Re: Fifo eviction for atomic cache

lanceMode, cacheMode) > > and found that the issue occurs only for atomic caches with > > writeSynchronizedMode=ASYNC|PRIMARY_SYNC > > Eviction for TX caches and for ATOMIC with > writeSynchronizedMode=FULL_SYNC > > works fine (always evicted 10 entries) > > > > Could someone take a look and explain such behavior? > > > > -- > > Sergey Kozlov > > > > > > > -- > Sergey Kozlov > -- Andrey Gura GridGain Systems, Inc. www.gridgain.com

Re: integration with spring boot

Oops, I didn't noticed. Ok, it means we already have this integration. On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 6:54 PM, Valentin Kulichenko < valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > Andrey, we already have this. See SpringCacheManager class. > > -Val > > On Thursday, November 5,

Re: integration with spring boot

nnotations-put > > We support all these? > > D. > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Andrey Gura <ag...@gridgain.com> wrote: > > > Oops, I didn't noticed. > > > > Ok, it means we already have this integration. > > > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2

Re: integration with spring boot

nline. > > > > Also note that we have a documentation page for this feature: > > https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/spring-caching > > > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Andrey Gura <ag...@gridgain.com> wrote: > > > > > We should not support

Re: 127.0.0.1 in VmIpFinder

gt; behavior seems very confusing. And actually it means that our examples > don't work out of the box with disabled multicast. > > This user seems to have the same issue: > > http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Unable-to-connect-to-Local-Node-Only-td1852.html > > -Val > -- Andrey Gura GridGain Systems, Inc. www.gridgain.com

Re: integration with spring boot

d with Spring boot? > > > http://docs.spring.io/spring-boot/docs/1.3.0.M1/reference/html/boot-features-caching.html > > If not, we should definitely add such integration. > > D. > -- Andrey Gura GridGain Systems, Inc. www.gridgain.com

Ignite nodes under different JDKs

this on warning message. So I have two questions: 1. Is there any objections about it? 2. What message will be more informative than current one ("Local node's java major version is different from remote node's one [locJvmMajVer=, rmtJvmMajVer=]")? -- Andrey Gura GridGain Sy

Re: Using IgniteContext in... well, Java context

, e.g. Java and Groovy, or there has to be JavaIgniteRDD > implementation > of it much like the state of things is in the Spark itself? > > Thanks for any feedback > -- > Cos > > -- Andrey Gura GridGain Systems, Inc. www.gridgain.com

Re: Cluster group affinity

, Andrey Kornev < > andrewkor...@hotmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > I have a user-defined cluster group and I'd like to be able to > > > > > consistently p

Re: Ignite nodes under different JDKs

o version? If both JVM has the same major version, but > different vendors, it might be even more important concern, than different > major versions of the same vendor. > > On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 8:48 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > On Thu,

Re: vert.x integration

wrote: > This question goes to Andrey Gura. > > Andrey, I remember you have been working on Vert.x integration and got > stuck on one bug in Ignite that had to be fixed before hand. Was that bug > fixed by now? Can you let us know how close we are in your opinion to > completing

Re: Asyncronous operations on distributed structures

"All previously > described methods have asynchronous analogs." But there are no async > operations in it's implemenation. > > Is this a bug in documentation of we forgot to implement them? > > Vladimir. > -- Andrey Gura GridGain Systems, Inc. www.gridgain.com

Re: ignite 1.4 status

Alexey Goncharuk is still working on ignite-1171. Alex please provide > > > > updates by the end of the day. > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1516 - performance > > offheap > > > > query benchmark is not fully recovered. Semyon will be fixing it. > > Sergi, > > > > can you please assist? > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-973 - Semyon has fixed > > race > > > > in > > > > cache logic, but issue is still reproducible due to possible issues > in > > > > indexing logic. Sergi, this is on you. Can you please take a look? > > > > > > > > --Yakov > > > > > > > > > > -- Andrey Gura GridGain Systems, Inc. www.gridgain.com

Re: Cluster group affinity

t; > > consistently pick the same node in the group for a given key. > Essentially, > > > what I want is a cluster group affinity that is not associated with any > > > cache. How can I do it? > > > > > > > Andrey, perhaps you could just take our affinity function and use it > > directly, no? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > Andrey > > > > > -- Andrey Gura GridGain Systems, Inc. www.gridgain.com

Re: What is jdbc:ignite:cfg ??

