Hi Igniters,
I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are more than
welcomed to help.
*Test with high flaky rate in master
ZookeeperDiscoverySegmentationAndConnectionRestoreTest.testStopNodeOnSegmentaion
+1
Yes, we can update the DEVNOTES.txt in the next release.
Regards,
Saikat
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 4:55 AM Maksim Stepachev
wrote:
> +1
>
> вт, 28 апр. 2020 г. в 11:27, Nikolay Izhikov :
>
> > *** Formal vote description fixed ***
> >
> > Dear Community,
> >
> > I have uploaded a release
Hi Igniters,
I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are more than
welcomed to help.
*Test with high flaky rate in master
PageMemoryImplTest.testCheckpointBufferCantOverflowMixedLoadRatioBased
Hi Igniters,
I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are more than
welcomed to help.
*Test with high flaky rate in master
AtomicPartitionCounterStateConsistencyTest.testPartitionConsistencyWithBackupsRestart
mstekl opened a new pull request #10:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/pull/10
I'm submitting a few set of improvements:
- Ran a fresh crawl and rebuilt sitemap.xml
- Fixed accessibility issues when using on header and homepage
- Changed the text for links btns
Hi Igniters,
I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are more than
welcomed to help.
If your changes can lead to this failure(s): We're grateful that you were a
volunteer to make the contribution to this project, but things change and you
may no longer be able to
mstekl opened a new pull request #9:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/pull/9
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to
Ok, I've updated IEP and POC accordingly:
* Config flag removed
* IPs and host names retrieval simplified - use existing node properties
and attributes instead of Compute
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 7:57 PM Igor Sapego wrote:
> I guess it makes sense. If anyone needs more control over connection
>
I guess it makes sense. If anyone needs more control over connection
we would need to implement a new feature anyway (like node filter we
discussed earlier)
Best Regards,
Igor
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 12:29 PM Pavel Tupitsyn
wrote:
> > enable the capability if the best effort affinity is on
>
Maxim Muzafarov created IGNITE-12963:
Summary: Request snapshot from remote node
Key: IGNITE-12963
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12963
Project: Ignite
Issue Type:
Hello. The calculator suggested a configuration based on 4 nodes with a
specific configuration each (2x5118N, 12x64GB of RAM, 2x480SSD system, 2x 1.6TB
NVMe base). The question is, can we limit the configuration to 3 nodes by
increasing the memory of each of them to 24x64GB and whether by
Hi, the ticket is ready for review.
[1] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/7728
вт, 28 апр. 2020 г. в 14:39, Sergey Antonov :
> Maxim, I'm talking about cluster upgrade through cluster stop -> binary
> update -> cluster start.
>
> вт, 28 апр. 2020 г. в 14:37, Maxim Muzafarov :
>
>> Sergey,
Hi Igniters,
I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are more than
welcomed to help.
*Test with high flaky rate in master-nightly
IgnitePdsWithTtlTest.testRebalancingWithTtlExpirable
Aleksey Plekhanov created IGNITE-12962:
--
Summary: Blacklist and whitelist of classes allowed to deserialize
via HTTP-REST should be supported
Key: IGNITE-12962
URL:
Hello, Alex.
+1 from me.
> 28 апр. 2020 г., в 15:03, Alex Plehanov написал(а):
>
> Hello guys,
>
> While we are still waiting for some tickets to resolve I propose to
> cherry-pick to 2.8.1 two more bugfixes:
> IGNITE-12933 Fixed node failure after put incorrect key class for cache
> with
Hello guys,
While we are still waiting for some tickets to resolve I propose to
cherry-pick to 2.8.1 two more bugfixes:
IGNITE-12933 Fixed node failure after put incorrect key class for cache
with indexed types
IGNITE-12855 Fixed node failure with concurrent get operation and entry
expiration
Maxim, I'm talking about cluster upgrade through cluster stop -> binary
update -> cluster start.
вт, 28 апр. 2020 г. в 14:37, Maxim Muzafarov :
> Sergey,
>
> Are you talking about a cluster rolling upgrade feature? AFAIK, Apache
> Ignite doesn't support this feature, so why we should care about
Sergey,
Are you talking about a cluster rolling upgrade feature? AFAIK, Apache
Ignite doesn't support this feature, so why we should care about it?
On Tue, 28 Apr 2020 at 14:32, Sergey Antonov wrote:
>
> Maxim,
>
> > should we _reject_ joining nodes which have different
> From my point of view,
Maxim,
> should we _reject_ joining nodes which have different
>From my point of view, it's a breaking change on cluster update.
We can get a different inline size in other scenarios too: as I know we did
some improvements in calculation effective (actual) index inline size.
Let's imagine, we
Hello!
Unfortunately, that's true. But the user can restart cluster after tables
creation and create secondary indexes (CREATE INDEX) after restart. My
workaround has a lot of limitations: it doesn't work with in-memory
clusters, it's unuseful.
вт, 28 апр. 2020 г. в 14:01, Ilya Kasnacheev :
>
Sergey, Ilya,
Since inline size for the `create table` clause not supported yet and
the IGNITE_MAX_INDEX_PAYLOAD_SIZE is the only option, should we
_reject_ joining nodes which have different
IGNITE_MAX_INDEX_PAYLOAD_SIZE value instead for allowing and printing
warning message? Thus we will
Hello!
Unfortunately and embarrassingly, we still do not support passing
INLINE_SIZE to CREATE TABLE, at least in 2.8.0.
This means IGNITE_MAX_INDEX_PAYLOAD_SIZE is the only option to create an
implicit primary key index with specified inline size.
Regards,
--
Ilya Kasnacheev
вт, 28 апр. 2020
Maxim Muzafarov created IGNITE-12961:
Summary: Start snapshot operation via control.sh
Key: IGNITE-12961
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12961
Project: Ignite
Issue
+1
вт, 28 апр. 2020 г. в 11:27, Nikolay Izhikov :
> *** Formal vote description fixed ***
>
> Dear Community,
>
> I have uploaded a release candidate of the two extension modules
> `ignite-spring-boot-autoconfigure` and
> `ignite-spring-boot-client-autoconfigure`.
>
> The following staging can
> enable the capability if the best effort affinity is on
I agree, makes sense.
Igor, what do you think?
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 8:25 AM Denis Magda wrote:
> Pavel,
>
> That would be a tremendous improvement for the recently release best effort
> affinity feature. Without this capability, we
Hi Denis,
The problem could be shown when you invoke CREATE INDEX without the
INLINE_SIZE parameter. You don't face with described problem If index
creates by CREATE_INDEX with explicit INLINE SIZE value.
вт, 28 апр. 2020 г. в 02:31, Denis Magda :
> Hi Sergey,
>
> Your changes look useful from
*** Formal vote description fixed ***
Dear Community,
I have uploaded a release candidate of the two extension modules
`ignite-spring-boot-autoconfigure` and
`ignite-spring-boot-client-autoconfigure`.
The following staging can be used for testing:
Hello, Saikat, Denis.
Thanks for feedback.
> 2. Also this voting is for Apache Ignite Spring Boot extensions 1.0.0 RC1
> instead of Apache Ignite Ignite 2.8.0-rc1. Is this correct?
Good catch, thank you.
> As you might remember, we agreed to update the release process [1]
I missed that we
Folks,
I keep working on crash recovery speed-up.
The main goal is to have put/get operations latency less than 500 ms on
node fail/left.
Currently, latency can be increased to seconds or even dozens of seconds.
The task is split to 2 threads
- Switch and tx recovery speed-up.
Speed-up can be
29 matches
Mail list logo
