Re: Making Ignite Collaboration 100% Open and Transparent

2019-09-13 Thread Denis Magda 
Igniters,

Please check this wiki page created based on the inputs from this
conversation:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Collaborate

Feel
free to propose or make changes.

-
Denis


On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 3:13 AM Anton Vinogradov  wrote:

> Folks,
>
> ASF Slack is just a private messenger.
> For me, it's a way to have a conversation with any contributor joined
> #ignite channel.
> Of-course, conversation results should be published at Jira/devlist.
>
> On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 1:11 PM Alexey Zinoviev 
> wrote:
>
> > Cool idea about sending summary/meeting records to dev list for each
> > meaningful communication
> > Support you, Pavel!
> >
> > пн, 2 сент. 2019 г. в 12:55, Pavel Tupitsyn :
> >
> > > Andrey is right, dev list is our primary form of communication, and for
> > > many good reasons.
> > >
> > > Other forms of communications are fine, but all discussions/decisions
> > > should be reflected on the dev list in one form or another.
> > > - Had a chat in slack and agreed on something? Write a summary to the
> dev
> > > list
> > > - Had a meeting? Recording is great, but please post meeting minutes in
> > > text form to the dev list
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Pavel
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 11:23 PM Denis Magda 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Andrey,
> > > >
> > > > I'm not insisting to replace dev list with Slack or always react to
> > Slack
> > > > messages. It's up to us to decide where and with what frequency to
> > > respond.
> > > > My suggestion is just to have Slack as an extra tool for the Ignite
> dev
> > > > communications (no user support).
> > > >
> > > > I also prefer either email conversations (time to think, no
> commitments
> > > to
> > > > respond ASAP) or phone calls (make things done now). But sometimes
> > Slack
> > > > comes handy. For instance, I'd like to have a faster channel to talk
> to
> > > > Nikolay Izhikov, Anton Vinogradov or Roman Shtykh on Ignite related
> > tasks
> > > > discussed initially on the dev.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > > Denis
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 6:04 AM Andrey Gura 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Why chat is called chat? [1] Just ignore modern definitions :) Chat
> > is
> > > > > "bla-bla-bla".
> > > > >
> > > > > IMO, there are no any pros for using Slack in order to make Ignite
> > > > > Collaboration 100% Open and Transparent. Chat is just garbage of
> some
> > > > > phrases that aren't structured into discussions (please, don't talk
> > me
> > > > > about threads in Slack, they are useless).  So  transparency isn't
> > > > > chat's property. If some topics have parallel discussion we will
> have
> > > > > as result something like salad "Asynchronous":
> > > > > tomacucumtoes,bersmayonn,aise. Moreover, the same salad we will
> have
> > > > > for discussion of one topic by many members.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mailing list is the best mean for easygoing interaction. It
> > > > > asynchronous by nature and doesn't have any means for pressure to
> > > > > community members (like notifications). Discussions on mailing list
> > > > > are organized into threads and any new message to the thread will
> > > > > follow up thread to the top of unread messages. All you need and
> > > > > nothing more.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mailing list are indexed by search engines while Slack channels
> > > > > aren't. It is stone in the garden of openтess.
> > > > >
> > > > > I always can refer to discussion on mailing list. But it's
> impossible
> > > > > for discussion in Slack channel due to reasons mentioned above.
> > > > >
> > > > > I do not mind the idea as a whole. Chat could be nice and fun. But
> > > > > openness, transparency, and also important searchability, it is all
> > > > > about mailing lists, not chats.
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/chat
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 12:40 AM Павлухин Иван <
> vololo...@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > + Meeting minutes
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2019-08-28 22:29 GMT+11:00, Alexey Zinoviev <
> > zaleslaw@gmail.com
> > > >:
> > > > > > > I am totally support the idea with the planned and widely
> > announced
> > > > > Hangout
> > > > > > > meeting between commiters and contributers and posting the link
> > to
> > > > the
> > > > > > > dev-list with the special Topic Name and short agenda. Maybe,
> the
> > > > > recorded
> > > > > > > video could be added to the YouTube (or to another platform) to
> > > share
> > > > > with
> > > > > > > the community members.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > пн, 26 авг. 2019 г. в 22:23, Amit Chavan :
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Hi Denis,
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> I really like the initiative for transparency and
> collaboration.
> > > Are
> > > > > > >> there
> > > > > > >> any plans to help get new contributors up to speed with the
> > > project
> > > > > where
> > > > > > >> they can contribute

Re: After IGNITE-12148 the Examples suite has unstable tests

2019-09-13 Thread Alexey Zinoviev 
Fixed it, please have a look and test it
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Examples?branch=%3Cdefault%3E


пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 21:16, Alexey Zinoviev :

> Ok, got it, I've found a solution
>
> пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 21:09, Denis Garus :
>
>> Alexey, about agents was my assumption, and it looks like wrong.
>> I didn't dive so deep.
>>
>> пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 20:54, Alexey Zinoviev :
>>
>> > Could you help me recognize the difference between agents to exactly
>> > reproduce the issue and be sure that I fix it?
>> >
>> >
>> > пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 20:51, Alexey Zinoviev :
>> >
>> > > Thank you, I'll try to fix it, ticket is here
>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12168
>> > >
>> > > пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 20:41, Denis Garus :
>> > >
>> > >> Alexey, sure.
>> > >> My first build today is [1], and the last build is [2].
>> > >> 28 tests became flaky.
>> > >>
>> > >> 1.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> >
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4594295=IgniteTests24Java8_Examples
>> > >> 2.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> >
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4595102=IgniteTests24Java8_Examples
>> > >>
>> > >> пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 20:25, Alexey Zinoviev <
>> zaleslaw@gmail.com>:
>> > >>
>> > >> > Dear @ Denis Garus
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Could you please what kind of tests became unstable?
>> > >> > Because I have no troubles with examples (and run them of course
>> > before
>> > >> > merging) and many builds have no troubles too
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Look at
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> >
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Examples?branch=%3Cdefault%3E
>> > >> > -
>> > >> > it's broken on Scala component a few weeks ago
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Could you please send me exact link on the builds that were ran by
>> > >> yourself
>> > >> > today
>> > >> >
>> > >> > But yes, the IGNITE-12148 could influence on many examples in ML
>> > module
>> > >> > because a few of resources were moved.
>> > >> > I will try to fix today or tomorrow (but I need more information to
>> > >> > reproduce the situation)
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 19:52, Denis Magda :
>> > >> >
>> > >> > > Alex Zinoviev, could you please double-check and confirm if
>> > >> IGNITE-12148
>> > >> > > affects the test suite?
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > -
>> > >> > > Denis
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 1:55 AM Denis Garus > >
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > > Hello, Igniters!
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > I ran two times the Examples suite [1] on the master branch
>> today
>> > >> and
>> > >> > get
>> > >> > > > different results. It looks like some tests become unstable
>> after
>> > >> > merging
>> > >> > > > of task IGNITE-12148 [2]. I think tests result depend on an
>> Agent
>> > >> that
>> > >> > > > executes suite.
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > 1.
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > >
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> >
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Examples?branch=%3Cdefault%3E
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > 2.
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > >
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> >
>> https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/cd5e39b783bc499837b569c2cf974a8fe308bcf2
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > >
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Re: ML stable and performance

2019-09-13 Thread Denis Magda 
Alexey, I'm wondering,

Are there any dependencies on Ignite Core that make us put off the ML
changes release until 2.8? I know that you do not support the idea of ML as
a separate Ignite module but this concept would allow us to release ML as
frequently as we want not being blocked by Ignite core releases.