Done. I hope that is more clear now. On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 1:14 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 10:17 AM, Andrey Gura <ag...@gridgain.com> wrote: > > > Cos, > > > > sepcifies configuration file for Ignite cl

Re: What is jdbc:ignite:cfg ??

way to fetch node's config via JDBC somehow? > Or > this is just a simple error in the doc, which needs to be fixed? > > Would appreciate the insight from the team. Thanks! > Cos > > [1] > https://zeppelin.incubator.apache.org/docs/0.5.5-incubating/interpreter/

Re: What is jdbc:ignite:cfg ??

ve said configuration under > /etc/ignite/conf/default-config.xml ? Sorry, it's either I am a bit dense, > or > the doc isn't written to a layman > > Thanks in advance! > Cos > > On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 01:03PM, Andrey Gura wrote: > > Cos, > > > > JDBC

Re: EntryProcessor invoked twice

gniteTxHandler.java:524) > > > at > > > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxHandler.access$200(IgniteTxHandler.java:87) > > > at > > > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxHandler$6.apply(IgniteTxHandler.java:144) > > > at > > > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxHandler$6.apply(IgniteTxHandler.java:142) > > > at > > > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheIoManager.processMessage(GridCacheIoManager.java:580) > > > at > > > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheIoManager.onMessage0(GridCacheIoManager.java:280) > > > at > > > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheIoManager.handleMessage(GridCacheIoManager.java:198) > > > at > > > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheIoManager.access$000(GridCacheIoManager.java:77) > > > at > > > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheIoManager$1.onMessage(GridCacheIoManager.java:160) > > > at > > > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.managers.communication.GridIoManager.processRegularMessage0(GridIoManager.java:811) > > > at > > > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.managers.communication.GridIoManager.access$1500(GridIoManager.java:106) > > > at > > > > > > > > > org.apache.ignite.internal.managers.communication.GridIoManager$5.run(GridIoManager.java:774) > > > at > > > > > > > > > java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142) > > > at > > > > > > > > > java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617) > > > at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745) > > > > > > -Val > > > > > > -- Andrey Gura GridGain Systems, Inc. www.gridgain.com

Re: What is jdbc:ignite:cfg ??

ason to specify it > > > > either. > > > > > > > > > > It seems that the only properly required is clientMode=true, no? > > > > > > > > If this is the case, then _no_ config is really needed, perhaps? > > > > > &

Re: What is jdbc:ignite:cfg ??

; On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 10:17 AM, Andrey Gura <ag...@gridgain.com> wrote: > > > Done. I hope that is more clear now. > > > > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 1:14 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org > > > > wrote: > > > > > On Mo

SQL query doesn't work with binary marshaller

cache.query(new SqlQuery<Integer, ObjectValue>(ObjectValue.class, "_val=?").setArgs(val)); Iterator<Cache.Entry<Integer, ObjectValue>> iter = qry.iterator(); // empty iterator Is it known issue or I should create a ticket? -- Andrey Gura GridGain Systems, Inc. www.gridgain.com

Re: Deadlock detection usage

; > wrote: > > > >> I would make deadlock-detection into a separate page. This way it will > be > >> more prominent and easier to access. > >> > >> I think we can mention 2 topics on that page: > >> - deadlock-free transactions > >>

