227
Sorry, incomplete message.
Why do you think there is no consensus?
I have no clue what can be a reason for another approach.
By default failure handler should fail all test.
Failure handlers test will be always a minority of tests, so fail handler
call is something abnormal.
чт, 20 сент. 2018
Why do you think there is no consensus?
I have no clue that by default failure handler should fail all test.
чт, 20 сент. 2018 г. в 21:10, Andrey Kuznetsov :
> I've created [1] to address this.
>
> Dmitriy, I like your idea of creating special test-scope handler. But there
> is no consensus
I've created [1] to address this.
Dmitriy, I like your idea of creating special test-scope handler. But there
is no consensus about it, so I don't want to rely on that potential handler
right now. We can switch to it later, of course.
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9660
чт, 20
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/4758
---
Andrey Kuznetsov created IGNITE-9660:
Summary: Switch default test FailureHandler to
StopNodeFailureHandler
Key: IGNITE-9660
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9660
Project: Ignite
Andrey,
I like your idea.
After changing the default node failure handler to the new one we should
carefully review the whole new test failures. For instance, calling this
method in tests should not lead test to the node being stopped:
FOR TEST ONLY!!!
TcpDiscoverySpi#simulateNodeFailure
BTW,
But the totally ideal situation would be finding a way to fail the test by
default, not only stopping a node.
Some time ago I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-8227 to
find out a way to do so.
чт, 20 сент. 2018 г. в 19:40, Dmitriy Pavlov :
> ++1
>
> чт, 20 сент. 2018 г. в
++1
чт, 20 сент. 2018 г. в 19:39, Andrey Kuznetsov :
> Igniters,
>
> While running tests I see a lot of ignored critical failures caused by
> {{NoOpFailureHandler}} that we use by default. In some tests, of cource,
> critical failures are the part of normal workflow, but in the majority of
>
Igniters,
While running tests I see a lot of ignored critical failures caused by
{{NoOpFailureHandler}} that we use by default. In some tests, of cource,
critical failures are the part of normal workflow, but in the majority of
tests they indicate bugs. By using {{NoOpFailureHandler}} we just
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/4648
---
The file is in place:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/MIGRATION_GUIDE.txt
Tho, I think we could put something there.
Regards,
--
Ilya Kasnacheev
чт, 20 сент. 2018 г. в 17:39, Nikolay Izhikov :
> Hello, Igniters.
>
> I've started to write Wiki article for a future Release
Hi,
IgniteStandByClusterTest seems to fail, Dmitriy G., Ivan, would it be
reasonable to revert commit?
Dmitriy Ryabov, is it related to recent fix or is it a standalone problem?
Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov
пн, 17 сент. 2018 г. в 18:45, Dmitrii Ryabov :
> Looks like problem I had described in
Hi Roman, Vladimir,
Is there any news about this failure? IgniteConfigurationParityTest seems
to fail.
Can we revert initial commit and re-merge with tests fixes?
Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov
вт, 18 сент. 2018 г. в 12:22, Roman Kondakov :
> Hi, Dmitriy!
>
> Vladimir assured me in a private
Alexey Goncharuk created IGNITE-9659:
Summary: NonCollocatedRetryMessageSelfTest is flaky
Key: IGNITE-9659
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9659
Project: Ignite
Issue
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/4779
---
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/4793
---
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/4702
---
GitHub user NSAmelchev opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/4797
IGNITE-9654
Fix for the
**IgniteCacheDistributedPartitionQueryNodeRestartsSelfTest.testJoinQueryUnstableTopology**
test.
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/3185
---
Hi Sergi,
Thanks for your thoughts on this.
I think everything is already available in Ignite to react upon cache
operations and what needs to be done is to check if that operation should also
change the resultset of a query. I think this is also how "Continuous Queries"
work in Ignite.
What
Ivan Daschinskiy created IGNITE-9658:
Summary: Add ability to disable memory deallocation on
deactivation.
Key: IGNITE-9658
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9658
Project: Ignite
Hello, Igniters.
I've started to write Wiki article for a future Release Managers.
Since release process doesn't described anywhere public I do it while releasing
2.7:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+manager+Notes
Any feedback is strongly appreciated.