-
Denis


On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 11:45 AM Alexey Zinoviev 
wrote:

> I could answer as one of developers of ML module.
> Currently is available the ML in version 2.7.5, it supports a lot of
> algorithms and could be used in production, but the API is not stable and
> will be changed in 2.8
>
> The ML module will be stable since next release 2.8, also we have no
> performance report to compare for example with Spark ML
> Based on my exploration the performance of in terms of Big O notation is
> the same like in Spark ML (real numbers says that Ignite ML is more faster
> than Spark ML due to Ignite in-memory nature and so on)
>
> Since 2.8 it will have good integration with TensorFlow, Spark ML, XGBoost
> via model inference.
>
> You as a user have no ability to run, for-example scikit-learn or R
> packages in distributed mode over Ignite, but you could run the TensorFlow,
> using Ignite as a distributed back-end instead of Horovod.
>
> If you have any questions, please let me know
>
>
>
> пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 21:28, Denis Magda :
>
>> David,
>>
>> Let me loop in Ignite dev list that has Ignite ML experts subscribed.
>> Please, could you share more details in regards to your performance
>> testing
>> and objectives for Ignite ML overall?
>>
>> The module is ready for production and we're ready to help solve any
>> cornerstones.
>>
>> -
>> Denis
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 4:50 AM David Williams 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Python is 25 times slower than Java for ML at runtimes, which I found
>> out
>> > online. But I don't know that statement is true or not. I need insiders'
>> > opinion.  Which ml other packages are best options for Ignite?
>> >
>> > On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 7:28 PM Mikael 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi!
>> >>
>> >> I have never used it myself but it's been there for long time and I
>> >> would expect it to be stable, and yes it will run distributed, I can't
>> >> say anything about performance as I have never used it.
>> >>
>> >> You will find a lot of more information at:
>> >>
>> >> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/machine-learning
>> >>
>> >> Mikael
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Den 2019-09-06 kl. 11:50, skrev David Williams:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > I am evaluating ML framework for Java platform. I knew Ignite has ML
>> >> > package.
>> >> > But I like to know its stability and performance for production. Can
>> >> > Ignite
>> >> > ML code run in distribute way?
>> >> >
>> >> > Except its own ML package, which ml packages are best options for
>> >> Ignite?
>> >>
>> >
>>
>

Re: ML stable and performance

2019-09-13 Thread Alexey Zinoviev 
I could answer as one of developers of ML module.
Currently is available the ML in version 2.7.5, it supports a lot of
algorithms and could be used in production, but the API is not stable and
will be changed in 2.8

The ML module will be stable since next release 2.8, also we have no
performance report to compare for example with Spark ML
Based on my exploration the performance of in terms of Big O notation is
the same like in Spark ML (real numbers says that Ignite ML is more faster
than Spark ML due to Ignite in-memory nature and so on)

Since 2.8 it will have good integration with TensorFlow, Spark ML, XGBoost
via model inference.

You as a user have no ability to run, for-example scikit-learn or R
packages in distributed mode over Ignite, but you could run the TensorFlow,
using Ignite as a distributed back-end instead of Horovod.

If you have any questions, please let me know



пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 21:28, Denis Magda :

> David,
>
> Let me loop in Ignite dev list that has Ignite ML experts subscribed.
> Please, could you share more details in regards to your performance testing
> and objectives for Ignite ML overall?
>
> The module is ready for production and we're ready to help solve any
> cornerstones.
>
> -
> Denis
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 4:50 AM David Williams  wrote:
>
> > Python is 25 times slower than Java for ML at runtimes, which I found out
> > online. But I don't know that statement is true or not. I need insiders'
> > opinion.  Which ml other packages are best options for Ignite?
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 7:28 PM Mikael  wrote:
> >
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> I have never used it myself but it's been there for long time and I
> >> would expect it to be stable, and yes it will run distributed, I can't
> >> say anything about performance as I have never used it.
> >>
> >> You will find a lot of more information at:
> >>
> >> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/machine-learning
> >>
> >> Mikael
> >>
> >>
> >> Den 2019-09-06 kl. 11:50, skrev David Williams:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I am evaluating ML framework for Java platform. I knew Ignite has ML
> >> > package.
> >> > But I like to know its stability and performance for production. Can
> >> > Ignite
> >> > ML code run in distribute way?
> >> >
> >> > Except its own ML package, which ml packages are best options for
> >> Ignite?
> >>
> >
>

Re: ML stable and performance

2019-09-13 Thread Denis Magda 
David,

Let me loop in Ignite dev list that has Ignite ML experts subscribed.
Please, could you share more details in regards to your performance testing
and objectives for Ignite ML overall?

The module is ready for production and we're ready to help solve any
cornerstones.

-
Denis


On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 4:50 AM David Williams  wrote:

> Python is 25 times slower than Java for ML at runtimes, which I found out
> online. But I don't know that statement is true or not. I need insiders'
> opinion.  Which ml other packages are best options for Ignite?
>
> On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 7:28 PM Mikael  wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I have never used it myself but it's been there for long time and I
>> would expect it to be stable, and yes it will run distributed, I can't
>> say anything about performance as I have never used it.
>>
>> You will find a lot of more information at:
>>
>> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/machine-learning
>>
>> Mikael
>>
>>
>> Den 2019-09-06 kl. 11:50, skrev David Williams:
>> >
>> >
>> > I am evaluating ML framework for Java platform. I knew Ignite has ML
>> > package.
>> > But I like to know its stability and performance for production. Can
>> > Ignite
>> > ML code run in distribute way?
>> >
>> > Except its own ML package, which ml packages are best options for
>> Ignite?
>>
>

Re: After IGNITE-12148 the Examples suite has unstable tests

2019-09-13 Thread Alexey Zinoviev 
Ok, got it, I've found a solution

пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 21:09, Denis Garus :

> Alexey, about agents was my assumption, and it looks like wrong.
> I didn't dive so deep.
>
> пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 20:54, Alexey Zinoviev :
>
> > Could you help me recognize the difference between agents to exactly
> > reproduce the issue and be sure that I fix it?
> >
> >
> > пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 20:51, Alexey Zinoviev :
> >
> > > Thank you, I'll try to fix it, ticket is here
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12168
> > >
> > > пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 20:41, Denis Garus :
> > >
> > >> Alexey, sure.
> > >> My first build today is [1], and the last build is [2].
> > >> 28 tests became flaky.
> > >>
> > >> 1.
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4594295=IgniteTests24Java8_Examples
> > >> 2.
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4595102=IgniteTests24Java8_Examples
> > >>
> > >> пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 20:25, Alexey Zinoviev  >:
> > >>
> > >> > Dear @ Denis Garus
> > >> >
> > >> > Could you please what kind of tests became unstable?
> > >> > Because I have no troubles with examples (and run them of course
> > before
> > >> > merging) and many builds have no troubles too
> > >> >
> > >> > Look at
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Examples?branch=%3Cdefault%3E
> > >> > -
> > >> > it's broken on Scala component a few weeks ago
> > >> >
> > >> > Could you please send me exact link on the builds that were ran by
> > >> yourself
> > >> > today
> > >> >
> > >> > But yes, the IGNITE-12148 could influence on many examples in ML
> > module
> > >> > because a few of resources were moved.
> > >> > I will try to fix today or tomorrow (but I need more information to
> > >> > reproduce the situation)
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 19:52, Denis Magda :
> > >> >
> > >> > > Alex Zinoviev, could you please double-check and confirm if
> > >> IGNITE-12148
> > >> > > affects the test suite?
> > >> > >
> > >> > > -
> > >> > > Denis
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 1:55 AM Denis Garus 
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > Hello, Igniters!
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I ran two times the Examples suite [1] on the master branch
> today
> > >> and
> > >> > get
> > >> > > > different results. It looks like some tests become unstable
> after
> > >> > merging
> > >> > > > of task IGNITE-12148 [2]. I think tests result depend on an
> Agent
> > >> that
> > >> > > > executes suite.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > 1.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Examples?branch=%3Cdefault%3E
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > 2.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/cd5e39b783bc499837b569c2cf974a8fe308bcf2
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: After IGNITE-12148 the Examples suite has unstable tests

2019-09-13 Thread Denis Garus 
Alexey, about agents was my assumption, and it looks like wrong.
I didn't dive so deep.

пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 20:54, Alexey Zinoviev :

> Could you help me recognize the difference between agents to exactly
> reproduce the issue and be sure that I fix it?
>
>
> пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 20:51, Alexey Zinoviev :
>
> > Thank you, I'll try to fix it, ticket is here
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12168
> >
> > пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 20:41, Denis Garus :
> >
> >> Alexey, sure.
> >> My first build today is [1], and the last build is [2].
> >> 28 tests became flaky.
> >>
> >> 1.
> >>
> >>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4594295=IgniteTests24Java8_Examples
> >> 2.
> >>
> >>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4595102=IgniteTests24Java8_Examples
> >>
> >> пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 20:25, Alexey Zinoviev :
> >>
> >> > Dear @ Denis Garus
> >> >
> >> > Could you please what kind of tests became unstable?
> >> > Because I have no troubles with examples (and run them of course
> before
> >> > merging) and many builds have no troubles too
> >> >
> >> > Look at
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Examples?branch=%3Cdefault%3E
> >> > -
> >> > it's broken on Scala component a few weeks ago
> >> >
> >> > Could you please send me exact link on the builds that were ran by
> >> yourself
> >> > today
> >> >
> >> > But yes, the IGNITE-12148 could influence on many examples in ML
> module
> >> > because a few of resources were moved.
> >> > I will try to fix today or tomorrow (but I need more information to
> >> > reproduce the situation)
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 19:52, Denis Magda :
> >> >
> >> > > Alex Zinoviev, could you please double-check and confirm if
> >> IGNITE-12148
> >> > > affects the test suite?
> >> > >
> >> > > -
> >> > > Denis
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 1:55 AM Denis Garus 
> >> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Hello, Igniters!
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I ran two times the Examples suite [1] on the master branch today
> >> and
> >> > get
> >> > > > different results. It looks like some tests become unstable after
> >> > merging
> >> > > > of task IGNITE-12148 [2]. I think tests result depend on an Agent
> >> that
> >> > > > executes suite.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > 1.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Examples?branch=%3Cdefault%3E
> >> > > >
> >> > > > 2.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/cd5e39b783bc499837b569c2cf974a8fe308bcf2
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
>

Re: After IGNITE-12148 the Examples suite has unstable tests

2019-09-13 Thread Alexey Zinoviev 
Could you help me recognize the difference between agents to exactly
reproduce the issue and be sure that I fix it?


пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 20:51, Alexey Zinoviev :

> Thank you, I'll try to fix it, ticket is here
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12168
>
> пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 20:41, Denis Garus :
>
>> Alexey, sure.
>> My first build today is [1], and the last build is [2].
>> 28 tests became flaky.
>>
>> 1.
>>
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4594295=IgniteTests24Java8_Examples
>> 2.
>>
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4595102=IgniteTests24Java8_Examples
>>
>> пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 20:25, Alexey Zinoviev :
>>
>> > Dear @ Denis Garus
>> >
>> > Could you please what kind of tests became unstable?
>> > Because I have no troubles with examples (and run them of course before
>> > merging) and many builds have no troubles too
>> >
>> > Look at
>> >
>> >
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Examples?branch=%3Cdefault%3E
>> > -
>> > it's broken on Scala component a few weeks ago
>> >
>> > Could you please send me exact link on the builds that were ran by
>> yourself
>> > today
>> >
>> > But yes, the IGNITE-12148 could influence on many examples in ML module
>> > because a few of resources were moved.
>> > I will try to fix today or tomorrow (but I need more information to
>> > reproduce the situation)
>> >
>> >
>> > пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 19:52, Denis Magda :
>> >
>> > > Alex Zinoviev, could you please double-check and confirm if
>> IGNITE-12148
>> > > affects the test suite?
>> > >
>> > > -
>> > > Denis
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 1:55 AM Denis Garus 
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Hello, Igniters!
>> > > >
>> > > > I ran two times the Examples suite [1] on the master branch today
>> and
>> > get
>> > > > different results. It looks like some tests become unstable after
>> > merging
>> > > > of task IGNITE-12148 [2]. I think tests result depend on an Agent
>> that
>> > > > executes suite.
>> > > >
>> > > > 1.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Examples?branch=%3Cdefault%3E
>> > > >
>> > > > 2.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/cd5e39b783bc499837b569c2cf974a8fe308bcf2
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Re: After IGNITE-12148 the Examples suite has unstable tests

2019-09-13 Thread Alexey Zinoviev 
Thank you, I'll try to fix it, ticket is here
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12168

пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 20:41, Denis Garus :

> Alexey, sure.
> My first build today is [1], and the last build is [2].
> 28 tests became flaky.
>
> 1.
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4594295=IgniteTests24Java8_Examples
> 2.
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4595102=IgniteTests24Java8_Examples
>
> пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 20:25, Alexey Zinoviev :
>
> > Dear @ Denis Garus
> >
> > Could you please what kind of tests became unstable?
> > Because I have no troubles with examples (and run them of course before
> > merging) and many builds have no troubles too
> >
> > Look at
> >
> >
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Examples?branch=%3Cdefault%3E
> > -
> > it's broken on Scala component a few weeks ago
> >
> > Could you please send me exact link on the builds that were ran by
> yourself
> > today
> >
> > But yes, the IGNITE-12148 could influence on many examples in ML module
> > because a few of resources were moved.
> > I will try to fix today or tomorrow (but I need more information to
> > reproduce the situation)
> >
> >
> > пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 19:52, Denis Magda :
> >
> > > Alex Zinoviev, could you please double-check and confirm if
> IGNITE-12148
> > > affects the test suite?
> > >
> > > -
> > > Denis
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 1:55 AM Denis Garus 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello, Igniters!
> > > >
> > > > I ran two times the Examples suite [1] on the master branch today and
> > get
> > > > different results. It looks like some tests become unstable after
> > merging
> > > > of task IGNITE-12148 [2]. I think tests result depend on an Agent
> that
> > > > executes suite.
> > > >
> > > > 1.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Examples?branch=%3Cdefault%3E
> > > >
> > > > 2.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/cd5e39b783bc499837b569c2cf974a8fe308bcf2
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-12168) [ML] Flaky ML example tests

2019-09-13 Thread Aleksey Zinoviev (Jira) 
Aleksey Zinoviev created IGNITE-12168:
-

 Summary: [ML] Flaky ML example tests
 Key: IGNITE-12168
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12168
 Project: Ignite
  Issue Type: Bug
  Components: ml
Reporter: Aleksey Zinoviev
Assignee: Aleksey Zinoviev


Discussed here 
[http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/After-IGNITE-12148-the-Examples-suite-has-unstable-tests-td43469.html]



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.2#803003)

Re: After IGNITE-12148 the Examples suite has unstable tests

2019-09-13 Thread Denis Garus 
Alexey, sure.
My first build today is [1], and the last build is [2].
28 tests became flaky.

1.
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4594295=IgniteTests24Java8_Examples
2.
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4595102=IgniteTests24Java8_Examples

пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 20:25, Alexey Zinoviev :

> Dear @ Denis Garus
>
> Could you please what kind of tests became unstable?
> Because I have no troubles with examples (and run them of course before
> merging) and many builds have no troubles too
>
> Look at
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Examples?branch=%3Cdefault%3E
> -
> it's broken on Scala component a few weeks ago
>
> Could you please send me exact link on the builds that were ran by yourself
> today
>
> But yes, the IGNITE-12148 could influence on many examples in ML module
> because a few of resources were moved.
> I will try to fix today or tomorrow (but I need more information to
> reproduce the situation)
>
>
> пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 19:52, Denis Magda :
>
> > Alex Zinoviev, could you please double-check and confirm if IGNITE-12148
> > affects the test suite?
> >
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 1:55 AM Denis Garus  wrote:
> >
> > > Hello, Igniters!
> > >
> > > I ran two times the Examples suite [1] on the master branch today and
> get
> > > different results. It looks like some tests become unstable after
> merging
> > > of task IGNITE-12148 [2]. I think tests result depend on an Agent that
> > > executes suite.
> > >
> > > 1.
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Examples?branch=%3Cdefault%3E
> > >
> > > 2.
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/cd5e39b783bc499837b569c2cf974a8fe308bcf2
> > >
> >
>