Re: Differences in default marshaller

. On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Yakov Zhdanov <yzhda...@apache.org> wrote: > Andrey Gura, can you please clarify? > > --Yakov > > 2016-01-06 22:06 GMT+03:00 Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org>: > > > On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 10:40PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:

Re: Differences in default marshaller

PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> wrote: > Andrey, > > Any chance we could upgrade Zeppelin to work with Ignite 1.5? > > D. > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 7:44 AM, Andrey Gura <ag...@gridgain.com> wrote: > > > Cos, > > > > the problem

Re: What is jdbc:ignite:cfg ??

n 14, 2016 at 8:42 AM, Andrey Gura <ag...@gridgain.com> wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > JFYI, I created ticket as result of this discussion: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-2382 > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 10:29 PM, Dm

Re: What is jdbc:ignite:cfg ??

ple with configuration. > 3. Query data using JDBC driver - example code and, if needed, > configuration to support it. > > Do you mind adding it? > > D. > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 7:50 AM, Andrey Gura <ag...@gridgain.com> wrote: > > > I didn't think that we sho

Re: Json support in Ignite

AffinityKeyField();* > > *}* > > > > It looks like we are over architecting here. > > Keys should not have many fields, and most likely will have one or two. > Iterating through fields and generating hash-code or equals the standard > way seems reasonable (as opposed to c

Re: What is jdbc:ignite:cfg ??

; > > The second option sounds good, yet the interpreter still needs to have > a > > > particular cache name in the configuration, which now looks weird > because > > > I am > > > working with multiple caches at once. > > > > > > It is pos

IgniteCompute.withAsync can execute tasks synchronously

should caller thread execute task or not. Maybe I missed something and there is better way to solve this problem. I will be grateful for any advice or idea. -- Andrey Gura GridGain Systems, Inc. www.gridgain.com

Re: Transformers in SCAN queries

]. Please provide any additional > comments there. > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-2546 > > -Val > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Andrey Gura <ag...@gridgain.com> wrote: > > > Sergi, > > > > > > > What you are going to

Re: Transformers in SCAN queries

R> transfomer); *because I don't see how these transformers > will work for example with SQL, but this API makes you think that > transformers are supported for all the query types. > > Sergi > > 2016-02-04 16:46 GMT+03:00 Andrey Gura <ag...@gridgain.com>: > > &g

Re: IgniteCompute.withAsync can execute tasks synchronously

I've created ticket https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-2646 On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Andrey Gura <ag...@gridgain.com> wrote: > Dmitry, > > GridTaskProcessor does't know what kind of IgniteCompute implementation > was used by client code. So we need

Re: [jira] [Created] (IGNITE-2493) Get rid fo sun.misc.Cleaner in PlatformMemoryPool.

; Reporter: Vladimir Ozerov > Assignee: Vladimir Ozerov > Fix For: 1.6 > > > > > > > -- > This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA > (v6.3.4#6332) > -- Andrey Gura GridGain Systems, Inc. www.gridgain.com

Re: About the Jira https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1481

CAL; - warning about ignoring affinity function parameter should be moved from validate() method to intialize() method. I hope this will help you. On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Ken Cheng <kcheng@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Andrey Gura, > > I am very new to Ignite, I am going

Re: Ticket IGNITE-1497

wrote: > Hello Thorsten! > > I am not working on this ticket and most probably will not have time to > start in nearest future. > > I am CCing project's dev list. Andrey Gura, can you please respond - > whether this issue is fixed or not with > https://issues.apache.o

Fwd: Ticket IGNITE-1497

Thorsten, good news! I'll close IGNITE-1497 ticket. Thanks a lot! -- Forwarded message -- From: Thorsten Raff <torde.r...@gmail.com> Date: Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:20 PM Subject: Re: Ticket IGNITE-1497 To: Andrey Gura <ag...@gridgain.com> Hi Andrey, I have built

Apache Ignite based cluster manager for Vert.x is part of Vert.x official stack now