I've tried to
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/4692
---
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/4724
---
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/4407
---
asfgit closed pull request #15: Incremental build upload
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot/pull/15
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on GitHub
dspavlov commented on issue #9: IGNITE-9541 Add the comparison for two general
statistics "RunAll" for master in the date interval
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot/pull/9#issuecomment-423176000
I've applied PR locally and tried it on existing DB. The result is a failure
Evgenii Zhuravlev created IGNITE-9657:
-
Summary: socket leak in TcpDiscoverySpi
Key: IGNITE-9657
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9657
Project: Ignite
Issue Type: Bug
Peter Ivanov created IGNITE-9656:
Summary: Automate RPM and DEB packages version increase on release
Key: IGNITE-9656
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9656
Project: Ignite
GitHub user pavel-kuznetsov opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/4796
IGNITE-9637: Suite for data load benchmarks
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/gridgain/apache-ignite ignite-9637
Pavel Kuznetsov created IGNITE-9655:
---
Summary: SQL: Create benchmark suite for DML operations.
Key: IGNITE-9655
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9655
Project: Ignite
Issue
GitHub user rkondakov opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/4795
MVCC TX: Send partition update counters to backup nodes on prepare state.
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull
Amelchev Nikita created IGNITE-9654:
---
Summary: Test testJoinQueryUnstableTopology is flaky in master
Key: IGNITE-9654
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9654
Project: Ignite
Hello!
Sep 19 13:28:18 apache-ignite[47439]: Caused by:
java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Can not set final
scan.fragment.node.dao.binary.converter.BinaryF
I think you have final fields in your class that can't be written to by
deserialization. Unfortunately the messages are truncated.
ok... thought I saw gridgain interaction in an email Will start a new
thread with my questions on test code or comment on Jira
On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 11:39 AM Dmitriy Pavlov
wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> Please be more specific, GridGain can't take part in the community, only
> individual
Andrey Kuznetsov created IGNITE-9653:
Summary: StopNodeOrHaltFailureHandlerTest.testJvmHalted has flaky
failures on master branch
Key: IGNITE-9653
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9653
Hi Paul,
Please be more specific, GridGain can't take part in the community, only
individual contributors can. So I don't understand which contributor was
pulling 9298.
Any feedback is appreciated, especially constructive, cause it helps in
developing a product in the right direction. But we
Dimitiry, Re: IGNITE-9298 ... this is my first contribution, don't know who
is reviewing the code, I did see that it was pulled by GridGain.
Additionally I was not happy about the test code, I followed what was there
before but it doesn't seem right.
On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 9:17 AM Dmitriy
Maxim Muzafarov created IGNITE-9652:
---
Summary: Fix `Missorted modifiers' according inspections profile`
Key: IGNITE-9652
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9652
Project: Ignite
Github user xtern closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/3587
---
Github user xtern closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/4711
---
SomeFire commented on a change in pull request #15: Incremental build upload
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot/pull/15#discussion_r219076597
##
File path:
ignite-tc-helper-web/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/ci/IgnitePersistentTeamcity.java
##
@@ -297,9
SomeFire commented on a change in pull request #15: Incremental build upload
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot/pull/15#discussion_r219076843
##
File path:
ignite-tc-helper-web/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/ci/IgniteTeamcityHelper.java
##
@@ -566,18
SomeFire commented on a change in pull request #15: Incremental build upload
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot/pull/15#discussion_r219077963
##
File path:
ignite-tc-helper-web/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/ci/IgnitePersistentTeamcity.java
##
@@ -297,9
SomeFire commented on a change in pull request #15: Incremental build upload
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot/pull/15#discussion_r219074854
##
File path:
ignite-tc-helper-web/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/ci/IgniteTeamcityHelper.java
##
@@ -566,18
SomeFire commented on a change in pull request #15: Incremental build upload
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot/pull/15#discussion_r219074162
##
File path:
ignite-tc-helper-web/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/ci/IgnitePersistentTeamcity.java
##
@@ -297,9
SomeFire commented on a change in pull request #15: Incremental build upload
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot/pull/15#discussion_r219076961
##
File path:
ignite-tc-helper-web/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/ci/issue/IssueDetector.java
##
@@ -396,8 +396,7
Hi,
As always, our constraint is a review. We as the community seems to agree
that review and patch commenting is a major contribution, but very few of
us doing a review, and 92 tickets are in Patch Available state.
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Issues+waiting+for+review
65 matches
Mail list logo