Re: After IGNITE-12148 the Examples suite has unstable tests

2019-09-13 Thread Alexey Zinoviev 
Dear @ Denis Garus

Could you please what kind of tests became unstable?
Because I have no troubles with examples (and run them of course before
merging) and many builds have no troubles too

Look at
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Examples?branch=%3Cdefault%3E
-
it's broken on Scala component a few weeks ago

Could you please send me exact link on the builds that were ran by yourself
today

But yes, the IGNITE-12148 could influence on many examples in ML module
because a few of resources were moved.
I will try to fix today or tomorrow (but I need more information to
reproduce the situation)


пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 19:52, Denis Magda :

> Alex Zinoviev, could you please double-check and confirm if IGNITE-12148
> affects the test suite?
>
> -
> Denis
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 1:55 AM Denis Garus  wrote:
>
> > Hello, Igniters!
> >
> > I ran two times the Examples suite [1] on the master branch today and get
> > different results. It looks like some tests become unstable after merging
> > of task IGNITE-12148 [2]. I think tests result depend on an Agent that
> > executes suite.
> >
> > 1.
> >
> >
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Examples?branch=%3Cdefault%3E
> >
> > 2.
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/cd5e39b783bc499837b569c2cf974a8fe308bcf2
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.7.6-rc2

2019-09-13 Thread Denis Magda 
+1 (binding)

-
Denis


On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 1:30 AM Alexey Goncharuk 
wrote:

> Dear Community,
>
> We have uploaded release candidate to
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/2.7.6-rc2/
>
> The following staging can be used for a dependent project for testing:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheignite-1471/
>
> This is a maintenance release for Ignite 2.7.5 addressing several usability
> and stability issues.
>
> Tag name is 2.7.6-rc2:
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/2.7.6-rc2
>
> 2.7.6 changes:
> Ignite:
>   * Changed default persistence directory location when IGNITE_HOME is not
> set, native persistence files will not be stored in the temp directory
> anymore
>   * Fixed a bug that caused a SELECT query with an equality predicate on a
> part of the primary compound key to return a single row even if the query
> matched multiple rows
>   * Fixed an issue that could cause data corruption during checkpointing
>   * Fixed an issue where a row size was calculated incorrectly for shared
> cache groups, which caused a tree corruption
>   * Reduced java heap footprint by optimizing GridDhtPartitionsFullMessage
> maps in exchange history
>   * Fixed an issue where an outdated node with a destroyed cache caused the
> cluster to hang
>   * Fixed a bug that made it impossible to change the inline_size property
> of an existing index after it was dropped and recreated with a different
> value
>   * Fixed an issue causing silent control.sh script fail when JAVA_HOME is
> not set
>   * Fixed an issue causing sporadic node failure when persistence is
> enabled and WAL mmap is disabled
>   * Fixed an issue causing potential PDS corruption when a node is killed
> during checkpoint mark phase
>
>   Ignite .NET:
>   * Native persistence now works with a custom affinity function
>   * Fixed missing CacheEntryEventType.Removed event
>
> Complete list of closed issues:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=(project%20%3D%20%27Ignite%27%20AND%20fixVersion%20in%20(%272.7.6%27)%20AND%20status%20IN%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed))%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20
>
> DEVNOTES
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob;f=DEVNOTES.txt;h=307189059ae70834ead4c127cc18295ce4d0735a;hb=21f7ca41c4348909e2fd26ccf59b5b2ce1f4474e
>
> RELEASE NOTES
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob;f=RELEASE_NOTES.txt;h=810ecfd3baeeb378d868a0cf230cbe5c0fe298ea;hb=21f7ca41c4348909e2fd26ccf59b5b2ce1f4474e
>
> Release Verification Task run
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4594148=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote4CheckRcLicensesChecksum
>
> The vote is formal, see voting guidelines
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
> +1 - to accept Apache Ignite 2.7.6-rc2
> 0 - don't care either way
> -1 - DO NOT accept Apache Ignite Ignite 2.7.6-rc2 (explain why)
>
> See notes on how to verify release here
> https://www.apache.org/info/verification.html
> and
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-ReleaseVerification
>
> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours till September 16, 09:00 UTC.
>
> https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/to?year=2019=9=16=09=0=0=utc-1
>
> -- Alexey Goncharuk
>

Hello

2019-09-13 Thread Сурков Александр Викторович 
Hi everybody.

My name Surkov Aleksandr.
I'm a new contributor.

Best regards
Surkov Aleksandr.

УВЕДОМЛЕНИЕ О КОНФИДЕНЦИАЛЬНОСТИ: Это электронное сообщение и любые документы, 
приложенные к нему, содержат конфиденциальную информацию. Настоящим уведомляем 
Вас о том, что если это сообщение не предназначено Вам, использование, 
копирование, распространение информации, содержащейся в настоящем сообщении, а 
также осуществление любых действий на основе этой информации, строго запрещено. 
Если Вы получили это сообщение по ошибке, пожалуйста, сообщите об этом 
отправителю по электронной почте и удалите это сообщение. CONFIDENTIALITY 
NOTICE: This email and any files attached to it are confidential. If you are 
not the intended recipient you are notified that using, copying, distributing 
or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is 
strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please notify the 
sender and delete this email.

Re: After IGNITE-12148 the Examples suite has unstable tests

2019-09-13 Thread Denis Magda 
Alex Zinoviev, could you please double-check and confirm if IGNITE-12148
affects the test suite?

-
Denis


On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 1:55 AM Denis Garus  wrote:

> Hello, Igniters!
>
> I ran two times the Examples suite [1] on the master branch today and get
> different results. It looks like some tests become unstable after merging
> of task IGNITE-12148 [2]. I think tests result depend on an Agent that
> executes suite.
>
> 1.
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Examples?branch=%3Cdefault%3E
>
> 2.
>
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/cd5e39b783bc499837b569c2cf974a8fe308bcf2
>

Re: Cache expiry policy not deleting records from disk(native persistence)

2019-09-13 Thread Denis Magda 
Artem, thanks, could you please share a reference to the updated page?
Can't find anything here:
https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/evictions

Shiva, I've restarted the discussion on the dev list, to get to the bottom
of this gap and how it can be addressed:
http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/How-to-free-up-space-on-disc-after-removing-entries-from-IgniteCache-with-enabled-PDS-td39839.html

-
Denis


On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 7:05 AM Artem Budnikov 
wrote:

> Hi Denis,
>
> I updated the page about eviction policies. Not freeing up space on disk
> was not implemented for reasons explained in the dev-list thread. I'll
> update the page once more if/when a solution is implemented.
>
> Artem
> On 13.09.2019 00:34, Denis Magda wrote:
>
> Shiva,
>
> Hopefully, someone from the dev community will pick this ticket up soon
> and solve the task. In the meantime, Artem, would you mind documenting this
> limitation referring to ticket 10862?
>
> -
> Denis
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 12:50 AM Shiva Kumar 
> wrote:
>
>> I have filed a bug https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12152 but
>> this is same as https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10862
>> Any idea on the timeline of these tickets?
>> In the documentation
>> https://apacheignite.readme.io/v2.7/docs/expiry-policies
>> it says when native persistence is enabled "*expired entries are removed
>> from both memory and disk tiers*" but in the disk it just mark the pages
>> as unwanted pages and same disk space used by these unwanted pages will be
>> used to store new pages but it will not remove unwanted pages from disk and
>> so it will not release disk space used by these unwanted pages.
>>
>> here is the developer's discussion link
>>
>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/How-to-free-up-space-on-disc-after-removing-entries-from-IgniteCache-with-enabled-PDS-td39839.html
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 11:53 PM Shiva Kumar 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi
>>> I have deployed ignite on kubernetes and configured two seperate
>>> persistent volume for WAL and persistence.
>>> The issue Iam facing is same as
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10862
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Shiva
>>>
>>> On Mon, 9 Sep, 2019, 10:47 PM Andrei Aleksandrov, <
>>> aealexsand...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hello,

 I guess that generated WAL will take this disk space. Please read about
 WAL here:

 https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/write-ahead-log

 Please provide the size of every folder under /opt/ignite/persistence.