. -- Andrey Gura GridGain Systems, Inc. www.gridgain.com

Re: Updating Ignite Prerequisites Page

Magda <dma...@gridgain.com> wrote: > Igniters, > > In my understanding the Prerequisites page [1] is out of date since it > doesn't contain IBM JDK and Solaris among JDK's and OS's lists. > > *Andrey Gura, > *Do you know IBM JDK and Solaris versions Ignite was tested

Re: Deadlock detection usage

rrupt the deadlock > detection process? > > To my knowledge, the deadlock detection process should run after > transaction has timed out and should include the deadlocked keys into the > timeout exception message. Am I wrong? > > D. > > On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Andrey Gu

Re: Eviction Events with offheap values

ent fired, no? Can you please > file a ticket on it? > > Thanks, > D. > > On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Andrey Gura <ag...@gridgain.com> wrote: > > > As I can see from GridCacheSwapManager code Ignite doesn't fire eviction > > events from offheap. > &

Re: Deadlock detection usage

nsaction is being blocked? If it is the transaction > in deadlock, then I think it should not matter, as it is blocked anyway. > > D. > > On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Andrey Gura <ag...@gridgain.com> wrote: > > > Dmitry, > > > > Do you think that we should confi

Re: Halfway to Ignite 1.6

, I propose to start testing and fixing ignite-1.6 > source > >>> code to provide stable release. > >>> > >>> As you know we have a huge amount of tests and some of them now failing > >>> at release branch. > >>> Fails can be found here: > >>> > >>> > http://149.202.210.143:8111/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests=projectOverview_IgniteTests=ignite-1.6 > >>> > >>> So, feel free to start investigations and fix issues :) > >>> > >> > >> > > > -- Andrey Gura GridGain Systems, Inc. www.gridgain.com

Re: Deadlock detection usage

showing how to use it? I would like to > add the example and some words on the feature to readme. io so that the > communicate can leverage from this. > > — > Denis > -- Andrey Gura GridGain Systems, Inc. www.gridgain.com

Re: Deadlock detection usage

user need to modify > these properties - IGNITE_TX_DEADLOCK_DETECTION_MAX_ITERS and > IGNITE_TX_DEADLOCK_DETECTION_TIMEOUT. > > Could you elaborate on the procedure more technically so that its clear > why these properties are needed? > > — > Denis > > On May

Re: Eviction Events with offheap values

> to make Ignite expire values automatically. > > Did this help? > > > 2016-05-13 19:49 GMT+03:00 Andrey Gura <ag...@gridgain.com>: > > > Alexei, Abraham, > > > > Eviction policy configuration doesn't make sense for OFFHEAP_TIERED mode. > > Evi

Re: Deadlock detection usage

ons > < > https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/transactions#deadlock-detection-in-pessimistic-transactions > > > > — > Denis > > > On May 23, 2016, at 2:28 PM, Andrey Gura <ag...@gridgain.com> wrote: > > > > Dmitry, > > > > In this case "blocked"

Re: Cache metrics return incorrect values

ics().getOffHeapGets()); > > We execute only put, but get counter also incremented. > > Is anyone has another opinion? > > > > On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Andrey Gura <ag...@gridgain.com> wrote: > > > Denis, > > > > I disagree. readOffheapPointe

Re: Cache metrics return incorrect values

ch receive pointer increase statistic (OffHeap get I mean), then > each > > OffHeap put will increased OffHeap get, because readOffheapPointer take > > place on OffHeap put. > > > > The thing confuses my: > > Has any rules metrics works? > > Where works with metrics value must take place? > > -- Andrey Gura GridGain Systems, Inc. www.gridgain.com

Re: Distributed joins for JDBC

t; connection.createStatement().unwrap(IgniteStatement.class);* > > * stmt.setDistributedJoins(true);* > > *stmt.executeQuery("...");* > > > > What do you think? > > > -- Andrey Gura GridGain Systems, Inc. www.gridgain.com

