Xander Uiterlinden created IGNITE-11351:
---
Summary: Basic "Starting Ignite inside an OSGi container" doesn't
work
Key: IGNITE-11351
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11351
Pavel Voronkin created IGNITE-11350:
---
Summary: doInParallel interruption is not properly handled in
ExchangeFuture.
Key: IGNITE-11350
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11350
Igniters,
I am currently trying to teach my thin client (pyignite) a new trick
called “Best effort affinity”.
I have been told that this feature is being implemented in the private
branch [1], so I checked it out, built it, and gave it a go.
The handshake goes as expected, I have actually
Sure Dmitriy, I will have a look into shared links and get back to you in
case of further queries.
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 10:27 PM Dmitriy Pavlov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thank you for interest in Apache Ignite.
>
> You can find a very short guide here
>
>
Roman Kondakov created IGNITE-11349:
---
Summary: MVCC: Deadlock in query pool when executing DML over
caches with queryParallism > 1
Key: IGNITE-11349
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11349
Hi Igniters,
I've noticed we have a couple more Java11 related failures: Tests here
didn't start at all, so assistance here for finding out
- reasons and
- how to fix it
are appreciated.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11190 Fix Apache Ignite tests
of Camel Streamer under Java 11
Hi,
Thank you for interest in Apache Ignite.
You can find a very short guide here
https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#contributing-to-apache-ignite
and full guide here
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute
'newbie'-labeled tickets are a
Hi awesome folks,
I am a software development engineer working in Amazon for nearly two and a
half years by now. Lately, I had been thinking of contributing to an open
source project. So, I googled for a few days and made some list of projects
of my interest and guess what I picked IGNITE as my
Sergey Chugunov created IGNITE-11348:
Summary: Ping node procedure may fail when another node leaves the
cluster
Key: IGNITE-11348
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11348
Project:
Ivan Bessonov created IGNITE-11347:
--
Summary: DistributedMetaStoragePersistentTest.testUnstableTopology
is flaky
Key: IGNITE-11347
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11347
Project:
Anton,
Do you have real questions? Seems like you're trying to state your opinion
related to the fix rather than asking a question.
We've discussed it in the thread related to Failure Handler fix, that whole
community is responsible to make things better. Mostly, contributors, who
care (proof of
Oleg,
You may use TODO if it is really necessary.
I see no reason to have any todo at JUnit3TestLegacySupport class since
it's already marked as legacy and should be removed in the future.
And we should have an issue about this removal.
Why you closed GNITE-10177 "cleanup Junit 3 from the
Maxim Karavaev created IGNITE-11346:
---
Summary: Remote client authentication failed for the
CommandHandler in the case where it optional on the server
Key: IGNITE-11346
URL:
Hi Anton,
I removed @deprecated from javadoc, thanks for noticing. PR #6122 [1] is
updated.
As for TODOs, I think you are wrong here because Ignite coding guidelines
[2] not only explicitly allow these but also explain the format in which
these should be presented. If you find violations of
Hi,
I have set the off heap size to 500 MB and max heap size to 512 MB.
My process is taking around 1.7 GB on Windows 10 as per the task manager.
So I decided to track the memory distribution using jcmd to find out if
there are any memory leaks in non-heap space.
After pushing the data to cache
Oleg,
Every commit should be final.
Comments, TODOs and partial fixes (why @deprecated still at Javadoc?) are
unacceptable.
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 3:23 PM oignatenko wrote:
> Hi Anton,
>
> There you go:
>
> PR to remove deprecation: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/6122
> JIRA:
Hi Anton,
There you go:
PR to remove deprecation: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/6122
JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11345
If anything there is not as you expected, please let me know.
regards, Oleg
--
Sent from:
Oleg Ignatenko created IGNITE-11345:
---
Summary: remove deprecation for beforeTestsStarted and
afterTestsStopped
Key: IGNITE-11345
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11345
Project:
Nikolay,
I agree with all points. But one thing is very uncertain. What
contribution is really troublesome (and consequently should be fixed
quickly or reverted)? But in fact it is a topic for a separate
discussion.
In current case about deprecation I agree with Nikolay and Anton. It
should be
Ivan, I think we should use common sense here.
1. We should keep master consistent.
2. Contributors should try to fix issues appeared with their contribution.
Do you agree with this?
If some contributor can't fix issue quickly, is't completely OK.
But, we should find another contributor, or
Ivan Artukhov created IGNITE-11344:
--
Summary: High performance drop in master vs 2.7
Key: IGNITE-11344
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11344
Project: Ignite
Issue Type:
Nikolay,
I agree with you and Anton that discussed deprecation is not a good thing.
But it is quite interesting for me personally where our community
declared actions which should be taken against troublesome
contributions.
пн, 18 февр. 2019 г. в 12:11, Nikolay Izhikov :
>
> Ivan.
>
> Please,
Ivan.
Please, use the quote right: "We should avoid any discussions *this time*."
This means - "We should *fix the issue* as quick as we can and discuss
correct improvement after"
Should we live this long with wrong deprecation?
I don't think so.
пн, 18 февр. 2019 г. в 11:58, Павлухин Иван :
Anton,
Could you please provide a link to a section in Ignite development
process document (or alike) stating in what cases "we should avoid a
discussion" and proceed with steps suggested by you? Sincerely, I am
not aware. Sorry if I missed it.
пн, 18 февр. 2019 г. в 11:33, Anton Vinogradov :
>
Oleg,
Task creation is not equaled to task in progress.
It means nothing, to be honest.
Are you going to fix this issue?
That's not the first time we have such discussion at the community.
So, now I have a clear vision.
Since you contributed code with problems you are responsible to
- fix them
Anton Dmitriev created IGNITE-11343:
---
Summary: [ML] Create a stub of Python API module
Key: IGNITE-11343
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11343
Project: Ignite
Issue Type:
Anton Dmitriev created IGNITE-11342:
---
Summary: [ML] Create a Python API for Ignite ML
Key: IGNITE-11342
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11342
Project: Ignite
Issue Type:
27 matches
Mail list logo