 BR,
 Andrei
 9/6/2019 9:45 PM, Shiva Kumar пишет:

 Hi all,
 I have set cache expiry policy like this




 
 >>> class="org.apache.ignite.configuration.CacheConfiguration">
   
   
   
   
   
 >>> class="javax.cache.expiry.CreatedExpiryPolicy" factory-method="factoryOf">
   
 
   
   
 
   
 
   

 
 



 And batch inserting records to one of the table which is created with
 above cache template.
 Around 10 minutes, I ingested ~1.5GB of data and after 10 minutes
 records started reducing(expiring) when I monitored from sqlline.

 0: jdbc:ignite:thin://192.168.*.*:10800> select count(ID) from
 DIMENSIONS;
 

 COUNT(ID)
 

 248896
 
 1 row selected (0.86 seconds)
 0: jdbc:ignite:thin://192.168.*.*:10800> select count(ID) from
 DIMENSIONS;
 

 COUNT(ID)
 

 222174
 
 1 row selected (0.313 seconds)
 0: jdbc:ignite:thin://192.168.*.*:10800> select count(ID) from
 DIMENSIONS;
 

 COUNT(ID)
 

 118154
 
 1 row selected (0.15 seconds)
 0: jdbc:ignite:thin://192.168.*.*:10800>
 0: jdbc:ignite:thin://192.168.*.*:10800> select count(ID) from
 DIMENSIONS;
 

 COUNT(ID)
 

 76061
 
 1 row selected (0.106 seconds)
 0: jdbc:ignite:thin://192.168.*.*:10800>
 0: jdbc:ignite:thin://192.168.*.*:10800> select count(ID) from
 DIMENSIONS;
 

 COUNT(ID)
 

 41671

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.7.6-rc2

2019-09-13 Thread Maxim Muzafarov 
+1

build from sources, run examples, verify checksum

On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 at 15:54, Ilya Kasnacheev  wrote:
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Built from source, built C++ and .Net, was able to start such nodes,
> checked that new default directory is where it is expected to be.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Ilya Kasnacheev
>
>
> пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 12:34, Alexey Zinoviev :
>
> > +1 go ahead
> >
> > пт, 13 сент. 2019 г., 11:30 Alexey Goncharuk :
> >
> > > Dear Community,
> > >
> > > We have uploaded release candidate to
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/2.7.6-rc2/
> > >
> > > The following staging can be used for a dependent project for testing:
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheignite-1471/
> > >
> > > This is a maintenance release for Ignite 2.7.5 addressing several
> > usability
> > > and stability issues.
> > >
> > > Tag name is 2.7.6-rc2:
> > >
> > >
> > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/2.7.6-rc2
> > >
> > > 2.7.6 changes:
> > > Ignite:
> > >   * Changed default persistence directory location when IGNITE_HOME is
> > not
> > > set, native persistence files will not be stored in the temp directory
> > > anymore
> > >   * Fixed a bug that caused a SELECT query with an equality predicate on
> > a
> > > part of the primary compound key to return a single row even if the query
> > > matched multiple rows
> > >   * Fixed an issue that could cause data corruption during checkpointing
> > >   * Fixed an issue where a row size was calculated incorrectly for shared
> > > cache groups, which caused a tree corruption
> > >   * Reduced java heap footprint by optimizing
> > GridDhtPartitionsFullMessage
> > > maps in exchange history
> > >   * Fixed an issue where an outdated node with a destroyed cache caused
> > the
> > > cluster to hang
> > >   * Fixed a bug that made it impossible to change the inline_size
> > property
> > > of an existing index after it was dropped and recreated with a different
> > > value
> > >   * Fixed an issue causing silent control.sh script fail when JAVA_HOME
> > is
> > > not set
> > >   * Fixed an issue causing sporadic node failure when persistence is
> > > enabled and WAL mmap is disabled
> > >   * Fixed an issue causing potential PDS corruption when a node is killed
> > > during checkpoint mark phase
> > >
> > >   Ignite .NET:
> > >   * Native persistence now works with a custom affinity function
> > >   * Fixed missing CacheEntryEventType.Removed event
> > >
> > > Complete list of closed issues:
> > >
> > >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=(project%20%3D%20%27Ignite%27%20AND%20fixVersion%20in%20(%272.7.6%27)%20AND%20status%20IN%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed))%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20
> > >
> > > DEVNOTES
> > >
> > >
> > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob;f=DEVNOTES.txt;h=307189059ae70834ead4c127cc18295ce4d0735a;hb=21f7ca41c4348909e2fd26ccf59b5b2ce1f4474e
> > >
> > > RELEASE NOTES
> > >
> > >
> > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob;f=RELEASE_NOTES.txt;h=810ecfd3baeeb378d868a0cf230cbe5c0fe298ea;hb=21f7ca41c4348909e2fd26ccf59b5b2ce1f4474e
> > >
> > > Release Verification Task run
> > >
> > >
> > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4594148=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote4CheckRcLicensesChecksum
> > >
> > > The vote is formal, see voting guidelines
> > > https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> > >
> > > +1 - to accept Apache Ignite 2.7.6-rc2
> > > 0 - don't care either way
> > > -1 - DO NOT accept Apache Ignite Ignite 2.7.6-rc2 (explain why)
> > >
> > > See notes on how to verify release here
> > > https://www.apache.org/info/verification.html
> > > and
> > >
> > >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-ReleaseVerification
> > >
> > > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours till September 16, 09:00
> > UTC.
> > >
> > >
> > https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/to?year=2019=9=16=09=0=0=utc-1
> > >
> > > -- Alexey Goncharuk
> > >
> >

Re: How to free up space on disc after removing entries from IgniteCache with enabled PDS?

2019-09-13 Thread Denis Magda 
The issue starts hitting others who deploy Ignite persistence in production:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12152

Alex, I'm curious is this a fundamental problem. Asked the same question in
JIRA but, probably, this discussion is a better place to get to the bottom
first:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10862

-
Denis


On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 6:01 AM Anton Vinogradov  wrote:

> Dmitriy,
>
> This does not look like a production-ready case :)
>
> How about
> 1) Once you need to write an entry - you have to chose not random "page
> from free-list with enough space"
> but "page from free-list with enough space closest to the beginning of the
> file".
>
> 2) Once you remove entry you have to merge the rest of the entries at this
> page to the
> "page from free-list with enough space closest to the beginning of the
> file"
> if possible. (optional)
>
> 3) Partition file tail with empty pages can bу removed at any time.
>
> 4) In case you have cold data inside the tail, just lock the page and
> perform migration to
> "page from free-list with enough space closest to the beginning of the
> file".
> This operation can be scheduled.
>
> On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 4:43 PM Dmitriy Pavlov  wrote:
>
> > In the TC Bot, I used to create the second cache with CacheV2 name and
> > migrate needed data from Cache  V1 to V2.
> >
> > After CacheV1 destroy(), files are removed and disk space is freed.
> >
> > ср, 9 янв. 2019 г. в 12:04, Павлухин Иван :
> >
> > > Vyacheslav,
> > >
> > > Have you investigated how other vendors (Oracle, Postgres) tackle this
> > > problem?
> > >
> > > I have one wild idea. Could the problem be solved by stopping a node
> > > which need to be defragmented, clearing persistence files and
> > > restarting the node? After rebalance the node will receive all data
> > > back without fragmentation. I see a big downside -- sending data
> > > across the network. But perhaps we can play with affinity and start
> > > new node on the same host which will receive the same data, after that
> > > old node can be stopped. It looks more as kind of workaround but
> > > perhaps it can be turned into workable solution.
> > >
> > > ср, 9 янв. 2019 г. в 10:49, Vyacheslav Daradur :
> > > >
> > > > Yes, it's about Page Memory defragmentation.
> > > >
> > > > Pages in partitions files are stored sequentially, possible, it makes
> > > > sense to defragment pages first to avoid interpages gaps since we use
> > > > pages offset to manage them.
> > > >
> > > > I filled an issue [1], I hope we will be able to find resources to
> > > > solve the issue before 2.8 release.
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10862
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 10:47 AM Павлухин Иван 
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I suppose it is about Ignite Page Memory pages defragmentation.
> > > > >
> > > > > We can get 100 allocated pages each of which becomes only e.g. 50%
> > > > > filled after removal some entries. But they will occupy a space for
> > > > > 100 pages on a hard drive.
> > > > >
> > > > > пт, 28 дек. 2018 г. в 20:45, Denis Magda :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Shouldn't the OS care of defragmentation? What we need to do is
> to
> > > give a
> > > > > > way to remove stale data and "release" the allocated space
> somehow
> > > through
> > > > > > the tools, MBeans or API methods.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Denis
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 6:24 AM Vladimir Ozerov <
> > > voze...@gridgain.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Vyacheslav,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > AFAIK this is not implemented. Shrinking/defragmentation is
> > > important
> > > > > > > optimization. Not only because it releases free space, but also
> > > because it
> > > > > > > decreases total number of pages. But is it not very easy to
> > > implement, as
> > > > > > > you have to both reshuffle data entries and index entries,
> > > maintaining
> > > > > > > consistency for concurrent reads and updates at the same time.
> Or
> > > > > > > alternatively we can think of offline defragmentation. It will
> be
> > > easier to
> > > > > > > implement and faster, but concurrent operations will be
> > prohibited.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 4:08 PM Vyacheslav Daradur <
> > > daradu...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Igniters, we have faced with the following problem on one of
> > our
> > > > > > > > deployments.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Let's imagine that we have used IgniteCache with enabled PDS
> > > during the
> > > > > > > > time:
> > > > > > > > - hardware disc space has been occupied during growing up of
> an
> > > amount
> > > > > > > > of data, e.g. 100Gb;
> > > > > > > > - then, we removed non-actual data, e.g 50Gb, which became
> > > useless for
> > > > > > > us;
> > > > > > > > - disc space stopped growing up with new data, but it was not
> > > > > > > > released, and still took 100Gb, instead

Re: Cache expiry policy not deleting records from disk(native persistence)

2019-09-13 Thread Artem Budnikov 

Hi Denis,

I updated the page about eviction policies. Not freeing up space on disk 
was not implemented for reasons explained in the dev-list thread. I'll 
update the page once more if/when a solution is implemented.


Artem

On 13.09.2019 00:34, Denis Magda wrote:

Shiva,

Hopefully, someone from the dev community will pick this ticket up 
soon and solve the task. In the meantime, Artem, would you mind 
documenting this limitation referring to ticket 10862?


-
Denis


On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 12:50 AM Shiva Kumar > wrote:


I have filed a bug
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12152 but this is
same as https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10862
Any idea on the timeline of these tickets?
In the documentation
https://apacheignite.readme.io/v2.7/docs/expiry-policies
it says when native persistence is enabled "*expired entries are
removed from both memory and disk tiers*" but in the disk it just
mark the pages as unwanted pages and same disk space used by these
unwanted pages will be used to store new pages but it will not
remove unwanted pages from disk and so it will not release disk
space used by these unwanted pages.

here is the developer's discussion link

http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/How-to-free-up-space-on-disc-after-removing-entries-from-IgniteCache-with-enabled-PDS-td39839.html


On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 11:53 PM Shiva Kumar
mailto:shivakumar@gmail.com>> wrote:

Hi
I have deployed ignite on kubernetes and configured two
seperate persistent volume for WAL and persistence.
The issue Iam facing is same as
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10862

Thanks
Shiva

On Mon, 9 Sep, 2019, 10:47 PM Andrei Aleksandrov,
mailto:aealexsand...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Hello,

I guess that generated WAL will take this disk space.
Please read about WAL here:

https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/write-ahead-log

Please provide the size of every folder under
/opt/ignite/persistence.

BR,
Andrei

9/6/2019 9:45 PM, Shiva Kumar пишет:

Hi all,
I have set cache expiry policy like this


 
 
          
              
                
                
                
                
                
                  
                    
                      
                        
                        
                      
                    
                  
                

              
          
 


And batch inserting records to one of the table which is
created with above cache template.
Around 10 minutes, I ingested ~1.5GB of data and after 10
minutes records started reducing(expiring) when I
monitored from sqlline.

0: jdbc:ignite:thin://192.168.*.*:10800> select count(ID)
from DIMENSIONS;


COUNT(ID)


248896

1 row selected (0.86 seconds)
0: jdbc:ignite:thin://192.168.*.*:10800> select count(ID)
from DIMENSIONS;


COUNT(ID)


222174

1 row selected (0.313 seconds)
0: jdbc:ignite:thin://192.168.*.*:10800> select count(ID)
from DIMENSIONS;


COUNT(ID)


118154

1 row selected (0.15 seconds)
0: jdbc:ignite:thin://192.168.*.*:10800>
0: jdbc:ignite:thin://192.168.*.*:10800> select count(ID)
from DIMENSIONS;


COUNT(ID)


76061

1 row selected (0.106 seconds)
0: jdbc:ignite:thin://192.168.*.*:10800>
0: jdbc:ignite:thin://192.168.*.*:10800> select count(ID)
from DIMENSIONS;


COUNT(ID)


41671

1 row selected (0.063 seconds)
0: jdbc:ignite:thin://192.168.*.*:10800> select

Re: [IEP-35] Monitoring & Profiling. Phase 2

2019-09-13 Thread Nikolay Izhikov 
Hello, Andrey.

> I really don't like name MonitoringList. First of all because it isn't
> about monitoring at all while can be useful for monitoring purposes.
> We already have SQL system views and I think that system view is good
> candidate for naming of new entity. 

SystemView is OK for me.
I will rename enity in the PR.

> I think akso that GridMetricManager is bad candidate for lists (system views) 
> management. 

For me, it seems that views and metrics is extension of one another.
If the user want to know some instant values(cache put count, cahe get latency) 
he use metrics
and one want to know list of running SQL queries one take a look into views. 

> There is no any interaction with lists on hot path of code flow
> and there is no any performance impact.

OK, let's remove it.

> Code generation for walkers is also redundant.

If you don't want, you can not use it.
I find it pretty usefull during development.

> I really don't understand why we should export system views content
> (especially periodically). Real life use case is take view content on
> demand. So we should have public API for it, SQL API and JMX. There is
> no need any exporters.

What if we want to export lists to log or via http, etc?

> Also it would be great to involve more people to this discussion.

Any feedback are welcome!