Re: All BinaryObjects created by BinaryObjectBuilder stored at the same partition by default

> > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > - Alex > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > View this message in context: > > > > > > > > > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/All-BinaryObjects-created-by-BinaryObjectBuilder-stored-at-the-same-partition-by-default-tp8042p10304.html > > > > Sent from the Apache Ignite Developers mailing list archive at > > > Nabble.com. > > > > > > > > > > -- Andrey Gura GridGain Systems, Inc. www.gridgain.com

Re: All BinaryObjects created by BinaryObjectBuilder stored at the same partition by default

> >> without a hash code is normal situation. > >> > >> > > I would not only print warning, but throw exception, if an object > without a > > hashCode ends up on a put or read operation in cache. > > > > > >> On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 9:00 AM, An

Re: IGNITE-3407 HTTP REST: query commands without pageSize failed with NPE

e know if any changes required. > > Regards, > Saikat > > [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/927 > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3407 > -- Andrey Gura GridGain Systems, Inc. www.gridgain.com

Re: Inaccurate documentation about transactions

>From my point of view @IgniteTransactional annotation is redundant entity which will just confuse and lead to questions like "How to use this annotation?" I think documention update is better way. On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 1:50 PM, Evgeniy Stanilovskiy wrote: > postgres has

Re: Remove CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.CLOCK mode.

me. >> >> -Val >> >> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 5:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Igniters, >>> >>> After remove CLOCK mode, CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode enum contains now only >>> one value PRIMARY. An

Re: Remove CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.CLOCK mode.

8, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Maxim, >> >> Yes, this setting doesn't make sense anymore. So we need remove all >> related methods. >> >> Also there is component called GridClockSyncProcessor that also should &

Re: REVIEW IGNITE-2552 EvictionPolicies refactored, logic changed

Hi, Aleksey! Thank you for contribution! I've reviewed your changes and have some comments (mostly cosmetic). Could you please fix this comment? See review in Upsource for details. On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 2:17 PM, ALEKSEY KUZNETSOV wrote: > Plz, review my PR : >

Re: Remove CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.CLOCK mode.

st > GridCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderReloadAllSelfTest > IgniteCachePutRetryAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest > GridCacheValueConsistencyAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderSelfTest > IgniteCacheAtomicPrimaryWriteOrderExpiryPolicyTest > > ok? :) > >> 1 марта 2017 г., в 2:04, Andrey Gura <a

Re: Remove CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.CLOCK mode.

I think that it is ok. On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx@gmail.com> wrote: > Ok. What do you say for the rest? > >> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:15, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> написал(а): >> >> Maxim, >> >> I think that du

Re: code refactoring suggestion

Aleksey, if you talk about fut.listen() then it doesn't make sense. listen() call checks whether future is already completed and if it completed invokes passed listener from current thread. On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 12:42 PM, ALEKSEY KUZNETSOV wrote: > Hi all ! During

Re: Remove CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.CLOCK mode.

г., в 12:07, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx@gmail.com> >> написал(а): >> > >> > Andrey, >> > >> > Please review PR again. >> > >> >> 1 марта 2017 г., в 18:47, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> написал(а): >> >> >> >&

Re: Code Review Tool Proposal: Upsource

+1 Great tool. On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 3:19 PM, Anton Vinogradov wrote: > +1 > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 3:08 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn > wrote: > > > Igniters, > > > > We have set up Upsource code review tool at > > http://reviews.ignite.apache.org/ >

Re: Apache Ignite 1.8 Release

Vladimir, IGNITE-2968 and IGNITE-2969 introduce deadlock detection for transactions on near caches and for optimistic transactions. I think it should be added to release notes. On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 3:08 PM, Vladimir Ozerov wrote: > Folks, > > I need to create RELEASE

Re: [VOTE] Use Upsource for Code Review

+1 On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > Sergi, > > I don't think we should enforce it. > "Official" means that it will be allowed, linked and described in wiki. > > It is up to contributor and reviewer to use it. > For example, if the changes are

Re: Updating Ignite Interpreter Guide on Zeppelin

Hi, Denis. I'll try to fix this situation and notify you and community in this thread. On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 11:25 PM, Denis Magda wrote: > Andrey G., > > As a maintainer of Ignite and Zeppelin Integration please contact Zeppelin > guys asking them to update the

IgniteSemaphore and failoverSafe flag

Hi all! Guys, could somebody explain semantic of failoverSafe flag in IgniteSemaphore. From my point of view the test below should work but it fails: public void testFailoverReleasePermits() throws Exception { Ignite ignite = grid(0); IgniteSemaphore sem =

Re: Updating Ignite Interpreter Guide on Zeppelin

Hi, all. I've update Ignite interpreter docs in Apache Zeppelin repository. PR: https://github.com/apache/zeppelin/pull/1581 If you have some comments please notify. On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 4:08 PM, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi, Denis. > > I'll try to fix this situa

Re: IgniteSemaphore and failoverSafe flag

gt; > It should be a minor fix, will be ready for 1.8. > > Best regards, > Vladisav > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 5:41 PM, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Hi all! > > > > Guys, could somebody explain semantic

Re: Batch DML queries design discussion

Alex, In most cases JdbcQueryTask should be executed locally on client node started by JDBC driver. JdbcQueryTask.QueryResult res = loc ? qryTask.call() : ignite.compute(ignite.cluster().forNodeId(nodeId)).call(qryTask); Is it valid behavior after introducing DML functionality? In cases

Re: NullPointerException on ScanQuery

Hi, I've looked at your code. First of all you have races in your code. For example your start two threads and destroy caches before thread is finished and it leads to cache closed error. Moreover, you stops application before any thread finished and it leads to topology changing and NPE. The

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Ignite 1.8.0 Released

Hi all I have a comment about release notes. Transactions deadlock detection was implemented in Apache Ignite 1.7. But this implementation is limited by pessimistic transactions only and doesn't support transactions on near caches. In Apache Ignite 1.8 release implemented deadlock detection that

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ignite 1.8.0 RC1

+1 (non-binding) 6 дек. 2016 г. 1:37 PM пользователь "Alexey Kuznetsov" < akuznet...@apache.org> написал: > +1 (binding) > > Downloaded > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/1.8.0-rc1/ > apache-ignite-1.8.0-src.zip > OK > > >sha1sum -c *.sha1 > apache-ignite-1.8.0-src.zip: OK > >

Re: NullPointerException on ScanQuery

Hi, As I wrote already I don't see any race for stable topology. Problems are possible on unstable topology. You can try wait for topology version will be the same on all nodes in cluster and avoid this race. Unfortunately I can't see your code except of example that has some drawbacks mentioned

Re: Update ignite version for Camel, Zeppelin, Vert.x and MyBatis

Vert.x - updated. Zeppelin - PR created and should be merged soon. On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> wrote: > Denis, > > I'll update Vert.x and Zeppelin dependency versions during this week. > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Denis Magda <

Re: Update ignite version for Camel, Zeppelin, Vert.x and MyBatis

Denis, I'll update Vert.x and Zeppelin dependency versions during this week. On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Denis Magda wrote: > Raul K., Andrey G., Roman S., > > Would you mind updating pom files of the external projects [1] Ignite is > integrated with by setting its

Re: Remove CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.CLOCK mode.