В Пт, 13/09/2019 в 15:13 +0300, Andrey Gura пишет:
> Nikolay,
> 
> thanks a lot for clarification! I added some comments to Upsource review [1].
> 
> Here I want to discuss some high-level issues.
> 
> 1. Naming
> 
> "There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache
> invalidation and naming things."
> -- Phil Karlton
> 
> I really don't like name MonitoringList. First of all because it isn't
> about monitoring at all while can be useful for monitoring purposes.
> 
> We already have SQL system views and I think that system view is good
> candidate for naming of new entity. As result we will have consistent
> naming which better describes domain.
> 
> I think akso that GridMetricManager is bad candidate for lists (system
> views) management. Because it isn't about metrics. May be new
> SystemViewManager will better fit to this purposes.
> 
> 2. Management
> 
> Lists (aka system views) have life cycle now. I believe that it is
> redundant functionality. There is no any reason for enabling/disabling
> lists. There is no any interaction with lists on hot path of code flow
> and there is no any performance impact.
> 
> So lists management can be reduced to lists creation and registration
> operations (which executes only on node start).
> 
> 3. Code generation
> 
> Code generation for walkers is also redundant. Amount of system views
> in the system is strongly limited (units not dozens) so it is easier
> to change walker by hand literally than navigate to code generator and
> run it. Moreover, first you should add Order annotation in the proper
> place and it make generator practically useless.
> 
> If you still see benefit that can bring Order annotation you can use
> reflection. Motivation is simple, system views are on not hot path and
> I expected that API for system views will not called frequently.
> 
> 4. Export
> 
> I really don't understand why we should export system views content
> (especially periodically). Real life use case is take view content on
> demand. So we should have public API for it, SQL API and JMX. There is
> no need any exporters.
> 
> 
> What do you think about it? Also it would be great to involve more
> people to this discussion.
> 
> [1] https://reviews.ignite.apache.org/ignite/review/IGNT-CR-1065
> 
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 6:24 PM Nikolay Izhikov  wrote:
> > 
> > Hello, Andrey.
> > 
> > Thanks, for joining the review.
> > 
> > Basic interface for objects list is `MonitoringList`. It provides the 
> > following features:
> > * name.
> > * description.
> > * row class.
> > * size.
> > * iterator for the list content.
> > * attribute walker (described below).
> > 
> > `MonitoringRow` is a marker interface for classes that can be used as a 
> > monitoring list content.
> > 
> > Internally, there is only one implementation of `MonitoringList`, for now, 
> > `MonitoringListAdapter`.
> > It adapts the content of some `ConcurrentMap` which uses widely in Ignite 
> > internals.
> > I think, will be another implementation in the follow-up PRs.
> > 
> > Public API changes:
> > 
> > * New registry created `ReadOnlyMonitoringListRegistry` It provides access:
> > * To all lists that exist in the Ignite.
> > * Ability to subscribe to the list creation/removal events.
> > 
> > * `MetricExporterSpi` changes:
> > * `setMonitoringListRegistry` method added
> > * `setMonitoringListExportFilter` method added.
> > 
> > `MonitoringRowAttributeWalker` is a helper class for exporter 
> > implementations.
> > Usually, exporter SPI iterates on `MonitoringRow` attributes.
> > `SqlViewExporterSpi`,

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.7.6-rc2

2019-09-13 Thread Ilya Kasnacheev 
+1 (binding)

Built from source, built C++ and .Net, was able to start such nodes,
checked that new default directory is where it is expected to be.

Regards,
-- 
Ilya Kasnacheev


пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 12:34, Alexey Zinoviev :

> +1 go ahead
>
> пт, 13 сент. 2019 г., 11:30 Alexey Goncharuk :
>
> > Dear Community,
> >
> > We have uploaded release candidate to
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/2.7.6-rc2/
> >
> > The following staging can be used for a dependent project for testing:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheignite-1471/
> >
> > This is a maintenance release for Ignite 2.7.5 addressing several
> usability
> > and stability issues.
> >
> > Tag name is 2.7.6-rc2:
> >
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/2.7.6-rc2
> >
> > 2.7.6 changes:
> > Ignite:
> >   * Changed default persistence directory location when IGNITE_HOME is
> not
> > set, native persistence files will not be stored in the temp directory
> > anymore
> >   * Fixed a bug that caused a SELECT query with an equality predicate on
> a
> > part of the primary compound key to return a single row even if the query
> > matched multiple rows
> >   * Fixed an issue that could cause data corruption during checkpointing
> >   * Fixed an issue where a row size was calculated incorrectly for shared
> > cache groups, which caused a tree corruption
> >   * Reduced java heap footprint by optimizing
> GridDhtPartitionsFullMessage
> > maps in exchange history
> >   * Fixed an issue where an outdated node with a destroyed cache caused
> the
> > cluster to hang
> >   * Fixed a bug that made it impossible to change the inline_size
> property
> > of an existing index after it was dropped and recreated with a different
> > value
> >   * Fixed an issue causing silent control.sh script fail when JAVA_HOME
> is
> > not set
> >   * Fixed an issue causing sporadic node failure when persistence is
> > enabled and WAL mmap is disabled
> >   * Fixed an issue causing potential PDS corruption when a node is killed
> > during checkpoint mark phase
> >
> >   Ignite .NET:
> >   * Native persistence now works with a custom affinity function
> >   * Fixed missing CacheEntryEventType.Removed event
> >
> > Complete list of closed issues:
> >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=(project%20%3D%20%27Ignite%27%20AND%20fixVersion%20in%20(%272.7.6%27)%20AND%20status%20IN%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed))%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20
> >
> > DEVNOTES
> >
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob;f=DEVNOTES.txt;h=307189059ae70834ead4c127cc18295ce4d0735a;hb=21f7ca41c4348909e2fd26ccf59b5b2ce1f4474e
> >
> > RELEASE NOTES
> >
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob;f=RELEASE_NOTES.txt;h=810ecfd3baeeb378d868a0cf230cbe5c0fe298ea;hb=21f7ca41c4348909e2fd26ccf59b5b2ce1f4474e
> >
> > Release Verification Task run
> >
> >
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4594148=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote4CheckRcLicensesChecksum
> >
> > The vote is formal, see voting guidelines
> > https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> >
> > +1 - to accept Apache Ignite 2.7.6-rc2
> > 0 - don't care either way
> > -1 - DO NOT accept Apache Ignite Ignite 2.7.6-rc2 (explain why)
> >
> > See notes on how to verify release here
> > https://www.apache.org/info/verification.html
> > and
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-ReleaseVerification
> >
> > This vote will be open for at least 72 hours till September 16, 09:00
> UTC.
> >
> >
> https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/to?year=2019=9=16=09=0=0=utc-1
> >
> > -- Alexey Goncharuk
> >
>

Re: [IEP-35] Monitoring & Profiling. Phase 2

2019-09-13 Thread Andrey Gura 
Nikolay,

thanks a lot for clarification! I added some comments to Upsource review [1].

Here I want to discuss some high-level issues.

1. Naming

"There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache
invalidation and naming things."
-- Phil Karlton

I really don't like name MonitoringList. First of all because it isn't
about monitoring at all while can be useful for monitoring purposes.

We already have SQL system views and I think that system view is good
candidate for naming of new entity. As result we will have consistent
naming which better describes domain.

I think akso that GridMetricManager is bad candidate for lists (system
views) management. Because it isn't about metrics. May be new
SystemViewManager will better fit to this purposes.

2. Management

Lists (aka system views) have life cycle now. I believe that it is
redundant functionality. There is no any reason for enabling/disabling
lists. There is no any interaction with lists on hot path of code flow
and there is no any performance impact.

So lists management can be reduced to lists creation and registration
operations (which executes only on node start).

3. Code generation

Code generation for walkers is also redundant. Amount of system views
in the system is strongly limited (units not dozens) so it is easier
to change walker by hand literally than navigate to code generator and
run it. Moreover, first you should add Order annotation in the proper
place and it make generator practically useless.

If you still see benefit that can bring Order annotation you can use
reflection. Motivation is simple, system views are on not hot path and
I expected that API for system views will not called frequently.

4. Export

I really don't understand why we should export system views content
(especially periodically). Real life use case is take view content on
demand. So we should have public API for it, SQL API and JMX. There is
no need any exporters.


What do you think about it? Also it would be great to involve more
people to this discussion.

[1] https://reviews.ignite.apache.org/ignite/review/IGNT-CR-1065

On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 6:24 PM Nikolay Izhikov  wrote:
>
> Hello, Andrey.
>
> Thanks, for joining the review.
>
> Basic interface for objects list is `MonitoringList`. It provides the 
> following features:
> * name.
> * description.
> * row class.
> * size.
> * iterator for the list content.
> * attribute walker (described below).
>
> `MonitoringRow` is a marker interface for classes that can be used as a 
> monitoring list content.
>
> Internally, there is only one implementation of `MonitoringList`, for now, 
> `MonitoringListAdapter`.
> It adapts the content of some `ConcurrentMap` which uses widely in Ignite 
> internals.
> I think, will be another implementation in the follow-up PRs.
>
> Public API changes:
>
> * New registry created `ReadOnlyMonitoringListRegistry` It provides access:
> * To all lists that exist in the Ignite.
> * Ability to subscribe to the list creation/removal events.
>
> * `MetricExporterSpi` changes:
> * `setMonitoringListRegistry` method added
> * `setMonitoringListExportFilter` method added.
>
> `MonitoringRowAttributeWalker` is a helper class for exporter implementations.
> Usually, exporter SPI iterates on `MonitoringRow` attributes.
> `SqlViewExporterSpi`, `JmxMetricExporterSpi` can be taken as an example.
> It can be implemented with Java reflection API, but I use more quick approach.
> `MonitoringRowAttributeWalker` can visit each attribute of the MonitoringRow 
> implementation.
> It's also, preserves, the order provided by the MonitoringRow implementation 
> author.
> It provides 2 main methods:
> * `visitAll(AttributeVisitor visitor);` - visits each attribute of 
> the some monitoring row class. Provides index, name and class of attribute to 
> the consumer.
> * `visitAll(R row, AttributeWithValueVisitor visitor)` - visits each 
> attribute of some monitoring row instance. Provides index, name, class, value 
> of attribute to the consumer.
>
>
> В Ср, 11/09/2019 в 16:30 +0300, Andrey Gura пишет:
> > Nikolai,
> >
> > I'm trying to review this PR but it is too large.
> >
> > Could you please describe problem and design of implemented solution?
> > Also javadocs for base interfaces aren't clear, too brief and doesn't
> > give any imagine about whole picture.
> >
> > At present it is very hard to understand the purposes of new
> > interfaces and walker generator, and design itself.
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 3:16 PM Nikolay Izhikov  wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello, Igniters.
> > >
> > > IEP-35. Monitoring Phase2 is ready [1]
> > > Please, join to the review!
> > >
> > > I've implemented:
> > >
> > > * Monitoring list engine.
> > > * Following list implemented:
> > > * Cache list
> > > * Cache group list
> > > * Compute task list
> > > * Service list.
> > >
> > > Engine details:
> > >
> > > *

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.7.6-rc2

2019-09-13 Thread Alexey Zinoviev 
+1 go ahead

пт, 13 сент. 2019 г., 11:30 Alexey Goncharuk :

> Dear Community,
>
> We have uploaded release candidate to
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/2.7.6-rc2/
>
> The following staging can be used for a dependent project for testing:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheignite-1471/
>
> This is a maintenance release for Ignite 2.7.5 addressing several usability
> and stability issues.
>
> Tag name is 2.7.6-rc2:
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/2.7.6-rc2
>
> 2.7.6 changes:
> Ignite:
>   * Changed default persistence directory location when IGNITE_HOME is not
> set, native persistence files will not be stored in the temp directory
> anymore
>   * Fixed a bug that caused a SELECT query with an equality predicate on a
> part of the primary compound key to return a single row even if the query
> matched multiple rows
>   * Fixed an issue that could cause data corruption during checkpointing
>   * Fixed an issue where a row size was calculated incorrectly for shared
> cache groups, which caused a tree corruption
>   * Reduced java heap footprint by optimizing GridDhtPartitionsFullMessage
> maps in exchange history
>   * Fixed an issue where an outdated node with a destroyed cache caused the
> cluster to hang
>   * Fixed a bug that made it impossible to change the inline_size property
> of an existing index after it was dropped and recreated with a different
> value
>   * Fixed an issue causing silent control.sh script fail when JAVA_HOME is
> not set
>   * Fixed an issue causing sporadic node failure when persistence is
> enabled and WAL mmap is disabled
>   * Fixed an issue causing potential PDS corruption when a node is killed
> during checkpoint mark phase
>
>   Ignite .NET:
>   * Native persistence now works with a custom affinity function
>   * Fixed missing CacheEntryEventType.Removed event
>
> Complete list of closed issues:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=(project%20%3D%20%27Ignite%27%20AND%20fixVersion%20in%20(%272.7.6%27)%20AND%20status%20IN%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed))%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20
>
> DEVNOTES
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob;f=DEVNOTES.txt;h=307189059ae70834ead4c127cc18295ce4d0735a;hb=21f7ca41c4348909e2fd26ccf59b5b2ce1f4474e
>
> RELEASE NOTES
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob;f=RELEASE_NOTES.txt;h=810ecfd3baeeb378d868a0cf230cbe5c0fe298ea;hb=21f7ca41c4348909e2fd26ccf59b5b2ce1f4474e
>
> Release Verification Task run
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4594148=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote4CheckRcLicensesChecksum
>
> The vote is formal, see voting guidelines
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
> +1 - to accept Apache Ignite 2.7.6-rc2
> 0 - don't care either way
> -1 - DO NOT accept Apache Ignite Ignite 2.7.6-rc2 (explain why)
>
> See notes on how to verify release here
> https://www.apache.org/info/verification.html
> and
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-ReleaseVerification
>
> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours till September 16, 09:00 UTC.
>
> https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/to?year=2019=9=16=09=0=0=utc-1
>
> -- Alexey Goncharuk
>

After IGNITE-12148 the Examples suite has unstable tests

2019-09-13 Thread Denis Garus 
Hello, Igniters!

I ran two times the Examples suite [1] on the master branch today and get
different results. It looks like some tests become unstable after merging
of task IGNITE-12148 [2]. I think tests result depend on an Agent that
executes suite.

1.
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Examples?branch=%3Cdefault%3E

2.
https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/cd5e39b783bc499837b569c2cf974a8fe308bcf2

[VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.7.6-rc2

2019-09-13 Thread Alexey Goncharuk 
Dear Community,

We have uploaded release candidate to
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/2.7.6-rc2/

The following staging can be used for a dependent project for testing:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheignite-1471/

This is a maintenance release for Ignite 2.7.5 addressing several usability
and stability issues.

Tag name is 2.7.6-rc2:
https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/2.7.6-rc2

2.7.6 changes:
Ignite:
  * Changed default persistence directory location when IGNITE_HOME is not
set, native persistence files will not be stored in the temp directory
anymore
  * Fixed a bug that caused a SELECT query with an equality predicate on a
part of the primary compound key to return a single row even if the query
matched multiple rows
  * Fixed an issue that could cause data corruption during checkpointing
  * Fixed an issue where a row size was calculated incorrectly for shared
cache groups, which caused a tree corruption
  * Reduced java heap footprint by optimizing GridDhtPartitionsFullMessage
maps in exchange history
  * Fixed an issue where an outdated node with a destroyed cache caused the
cluster to hang
  * Fixed a bug that made it impossible to change the inline_size property
of an existing index after it was dropped and recreated with a different
value
  * Fixed an issue causing silent control.sh script fail when JAVA_HOME is
not set
  * Fixed an issue causing sporadic node failure when persistence is
enabled and WAL mmap is disabled
  * Fixed an issue causing potential PDS corruption when a node is killed
during checkpoint mark phase

  Ignite .NET:
  * Native persistence now works with a custom affinity function
  * Fixed missing CacheEntryEventType.Removed event

Complete list of closed issues:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=(project%20%3D%20%27Ignite%27%20AND%20fixVersion%20in%20(%272.7.6%27)%20AND%20status%20IN%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed))%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20

DEVNOTES
https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob;f=DEVNOTES.txt;h=307189059ae70834ead4c127cc18295ce4d0735a;hb=21f7ca41c4348909e2fd26ccf59b5b2ce1f4474e

RELEASE NOTES
https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob;f=RELEASE_NOTES.txt;h=810ecfd3baeeb378d868a0cf230cbe5c0fe298ea;hb=21f7ca41c4348909e2fd26ccf59b5b2ce1f4474e

Release Verification Task run
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4594148=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote4CheckRcLicensesChecksum

The vote is formal, see voting guidelines
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html

+1 - to accept Apache Ignite 2.7.6-rc2
0 - don't care either way
-1 - DO NOT accept Apache Ignite Ignite 2.7.6-rc2 (explain why)

See notes on how to verify release here
https://www.apache.org/info/verification.html
and
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-ReleaseVerification

This vote will be open for at least 72 hours till September 16, 09:00 UTC.
https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/to?year=2019=9=16=09=0=0=utc-1

-- Alexey Goncharuk