RIMARY. >>>> >>>> Any objections? >>>> >>>> — >>>> Denis >>>> >>>>> On Feb 27, 2017, at 8:09 AM, Kozlov Maxim <dreamx@gmail.com >>>>> <mailto:dreamx@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>> &g

Re: Ignite-4795 - ready for review

Dmitry, see JIRA ticket for review comments. On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 6:13 PM, Denis Magda wrote: > Hello Dmitriy, thanks! Someone will have a look at your changes soon. Sorry > for the delay. > > — > Denis > >> On Mar 27, 2017, at 3:24 AM, Дмитрий Рябов

Re: Distribution of keys to partitions

Michael, it makes sense only for cases when partitions count is power of two. Affinity function doesn't have this limitation. Bu, of course, we can check, that partitions count is power of two and use optimized hash code calculation. On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 4:09 PM, Michael Griggs

Re: Distribution of keys to partitions

lmost no one changes it. If this change actually provides > better distribution, it absolutely makes sense to do it. > > Michael, can you create a Jira ticket and put you findings there? > > -Val > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 3:58 PM, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> wrote:

Re: Ignite-4795 - ready for review (Inherit TransactionException and update Javadoc)

st have only 1 PR, isn't it?). > So ticket has only one attached link to "GitHub Pull Request #1630". > > 2017-04-10 14:24 GMT+03:00 Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org>: > >> Dmitry, >> >> this review is in progress. But I'm confused about PR number because

Re: transaction , waiting for prepare response

Aleksey, timer like you are mentioned exists - it is transaction timeout. On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 3:25 PM, ALEKSEY KUZNETSOV wrote: > Igniters! If we started transaction, and in phase prepare the primary node > doesnt receive GridDhtPrepareResponse then the transaction

Re: Ignite-4795 - ready for review (Inherit TransactionException and update Javadoc)

Dmitry, thanks a lot for your contribution. Changes are merged into master branch. On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 7:07 PM, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> wrote: > Thanks, Dmitry! I've reviewed your changes again and will merge it > after TC results. > > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 3:08

Re: ignite-3682 - GridFunc: move all inner anonymous classes to separate top-level classes.

Vyacheslav, thank you for contribution! Your changes are merged into master branch. On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur wrote: > I've received answers in the issue. > > Ready for review. > > 2017-03-16 10:14 GMT+03:00 Vyacheslav Daradur

Re: Ignite-4795 - ready for review (Inherit TransactionException and update Javadoc)

Dmitry, this review is in progress. But I'm confused about PR number because in JIRA ticket we discussed PR 1631. What is actual PR number for latest changes? On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 11:38 AM, Дмитрий Рябов wrote: > Hello, igniters. Please, review. > > PR:

Re: Prohibit stateful affinity (FairAffinityFunction)

Guys, It seems that both mentioned problem have the same root cause: each cache has personal affinity function instance and it leads to perfromance problem (we retry the same calcualtions for each cache) and problem related with fact that FailAffinityFunction is statefull (some co-located cache

Re: ignite-3682 - GridFunc: move all inner anonymous classes to separate top-level classes.

> BTW, looks unusually that the master-branch contains separate commits of > this task. > > > 2017-04-12 19:13 GMT+03:00 Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org>: > >> Vyacheslav, >> >> thank you for contribution! Your changes are merged into master branch. >> >

Re: Remove CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.CLOCK mode.

ests - http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId= > IgniteTests_RunAll_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521% > 2Fhead=buildTypeStatusDiv <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/ > viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll_ > IgniteTests=pull/1521/head=buildTypeStatusDiv> > > > 7 мар

Re: Remove CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.CLOCK mode.

ion.writeTo(ByteBuffer buf, MessageWriter writer) > - GridCacheVersion.readFrom(ByteBuffer buf, MessageReader reader) > > use globalTime variable, must be removed case 0: (in both methods) or replace > globalTime? > > > >> 2 марта 2017 г., в 16:58, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> написал

Re: REVIEW IGNITE-2552 EvictionPolicies refactored, logic changed

wrote: > lets review code at github rather than upsource later on. Because, the > later is too slow and bring no substantial benefits compared github > > ср, 1 мар. 2017 г. в 18:04, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org>: > >> Hi, Aleksey! >> >> Thank you for contributi

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Ignite 1.9.0 Released

onfluence/display/IGNITE/External+Integrations> > > — > Denis > >> On Mar 7, 2017, at 11:47 AM, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> JFYI >> >> Also today Vert.x 3.4.0 was released with Apache Ignite 1.9 based >> cluster manag

Re: Remove CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.CLOCK mode.

t;>> Tests_RunAll_IgniteTests=pull%2F1521%2Fhead=buildTypeStatusDiv >>> <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=Ignit >>> eTests_RunAll_IgniteTests=pull/1521/head=buildTypeStatusDiv> >>> >>> > 7 марта 2017 г., в 14:15, Andrey Gura <ag...@ap

Re: REVIEW IGNITE-2552 EvictionPolicies refactored, logic changed

Aleksey, Thanks for your contribution! I've merged this PR into master branch. See JIRA issue comment for details. On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> wrote: > Aleksey, > > I don't see any new changes. So I'll check TC and merge changes today. > >

Re: REVIEW IGNITE-2552 EvictionPolicies refactored, logic changed

Aleksey, I don't see any new changes. So I'll check TC and merge changes today. On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 10:20 AM, ALEKSEY KUZNETSOV <alkuznetsov...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi! Can u plz review ticket once more > > вт, 7 мар. 2017 г. в 18:52, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org>: >

Re: starting grids in tests

startGrids() method starts nodes sequentially, whille startGridsMultiThread() does it in parallel. Moreover, startGridsMultiThreaded() waits for finishing of partition map exchange. On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 4:43 PM, ALEKSEY KUZNETSOV wrote: > Hi All! > When would you

Re: REVIEW IGNITE-2552 EvictionPolicies refactored, logic changed

Aleksey, thanks! I answered in JIRA ticket. On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 10:56 AM, ALEKSEY KUZNETSOV <alkuznetsov...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've fixed the comments. > http://reviews.ignite.apache.org/ignite/review/IGNT-CR-98 > > пт, 3 мар. 2017 г. в 19:23, Andrey Gura <ag...@apac

Re: Remove CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.CLOCK mode.

lTime == otherGlobalTime || ignoreTime) { // => if (ignoreTime) { >> . >> } >> else >> return globalTime > otherGlobalTime ? 1 : -1; // => return -1; >> >> and, >> GridCacheMvcc class, >> SER_VER_COMPARATOR is comparator by globalTime var.

Re: general question

t; certain Ignite instance?". In other words, i want to make sure N1 doesn't > contain C1 cache. Is there a function F() as following : F (N1) = null , > F(N2) = C1. > > пн, 6 мар. 2017 г. в 16:54, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org>: > >> Aleksey, >> >> node

Re: general question

Aleksey, node N1 must not contain C1 cache data (must not be affinity node for cache C1), but N1 node must to know about C1 cache (must jave C1 cache descriptor) in order to provide access to C1 cache from this node. On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 4:36 PM, ALEKSEY KUZNETSOV

Re: Remove CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.CLOCK mode.

er to replace this variable? > > >> 3 марта 2017 г., в 19:19, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> написал(а): >> >> Maxim, >> >> I think the next implementation will be good enough: >> >> public IgniteUuid asGridUuid() { >>return new IgniteUu

Re: Remove CacheAtomicWriteOrderMode.CLOCK mode.

;dreamx@gmail.com> написал(а): >> >> Andrey, in GridTimeSyncProcessorSelfTest class methods: testTimeSync() and >> testTimeSyncChangeCoordinator() also removed? >> >> >>> 6 марта 2017 г., в 18:42, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> написал(а): >

Re: code refactoring suggestion

Aleksey, once again, listener will be called directly in GridFutureAdapter.listen() method if future already completed. 1. execute prepareAsync() 2. prepare phase answer got 3. listener binded (actually not binded but called) @Override public void listen(IgniteInClosure> lsnr0) { assert

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >