Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)

[Dmitry Pavlov]

+1 for Apache Way in decision making (it states there should not be time 
pressure for the decision making).

0 for removal
0 for moving to extensions

but since Aleksei is an expert here, it makes sense to me to wait for him.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2023/08/16 17:32:55 Aleksei Zinovev wrote:
> Hi, I have objection for fast merging, (not for moving) as a module
> maintainer.
> 
> I never used ignite extension, need a time to be familiar with it and test
> the pr.
> 
> Please postpone it till 10 september.
> 
> I don't understand reasons to do it so fast. I suppose it's ok to wait
> 15-20 days with PR
> 
> Thanks for collaboration and doing this work.
> 

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.11.0 RC2

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Thanks to Maxim and kudos to Alexey Gidaspov, who was serving role of Release 
manager during all init, rampdown and stabilization phase. 

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/09/21 09:01:55, Pavel Tupitsyn  wrote: 
> Maxim,
> 
> I'll prepare a dedicated blog post about Ignite.NET changes later this week.
> Thanks for driving the release!
> 
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 11:20 PM Maxim Muzafarov  wrote:
> 
> > Denis,
> >
> > The post is added:
> > https://blogs.apache.org/ignite/entry/apache-ignite-2-11-stabilization
> >
> > I've fixed the image according to your suggestions.
> >
> > On Mon, 20 Sept 2021 at 21:35, Denis Magda  wrote:
> > >
> > > Maxim, thanks for driving the release and preparing the announcement
> > > article!
> > >
> > > A few questions:
> > >
> > >- Should "dev" be replaced with "2.11" on the picture of the cellular
> > >clusters deployment section?
> > >- Will the article be published on our blogs.apache.org page?
> > >
> > > -
> > > Denis
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 9:36 PM Maxim Muzafarov 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Pavel,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I've prepared a draft blog post [1] for the 2.11 release announcement
> > > > message, however, this post doesn't include changes related to the
> > > > .NET part of the Apache Ignite. Will you prepare a dedicated post
> > > > related to the .NET changes or I should include them in this one?
> > > >
> > > > Folks,
> > > > all the comments are welcome.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > > >
> > https://github.com/Mmuzaf/mmuzaf.github.io/blob/main/_post/Release_Newsletter_211.md
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 16 Sept 2021 at 17:21, Maxim Muzafarov 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello, Igniters!
> > > > >
> > > > > Apache Ignite 2.11.0 release (RC2) has been accepted.
> > > > >
> > > > > 5 - "+1" votes received.
> > > > > 1 - "+0,5" vote received.
> > > > >
> > > > > Here are the votes received:
> > > > >
> > > > >  - Pavel Tupitsyn (binding)
> > > > >  - Alex Plehanov (binding)
> > > > >  - Nikolay Izhikov (binding)
> > > > >  - Ilya Kasnacheev
> > > > >  - Ivan Daschinsky
> > > > >  - Zhenya Stanilovsky
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Here is the link to the voting thread -
> > > > >
> > > >
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rab233aa7d737b84b678fb74c81a867e3aad270471a2aac85a4d35cb8%40%3Cdev.ignite.apache.org%3E
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you!
> > > >
> >
> 

Re: [DISCUSSION] Separate Jira project and Confluence space for Ignite 3

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Ok, if nobody minds, I'll create spaces a bit later.

I hope it is not too urgent.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/09/21 10:37:42, Valentin Kulichenko  
wrote: 
> Hi Dmitry,
> 
> According to Infra, this has to be done through http://selfserve.apache.org/,
> but only PMC chairs have access.
> 
> Could you please assist with the creation of the Jira project and
> Confluence space?
> 
> -Val
> 
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 10:46 AM Valentin Kulichenko <
> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Infra requests created:
> >
> >- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-22349
> >- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-22350
> >
> > -Val
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 10:50 AM Petr Ivanov  wrote:
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Since we've agreed that there are two projects (that are Ignite2 and
> >> Ignite3), separate development environments seem to be logical and natural
> >> course of things.
> >>
> >> > On 18 Sep 2021, at 12:42, Alexander Polovtcev 
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > +1
> >> > This is a welcome proposal, because we already have some pending Ignite
> >> 3
> >> > specific documents, and it is not clear where to put them at the moment.
> >> >
> >> > On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 4:22 AM Valentin Kulichenko <
> >> > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Igniters,
> >> >>
> >> >> I think it's clear to all of us that Ignite 2.x and 3.x will coexist
> >> for a
> >> >> while. They are developed in separate Git repos, but we still
> >> accumulate
> >> >> the tickets for both versions in the same Jira project, which seems to
> >> >> complicate the ticket management.
> >> >>
> >> >> For example, we use the "ignite-3" label for 3.x tickets, but this
> >> approach
> >> >> is fragile. If someone forgets to add the label to a new ticket, it's
> >> >> likely to be lost. We need a better separation.
> >> >>
> >> >> All the above is true for Wiki as well - we use a single Confluence
> >> space.
> >> >>
> >> >> I suggest creating a new Jira project and a new Confluence space for
> >> Ignite
> >> >> 3 and moving all the relevant tickets and pages there.
> >> >>
> >> >> Any thoughts or objections?
> >> >>
> >> >> -Val
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > With regards,
> >> > Aleksandr Polovtcev
> >>
> >>
> 

[ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Kseniya Romanova

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hello Ignite community,

The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Ignite
has invited Kseniya Romanova to become a member of the PMC (and committer 
automatically)
and we are pleased to announce that she has accepted.

Kseniya did a fantastic work to make Ignite Summit possible, and the Cloud 
Edition is on the way. She drives a lot of recurrent community related 
activities such as Saint-Petersburg and Moscow Apache Ignite meetups (both 
offilne and online). 

These community efforts are not so measurable as code contirbution or user 
support, but these meetups and events helps community to collaborate.  

Apache communities can welcome non-technical people as their PMC members.

Being a committer enables easier contribution to the
project since there is no need to go via the patch
submission process. This should enable better productivity.
A PMC member helps manage and guide the direction of the project.

Please join me in in congratulating Kseniya on her new role.

Best Regards,
Dmitriy Pavlov 
on behalf of Apache Ignite PMC

Re: TC step problem

[Dmitry Pavlov]

I guess that Ilya is rigth.

It migth worth to update the instruction a little bit to avoid such questions 
(for 2.11 use 2.11; and for 2.11.1 use 2.11.1).

Alexey, WDYT?

On 2021/08/27 09:56:45, Ilya Kasnacheev  wrote: 
> Hello!
> 
> I guess the branch version should be 2.11 and not 2.11.0 since it is called
> ignite-2.11
> 
> Regards,
> -- 
> Ilya Kasnacheev
> 
> 
> пт, 27 авг. 2021 г. в 11:41, Alexey Gidaspov :
> 
> > Hi, ALL!
> >
> > I'm preparing vote for 2.11 release and tried to start compare with
> > previous release on TC [1]. Something's gone wrong. Can anyone tell what am
> > I doing wrong?
> >
> > [1]
> > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_IgniteRelease72CheckFileConsistency/6153997
> >
> 

Re: [Announcement] Apache Ignite 2.11 Code Freeze started

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Мах, the vote is about to come.

So is it a sufficient reason to downvote release?

Would you cast -1 for RC for that case?

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/08/27 12:46:24, Maxim Muzafarov  wrote: 
> Folks,
> 
> 
> I've been faced these issues, which seems to be a blocker for the
> release. Please, take a look and share your thoughts.
> 
> The server node fails when the client node with the higher java
> version connects to it [1].
> The Apache Ignite build fails with missing dependency [2].
> 
> 
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14725
> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15388
> 
> On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 16:56, Maxim Muzafarov  wrote:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 16:27, Ivan Daschinsky  wrote:
> > >
> > > I suppose, that https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15274 is a
> > > blocker.
> > > Fix is quite easy and straightforward
> > >
> > > пн, 2 авг. 2021 г. в 03:11, Igor Sapego :
> > >
> > > > Cherry-picked to release branch.
> > > >
> > > > Best Regards,
> > > > Igor
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 3:11 PM Alexey Gidaspov 
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Ok, I think we should add [1] to 2.11 release. Can you cherry-pick it 
> > > > > to
> > > > > release branch?
> > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14815
> > > > >
> > > > > On 2021/07/30 02:25:25, Igor Sapego  wrote:
> > > > > > I'm fine with any of these two solutions.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > > Igor
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 6:36 PM Ilya Kasnacheev <
> > > > > ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hello!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think it does make sense to include changes which will let us 
> > > > > > > avoid
> > > > > > > migration issues in the future.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Alternatively, maybe we can revert the incomplete change from 
> > > > > > > 2.11 in
> > > > > order
> > > > > > > to reintroduce it in 2.12 in full form if Igor agrees and RE 
> > > > > > > thinks
> > > > > this is
> > > > > > > the best course of action.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Ilya Kasnacheev
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > чт, 29 июл. 2021 г. в 18:07, Igor Sapego :
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Alexey,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It contains changes we could not introduce if we release ignite 
> > > > > > > > in
> > > > > its
> > > > > > > > current state as they are going to be breaking changes.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > > > > Igor
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 4:13 PM Alexey Gidaspov <
> > > > > olive.c...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi, Igor!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Now we are in stabilization phase and accepting only 
> > > > > > > > > blockers. I
> > > > > may be
> > > > > > > > > wrong, but this ticket doesn't seem to be of that kind.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 2021/07/28 21:00:15, Igor Sapego  
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Igniters,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I suggest adding [1] to the scope of release, because it
> > > > contains
> > > > > > > > > > changes to code introduced by [2], which is already 
> > > > > > &g

[ANNOUNCE] New committer: Petr Ivanov

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hello Ignite community,

The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Ignite
has invited Petr Ivanov (vveider) to become a committer and we are pleased 
to announce that he has accepted.
  
Petr is community veteran, who supports TeamCity instance, as well as TC Bot, 
and other services. He contributes also to supporting our checkstyle/PMD/maven 
scripts, docker images, DEB, and RPM packages, Ignite start scripts, and many 
more things, which are crucial for Apache Ignite development process and 
running in producition. 

Please join me in congratulating Petr with his new role in the community.

Being a committer enables easier contribution to the
project since there is no need to go via the patch
submission process. This should enable better productivity.

Best Regards,
Dmitriy Pavlov
on behalf of Apache Ignite PMC

Re: Secondary TeamCity instance: ci2.ignite.apache.org

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Folks, 

Thanks to Vitaly Osipov, to infra , and to Peter Ivanov 
https://ci2.ignite.apache.org/ is working now. You can use your current account 
credentials from ci to log in.

Final setup is not finished, so RunAll can't be executed there, but some test 
steps you can do now. At least, check login, check some separate suite 
execution (excepting .net)

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/08/03 15:33:04, Dmitry Pavlov  wrote: 
> Hi Igniters,
> 
> I'm glad to announce that SberTech made an internal aggreement to sponsor a 
> computing power to provide backup TeamCity instance. This instance is 
> intended to be a geo-independent, secondary instance with availablility for 
> community members. 
> 
> Thanks to JetBrains for providing license keys for TeamCity as their part of 
> opensource sponsoring program.
> 
> Most likely, we'll setup some domain name as tc.i.a.o or ci2.i.a.o. Please 
> share your vision what would be most obvious.
> 
> After a private discussions with Vitaliy Osipov and Petr Ivanov, I do believe 
> that it would be possible to preserve current registered users. Build 
> configurations are to be the same for the secondary instance. Technical 
> details on how is could be achieved will be available later (most likely 
> we'll start a sepearate thread to dicuss that).
> 
> You are more than welcome to be an early adopters.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
> 
> 

Storing Teamcity projects settings in Version Control

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Igniters,

Once there was a discussion about placing our build configurations (TC) 
settings in a VSC repository. This idea was suggested because we wanted to 
validate internals of configs using IDE/text editor. 

https://www.jetbrains.com/help/teamcity/storing-project-settings-in-version-control.html

Now, with introduction of a second instance this idea migth be useful twice, 
we'll be able to 
- view, track history, track authorship (? I'm not 100% sure, it is to be 
checked)
- use VSC as a signle source of thurth
- we can remove TC Bot's code for validating all configs using REST

How does that sound to you? Is it better to look at Kotlin DSL? Or could XML be 
enought? 

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

Re: Secondary TeamCity instance: ci2.ignite.apache.org

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Thanks to Vitaly Osipov for creating a request, waiting for infra to set it up:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-22190

On 2021/08/04 07:50:36, Anton Vinogradov  wrote: 
> Great news!
> Wish you good luck with this undertaking!
> P.s. ci2.i.a.o sounds good to me.
> 
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 7:36 PM Petr Ivanov  wrote:
> 
> > Seems that preserving and syncing users will be difficult to achieve —
> > that info is stored in DB, and partial DB replication is tricky.
> >
> > Also ci2.ignite.apache.org is good name, but currently it is targeted the
> > same IP as original one:
> > ; ANSWER SECTION:
> > ci2.ignite.apache.org.  1726IN  A   195.144.253.150
> >
> >
> >
> > > On 3 Aug 2021, at 18:33, Dmitry Pavlov  wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Igniters,
> > >
> > > I'm glad to announce that SberTech made an internal aggreement to
> > sponsor a computing power to provide backup TeamCity instance. This
> > instance is intended to be a geo-independent, secondary instance with
> > availablility for community members.
> > >
> > > Thanks to JetBrains for providing license keys for TeamCity as their
> > part of opensource sponsoring program.
> > >
> > > Most likely, we'll setup some domain name as tc.i.a.o or ci2.i.a.o.
> > Please share your vision what would be most obvious.
> > >
> > > After a private discussions with Vitaliy Osipov and Petr Ivanov, I do
> > believe that it would be possible to preserve current registered users.
> > Build configurations are to be the same for the secondary instance.
> > Technical details on how is could be achieved will be available later (most
> > likely we'll start a sepearate thread to dicuss that).
> > >
> > > You are more than welcome to be an early adopters.
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > >
> >
> >
> 

Re: [DISCUSSION] Send documentation feedback notifications to dev list

[Dmitry Pavlov]

0 from my side. Both ways have their own pros.

We can redirect to notifications@ list. issues@ seems to be too overloaded with 
all comments

And as an option we can leave it as is now, and take a look at how often 
feedback will arise.

Sicerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/08/09 05:54:07, Ivan Pavlukhin  wrote: 
> Igniters,
> 
> Recently documentation feedback notifications were set up. And
> currently destination for such notifications is dev list
> dev@ignite.apache.org. It was announced in [1]. A notification message
> itself looks as [2].
> 
> Let's discuss if we all are fine with this notifications on dev list
> as much effort was spent for keeping dev list clean, e.g. [3]. For me
> personally these notifications are some kind of "noice" as I read the
> list on spare time.
> 
> Please share your opinion! Formal vote will be started if needed.
> 
> [1] 
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rf6b0ee140239ae119c97fe4022316b4e2f5c9f06a677bace5033e313%40%3Cdev.ignite.apache.org%3E
> [2] 
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rbd7c06f76559f46bc2872484529bc4fa1c503d705b6cc379156f0bb0%40%3Cdev.ignite.apache.org%3E
> [3] 
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rbd7c06f76559f46bc2872484529bc4fa1c503d705b6cc379156f0bb0%40%3Cdev.ignite.apache.org%3E
> 
> -- 
> 
> Best regards,
> Ivan Pavlukhin
> 

Quartely ASF board report for Apache Ignite

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Igniters,

It's time to submit ASF Board report, so, as usual, I encourage every community 
member to suggest some addition to that report. 

What was the most recognizable (releases, decisions, etc) during past quarter, 
since May (~ Ignite Summit):

Draft you can find at:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/ASF+Board+Report+Drafts
I'm going to submit report on Monday, Aug, 09. 

Feel free to update draft there and/or suggest ideas here, in the list.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

Re: Re[2]: [ANNOUNCE] Welcome Zhenya Stanilovsky as a new committer

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Zhenya, congrats with new role. Well deserved!

On 2021/07/30 16:10:41, Shishkov Ilya  wrote: 
> Zhenya,
> 
> Congrats!
> 
> пт, 30 июл. 2021 г. в 14:01, Zhenya Stanilovsky  >:
> 
> >
> >
> > Guys, thank you very much !!
> >
> > >Zhenya,
> > >
> > >Congrats!
> > >
> > >--
> > >Regards,
> > >Konstantin Orlov
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> On 30 Jul 2021, at 12:20, Вячеслав Коптилин < slava.kopti...@gmail.com
> > > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hooray!
> > >>
> > >> Congrats! May the Force be with you!
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> S.
> > >>
> > >> пт, 30 июл. 2021 г. в 11:17, Anton Vinogradov < a...@apache.org >:
> > >>
> > >>> Congrats!
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 10:19 AM ткаленко кирилл <
> > tkalkir...@yandex.ru >
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> >  Zhenya, congratulations!
> > 
> >   Пересылаемое сообщение 
> >  30.07.2021, 09:50, "Ivan Daschinsky" < ivanda...@apache.org >:
> > 
> > 
> >  Zhenya, congrats, well deserved!
> > 
> >  пт, 30 июл. 2021 г. в 00:44, Andrey Mashenkov <
> > >>>  andrey.mashen...@gmail.com
> > > :
> > 
> > > Congratulations Zhenya!
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 12:06 AM Maxim Muzafarov < mmu...@apache.org
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Ignite has invited
> > >> Zhenya Stanilovsky to become a committer and we are pleased to
> >  announce
> > >> that
> > >> he has accepted.
> > >>
> > >> For the last few years, Zhenya made a lot of performance fixes
> > >> especially for the core modules and important contributions to the
> > >> Apache Ignite codebase. He is actively involved in integrating the
> > >> Calcite framework with Apache Ignite. Moreover, he has been a great
> > >> help in the preparation of several Apache Ignite major releases by
> > >> carrying out stress-load tests. Besides the code contributions,
> > >>> Zhenya
> > >> is also an active community member and help users on dev and users
> > >> lists.
> > >>
> > >> Being a committer enables easier contribution to the project since
> >  there
> > > is
> > >> no need to go via the patch submission process. This should enable
> >  better
> > >> productivity.
> > >>
> > >> Please join me in welcoming Ivan, and congratulating him on the new
> >  role
> > > in
> > >> the Apache Ignite Community.
> > >>
> > >> Best Regards,
> > >> Maxim Muzafarov
> > >>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best regards,
> > > Andrey V. Mashenkov
> > 
> >   Конец пересылаемого сообщения 
> > 
> > >>>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 

Secondary TeamCity instance: ci2.ignite.apache.org

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Igniters,

I'm glad to announce that SberTech made an internal aggreement to sponsor a 
computing power to provide backup TeamCity instance. This instance is intended 
to be a geo-independent, secondary instance with availablility for community 
members. 

Thanks to JetBrains for providing license keys for TeamCity as their part of 
opensource sponsoring program.

Most likely, we'll setup some domain name as tc.i.a.o or ci2.i.a.o. Please 
share your vision what would be most obvious.

After a private discussions with Vitaliy Osipov and Petr Ivanov, I do believe 
that it would be possible to preserve current registered users. Build 
configurations are to be the same for the secondary instance. Technical details 
on how is could be achieved will be available later (most likely we'll start a 
sepearate thread to dicuss that).

You are more than welcome to be an early adopters.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

Re: [Announcement] Apache Ignite 2.11 Code Freeze started

[Dmitry Pavlov]

I personally trust opinion of Nikolay and Maxim, we can consider both as 
blockers.

Just an idea to consider:
For fixed ticket/PR (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15170)  most 
likely we don't need to re-run performance tests. 

If second issue has no impact on performance, we can take perf results from 
rc.-1 and run only functional tests for rc.0.

On 2021/07/22 04:44:01, "Николай Ижиков"  wrote: 
> +1 to fix both prior to release
> 
> Отправлено с iPhone
> 
> > 22 июля 2021 г., в 02:36, Maxim Muzafarov  написал(а):
> > 
> > Folks,
> > 
> > We've faced [1][2] issues related to the new functionality added to
> > the 2.11 release (it will be safe to merge to the release branch).
> > From my point of view, both of them are critical and must be included
> > in the 2.11 release.
> > The [2] is ready for merge. The [1] will be completed by the end of this 
> > week.
> > 
> > Please share your thoughts.
> > 
> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15146
> > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15170
> > 
> >> On Tue, 20 Jul 2021 at 15:08, Maxim Muzafarov  wrote:
> >> 
> >> Folks,
> >> 
> >> Since the release branch was created some time ago, should we bump up
> >> the master branch version to the next one?
> >> 
> >>> On Thu, 1 Jul 2021 at 17:15, Alexey Gidaspov  wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> Hi, Pavel.
> >>> 
> >>> I think, it looks like blocker. Please cherry-pick it to 2.11 release 
> >>> branch
> >>> 
> >>> On 2021/07/01 09:29:57, Pavel Pereslegin  wrote:
>  Hello, Alexey!
>  
>  Is it possible to include a hotfix that corrects the command syntax
>  output in the control script? [1]
>  
>  This bug can significantly complicate the use of the snapshot restore
>  function (one of the important features of 2.11). In addition, this
>  may raise a number of questions to the product support, which we can
>  prevent by adding this patch in 2.11.
>  
>  This patch does not affect any functions other than the "help" output
>  of the control script.
>  
>  [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14989
>  
>  чт, 1 июл. 2021 г. в 11:56, Alexey Gidaspov :
> > 
> > Hi, Iilya!
> > 
> > As I can see, this feature highly improves debugging during incidents. 
> > So I think we can call it blocker and cherry-pick to ignite-2.11 branch
> > 
> > On 2021/06/30 20:26:43, Shishkov Ilya  wrote:
> >> Hello, Alexey!
> >> Is it possible to add system views for BaselineNode attributes [1] and
> >> corresponding documentation [2] to 2.11?
> >> 
> >> 1. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15007
> >> 2. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15028
> >> 
> >> ср, 30 июн. 2021 г. в 11:07, Nikita Amelchev :
> >> 
> >>> Thanks! I have cherry-picked the commit to the 2.11 branch.
> >>> 
> >>> ср, 30 июн. 2021 г. в 11:00, Alexey Gidaspov :
>  
>  Hi, Nikita!
>  
>  I think it's important fix and should be included in 2.11 release. 
>  I've
> >>> tagged ticket by fixVersion 2.11. Can you cherry-pick it to 
> >>> ignite-2.11
> >>> branch? And please fill release notes or delete flag.
>  
>  On 2021/06/30 07:55:04, Nikita Amelchev  wrote:
> > Hello, Alexey.
> > 
> > I suggest adding to the 2.11 scope the resolved issue [1]. It fixes
> > incorrect values of cache, cache groups, data region metrics after
> > cluster reactivation.
> > WDYT?
> > 
> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14990
> > 
> > вт, 29 июн. 2021 г. в 15:09, Alexey Gidaspov :
> >> 
> >> Ok, we can add this fix to release scope.
> >> 
> >> On 2021/06/29 08:36:00, Сурков Александр
> >>> Викторович wrote:
> >>> Hi Alexey.
> >>> 
> >>> I think need add ticket: JmxMetricExporter fails to export
> >>> discovery metrics - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14376
> >>> 
> >>> On 2021/06/15 14:43:55, Alexey Gidaspov  wrote:
>  Apache Ignite 2.11 Code Freeze started now>
>  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > Best wishes,
> > Amelchev Nikita
> > 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> --
> >>> Best wishes,
> >>> Amelchev Nikita
> >>> 
> >> 
>  
> 

Re: Your Nabble Forum

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Folks, 

My vote goes for ponymail. Actually it is a project under ASF itself, it is the 
part of Incubator.

If we have a contributor who is aware about CEO setup, we can suggest help and 
solve that issue for all ASF projects at once.

https://github.com/apache/incubator-ponymail
https://ponymail.incubator.apache.org/support.html
https://lists.apache.org/list.html?us...@ponymail.apache.org

I personaly use only lists.apache.org. And since at my dayjob gmail is blocked, 
I also reply here.

What do you think? 

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/07/22 10:58:28, Denis Magda  wrote: 
> Probably, this is a reason why our Nabble's dev list forum got out of sync.
> The latest message is dated as June 20th.
> 
> Yeah, it's sad that ASF's mailing lists are not visible to search engines
> like Google. That's a big deal for those who search for a topic on search
> engines (99% of the human beings?). Let's think, I see three options here:
> 
>- Search for an alternate mail archiving solution that can be indexed by
>Google
>- Talk to the ASF mates, probably there is a solution for user lists
>- Give up the reins to StackOverflow that will naturally become a
>primary communication channel for the user-related questions.
> 
> --
> Denis
> 
> -
> Denis
> 
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 12:33 AM Ilya Kasnacheev 
> wrote:
> 
> > Hello!
> >
> > They say they don't host mailing list archives anymore. I wonder what they
> > expect us to do here.
> >
> > I think it's a pity since Nabble had a great deal of SEO visibility,
> > especially for user list. Unfortunately, Pony Mail is almost useless in
> > that regard.
> >
> > Regards,
> > --
> > Ilya Kasnacheev
> >
> >
> > ср, 21 июл. 2021 г. в 23:23, :
> >
> > > We are downsizing Nabble to one server.  If you want to preserve your
> > > forum:
> > >
> > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
> > >
> > > Then you should follow the instructions here:
> > >
> > > http://support.nabble.com/Downsizing-Nabble-tp7609715.html
> > >
> >
> 

Re: Not enough permissions to run RC build

[Dmitry Pavlov]

+1 from my side. Alexey is a RM for 2.11. It is really essential thing  to be 
able to trigger release builds

Sincerely,

On 2021/07/19 16:09:54, Petr Ivanov  wrote: 
> Nikolay, Dmitriy, Anton — what do you think?
> 
> 
> 
> > On 19 Jul 2021, at 16:10, Alexey Gidaspov  wrote:
> > 
> > No, but I'm release manager for 2.11 release and I think I should be able 
> > to run RC build. 
> > 
> > On 2021/07/19 12:47:46, Petr Ivanov  wrote: 
> >> Hi!
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Are you committer or PMC on Apache Ignite?
> >> 
> >> 
> >>> On 19 Jul 2021, at 14:40, Alexey Gidaspov  wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> Hi, All!
> >>> 
> >>> I've found out that I don't have enough permissions to run RC build for 
> >>> ignite-2.11 branch on TC. Can anyone help me?
> >> 
> >> 
> 
> 

Re: TC bot problems

[Dmitry Pavlov]

That's really strange thing. I can't see anything at TC bot code that migth 
stop from loading history of runs. But locally I see the same picture.

Folks, who could have an access to TC bot config. Could you please double check 
what is set in the branches.json? If we set up baseBranchForTc as ignite 2.10 
we can avoid usage of PR page and we can use tracked branch page for 
comparison. 

{
  "id": "ignite-2.11",
  "chains": [
{
  "serverId": "apache",
  "suiteId": "IgniteTests24Java8_RunAllNightly",
  "branchForRest": "ignite-2.11",
  "baseBranchForTc": "ignite-2.10", // <<<<<-- HERE -->>>>>>>>
  "triggerBuild": true,
  "triggerBuildQuietPeriod": 30 
}
  ] 
}

On 2021/07/12 09:39:38, Alexey Gidaspov  wrote: 
> Hi, Dmitriy!
> 
> Ok, I got it. But drop down list is only one part of the problem. Another 
> part - absence of data relating to 2.10 release.
> 
> On 2021/07/12 09:37:03, Dmitry Pavlov  wrote: 
> > Hi Alexey,
> > 
> > Base branches dropdown menu is being built using pre-configured list of 
> > branches.
> > 
> > So it works as expected.
> > 
> > Sincerely,
> > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > 
> > On 2021/07/09 14:16:27, Alexey Gidaspov  wrote: 
> > > Hi, all!
> > > 
> > > I'm trying to compare release 2.11 against 2.10. I'm using [1] and I 
> > > can't see any data related to the  release of 2.10. And when I'm trying 
> > > to specify base branch  using dropdown menu, I can't select ignite-2.10 
> > > branch. What am I doing wrong?
> > > 
> > > [1] 
> > > https://mtcga.gridgain.com/pr.html?serverId=apache=IgniteTests24Java8_RunAllNightly=ignite-2.11=Latest=ignite-2.10
> > > 
> > 
> 

Re: TC bot problems

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Alexey,

Base branches dropdown menu is being built using pre-configured list of 
branches.

So it works as expected.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/07/09 14:16:27, Alexey Gidaspov  wrote: 
> Hi, all!
> 
> I'm trying to compare release 2.11 against 2.10. I'm using [1] and I can't 
> see any data related to the  release of 2.10. And when I'm trying to specify 
> base branch  using dropdown menu, I can't select ignite-2.10 branch. What am 
> I doing wrong?
> 
> [1] 
> https://mtcga.gridgain.com/pr.html?serverId=apache=IgniteTests24Java8_RunAllNightly=ignite-2.11=Latest=ignite-2.10
> 

Re: IGNITE-14812: Statistics

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Nikolai,

thank you for noticing. I guess it's not about license, but about Intellectual 
Property (IP) ownership.

AFAIK, Apache License 2.0 is here and AL 2.0 is definetely allowed to be used 
in the codebase for an Apache project 
(https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html)

But licenese and IP owner are 2 sligthly different things. E.g at the end of 
any website you can find:
Copyright © 2021 The Apache Software Foundation, Licensed under the Apache 
License, Version 2.0.

Incubated projects are mandated to transfer IP to the ASF. And I'm not aware of 
any exceptions. 

In this PR there are 5 classes which licenses with AL 2.0, but IP owner is 3rd 
party company. 

I'm a bit concerned about having such code in the project. I'd rather reverted 
it until we have approval from experts at mailing list: 
legal-disc...@apache.org 

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/06/22 14:56:49, Nikolay Izhikov  wrote: 
> Hello, Igniters.
> 
> Recently huge commit was merged [1].
> 
> Taras, Alexander, can you, please, explain what is purpose of the commit?
> What feature it implemented?
> 
> Looked inside the ticket and found no explanation.
> Description is "Add statistics collection and usage.»
> 
> Do we have plans to document this new feature?
> 
> Also, I see very strange license in added files [2]
> 
> ```
>  * Copyright 2013 Aggregate Knowledge, Inc.
>  *
>  * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
> ```
> 
> Is it OK to have those copyright inside ASF codebase?
> Is it some kind of external dependency we adopted as part of the code?
> Why do we need it?
> 
> [1] 
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/503a98495433e1d0cf84f8be8c1e2adc57034fbb
> [2] 
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/modules/indexing/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/query/stat/hll/serialization/IHLLMetadata.java

Re: Temporary TC Outage

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Petr,

Sad news, but anyway, thank you for letting community know. 

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/06/21 16:19:16, Petr Ivanov  wrote: 
> Hi, Igniters!
> 
> 
> Currently our TC instance is out of order due to power outage (power booth 
> burned down).
> Restoration can take 1-2 days at least.
> 
> I will keep you updated on further news. Please, stand by.

Re: Teamcity Bot: setup 2.11 tracked branch for daily runs instead of 2.10

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Thank you Sergey, I can see changes now

On 2021/06/11 11:05:17, Sergey Uttsel  wrote: 
> I setup 2.11 instead of 2.10.
> Now RunAllNightly for "ignite-2.11" branch will be run on TeamCity.
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
> 

Teamcity Bot: setup 2.11 tracked branch for daily runs instead of 2.10

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Folks (from GG), 

It seems my previous message migth be unnoticed, so I'm duplicating this as a 
sepearate thread.

Could you please update tracked branch in the TC Bot config file 
'branches.json'. AFAIR, restart is not needed (TC bot periodically checks for 
config updates automatically)

We need to setup 2.11 runs (we might do that instead of 2.10).

More or less config should look like that:

  "branches": [
{
  "id": "ignite-2.11-nightly",
  "chains": [
{
  "serverId": "apache",
  "suiteId": "IgniteTests24Java8_RunAllNightly",
  "branchForRest": "ignite-2.11"
}
  ]
},
  ]

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

Re: Re[2]: [Discussion] Apache Ignite 2.11 Scope Freeze

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Folks (from GG), 

could you please update tracked branch in the TC Bot config file 
'branches.json'. AFAIR, restart is not needed (TC bot periodically checks for 
config updates automatically)

We need to setup 2.11 runs (we migth do that instead of 2.10).

More or less config should look like that:

  "branches": [
{
  "id": "ignite-2.11-nightly",
  "chains": [
{
  "serverId": "apache",
  "suiteId": "IgniteTests24Java8_RunAllNightly",
  "branchForRest": "ignite-2.11"
}
  ]
},
  ]

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/06/08 13:46:01, Dmitry Pavlov  wrote: 
> Hi,
> 
> To my opinion it's fine, since we freezed release scope, but haven't freezed 
> the code yet.
> 
> So, we're at Phase2 - Rampdown phase - 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process
> 
> Code freeze is planned to 14 June, see also 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.11
> 
> The last word is for RM here. Alexey, WDYT?
> 
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
> 
> On 2021/06/08 12:54:26, Zhenya Stanilovsky  
> wrote: 
> > 
> > Hi ! I found that very important issue [1] (already in master) is not 
> > planned to be in 2.11, may be it still possible to take it into scope ?
> >  
> > thanks !
> >  
> > [1]  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14739
> >  
> > >Hi Folks,
> > >
> > >Branch divergence has been completed. Sorry for the delay, it was my 
> > >fault. Now branch for 2.11 is now available
> > >https://github.com/apache/ignite/tree/ignite-2.11
> > >https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/ignite-2.11
> > >
> > >Who could help with updating TC bot configuration (json)?
> > >I suggest changing tracked branch ignite-2.10-nightly to 
> > >ignite-2.11-nightly and run 'ignite-2.11' instread. See also  
> > >https://mtcga.gridgain.com/current.html?branch=ignite-2.10-nightly
> > >
> > >Sincerely,
> > >Dmitriy Pavlov
> > >
> > >
> > >On 2021/06/04 13:51:28, Pavel Pereslegin < xxt...@gmail.com > wrote:
> > >> Hopefully we'll be done by the end of next week (2021.06.11).
> > >>
> > >> пт, 4 июн. 2021 г. в 16:06, Alexey Gidaspov < olive.c...@gmail.com >:
> > >> >
> > >> > Hello, Pavel.
> > >> >
> > >> > Can you specify the date more precisly?
> > >> >
> > >> > On 2021/06/04 12:05:53, Pavel Pereslegin < xxt...@gmail.com > wrote:
> > >> > > Hello Alexey.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > We have implemented a feature to automatically restore the cache 
> > >> > > group
> > >> > > from a snapshot [1].
> > >> > > But this feature requires CLI management [2], which is currently on
> > >> > > review and should also be included in 2.11. We plan to finish with it
> > >> > > next week.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > [1]  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13805
> > >> > > [2]  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14723
> > >> > >
> > >> > > пт, 4 июн. 2021 г. в 13:01, Dmitry Pavlov < dpav...@apache.org >:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I've updated the page  
> > >> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.11
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > since final freeze is technically possible only after branch 
> > >> > > > divergence (see also  
> > >> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process 
> > >> > > > )
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Sincerely
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > On 2021/06/04 09:56:15, Alexey Gidaspov < olive.c...@gmail.com > 
> > >> > > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > I'm planning to diverge branch at 16:00 MSK 7 June, 2021
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > And here is 2.11 release wiki page [1]
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > [1]  
> > >> > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.11
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > On 2021/06/04 09:11:49, Alexey Gidaspov < olive.c...@gmail.com > 
> > >> > > > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > > Hi, Igniters!
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > I'm going to start scope freeze and leave only Resolved 
> > >> > > > > > tickets in it [1]. You are welcome to discuss.
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > [1]  
> > >> > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/a4be115d2bd4318ae958ac91aba40294dfd62f293b3cb264c8fcf0ae%40%3Cdev.ignite.apache.org%3E
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> 
> >  
> >  
> >  
> >  
> 

Re: Access rights to Team City

[Dmitry Pavlov]

I guess 'put to top' rigth would be useful, as well.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/06/09 13:02:11, Alexey Gidaspov  wrote: 
> Hi, Petr!
> 
> In this case I mean 'manually trigger builds'
> 
> On 2021/06/09 10:11:11, Petr Ivanov  wrote: 
> > Hi, Aleksey.
> > 
> > 
> > What do you mean by "manage"?
> > 
> > 
> > > On 9 Jun 2021, at 12:42, Alexey Gidaspov  wrote:
> > > 
> > > Hi, All!
> > > 
> > > I've found out that I can't manage builds at Team City. Can anyone tell 
> > > me how can I get necessary access rights? My TC account name is 
> > > agidaspov. 
> > 
> > 
> 

Re: Re[2]: [Discussion] Apache Ignite 2.11 Scope Freeze

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi,

To my opinion it's fine, since we freezed release scope, but haven't freezed 
the code yet.

So, we're at Phase2 - Rampdown phase - 
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process

Code freeze is planned to 14 June, see also 
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.11

The last word is for RM here. Alexey, WDYT?

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/06/08 12:54:26, Zhenya Stanilovsky  wrote: 
> 
> Hi ! I found that very important issue [1] (already in master) is not planned 
> to be in 2.11, may be it still possible to take it into scope ?
>  
> thanks !
>  
> [1]  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14739
>  
> >Hi Folks,
> >
> >Branch divergence has been completed. Sorry for the delay, it was my fault. 
> >Now branch for 2.11 is now available
> >https://github.com/apache/ignite/tree/ignite-2.11
> >https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/ignite-2.11
> >
> >Who could help with updating TC bot configuration (json)?
> >I suggest changing tracked branch ignite-2.10-nightly to ignite-2.11-nightly 
> >and run 'ignite-2.11' instread. See also  
> >https://mtcga.gridgain.com/current.html?branch=ignite-2.10-nightly
> >
> >Sincerely,
> >Dmitriy Pavlov
> >
> >
> >On 2021/06/04 13:51:28, Pavel Pereslegin < xxt...@gmail.com > wrote:
> >> Hopefully we'll be done by the end of next week (2021.06.11).
> >>
> >> пт, 4 июн. 2021 г. в 16:06, Alexey Gidaspov < olive.c...@gmail.com >:
> >> >
> >> > Hello, Pavel.
> >> >
> >> > Can you specify the date more precisly?
> >> >
> >> > On 2021/06/04 12:05:53, Pavel Pereslegin < xxt...@gmail.com > wrote:
> >> > > Hello Alexey.
> >> > >
> >> > > We have implemented a feature to automatically restore the cache group
> >> > > from a snapshot [1].
> >> > > But this feature requires CLI management [2], which is currently on
> >> > > review and should also be included in 2.11. We plan to finish with it
> >> > > next week.
> >> > >
> >> > > [1]  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13805
> >> > > [2]  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14723
> >> > >
> >> > > пт, 4 июн. 2021 г. в 13:01, Dmitry Pavlov < dpav...@apache.org >:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I've updated the page  
> >> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.11
> >> > > >
> >> > > > since final freeze is technically possible only after branch 
> >> > > > divergence (see also  
> >> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process )
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Sincerely
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On 2021/06/04 09:56:15, Alexey Gidaspov < olive.c...@gmail.com > 
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > I'm planning to diverge branch at 16:00 MSK 7 June, 2021
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > And here is 2.11 release wiki page [1]
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > [1]  
> >> > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.11
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > On 2021/06/04 09:11:49, Alexey Gidaspov < olive.c...@gmail.com > 
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > Hi, Igniters!
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > I'm going to start scope freeze and leave only Resolved tickets 
> >> > > > > > in it [1]. You are welcome to discuss.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > [1]  
> >> > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/a4be115d2bd4318ae958ac91aba40294dfd62f293b3cb264c8fcf0ae%40%3Cdev.ignite.apache.org%3E
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > >
> >> 
>  
>  
>  
>  

Re: [Discussion] Apache Ignite 2.11 Scope Freeze

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Folks,

Branch divergence has been completed. Sorry for the delay, it was my fault. Now 
branch for 2.11 is now available
https://github.com/apache/ignite/tree/ignite-2.11
https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/ignite-2.11

Who could help with updating TC bot configuration (json)?
I suggest changing tracked branch ignite-2.10-nightly to ignite-2.11-nightly 
and run 'ignite-2.11' instread. See also 
https://mtcga.gridgain.com/current.html?branch=ignite-2.10-nightly

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov


On 2021/06/04 13:51:28, Pavel Pereslegin  wrote: 
> Hopefully we'll be done by the end of next week (2021.06.11).
> 
> пт, 4 июн. 2021 г. в 16:06, Alexey Gidaspov :
> >
> > Hello, Pavel.
> >
> > Can you specify the date more precisly?
> >
> > On 2021/06/04 12:05:53, Pavel Pereslegin  wrote:
> > > Hello Alexey.
> > >
> > > We have implemented a feature to automatically restore the cache group
> > > from a snapshot [1].
> > > But this feature requires CLI management [2], which is currently on
> > > review and should also be included in 2.11. We plan to finish with it
> > > next week.
> > >
> > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13805
> > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14723
> > >
> > > пт, 4 июн. 2021 г. в 13:01, Dmitry Pavlov :
> > > >
> > > > I've updated the page 
> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.11
> > > >
> > > >  since final freeze is technically possible only after branch 
> > > > divergence (see also 
> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process)
> > > >
> > > > Sincerely
> > > >
> > > > On 2021/06/04 09:56:15, Alexey Gidaspov  wrote:
> > > > > I'm planning to diverge branch at 16:00 MSK 7 June, 2021
> > > > >
> > > > > And here is 2.11 release wiki page [1]
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] 
> > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.11
> > > > >
> > > > > On 2021/06/04 09:11:49, Alexey Gidaspov  wrote:
> > > > > > Hi, Igniters!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm going to start scope freeze and leave only Resolved tickets in 
> > > > > > it [1]. You are welcome to discuss.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] 
> > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/a4be115d2bd4318ae958ac91aba40294dfd62f293b3cb264c8fcf0ae%40%3Cdev.ignite.apache.org%3E
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> 

Re: [DISCUSSION] Code style. Variable abbrevations

[Dmitry Pavlov]

+1 for removal. Cnt and count both seem to be fine.

Manual rule enforcement saves a couple of symbols in code, but requires some 
time from both contributor and reviewer.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/06/04 19:18:37, Pavel Tupitsyn  wrote: 
> In my opinion, we should remove this rule.
> Looks like a waste of time. freq or frequency, cnt or count, it is fine
> either way.
> 
> On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 7:39 PM Nikolay Izhikov  wrote:
> 
> > Hello, Igniters.
> >
> > Right now, we have the rule to use some predefined list of abbrevation for
> > variable names [1].
> > Some of the reviewers ask to follow this rule strictly.
> >
> > > It is required to use abbreviated form for code consistency.
> >
> > I tried to implement this rule in form of checkstyle check [2] and it
> > seems like many of use doesn’t follow this requirement.
> > My check found 4124 violation in core module.
> >
> > Should we make this rule optional in documentation or should we remove it
> > completely?
> > Or should someone proceed and fix all the violations?
> >
> > WDYT?
> >
> >
> > Example of output:
> > ```
> > [ERROR]
> > /Users/sbt-izhikov-nv/work/ignite/modules/core/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/cache/persistence/db/IgnitePdsWithTtlTest.java:94:
> > Abbrevation should be used for CACHE_NAME_LOCAL_ATOMIC! Please, use loc,
> > instead of LOCAL [IgniteAbbrevationsRule]
> > [ERROR]
> > /Users/sbt-izhikov-nv/work/ignite/modules/core/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/cache/persistence/db/IgnitePdsWithTtlTest.java:97:
> > Abbrevation should be used for CACHE_NAME_LOCAL_TX! Please, use loc,
> > instead of LOCAL [IgniteAbbrevationsRule]
> > [ERROR]
> > /Users/sbt-izhikov-nv/work/ignite/modules/core/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/cache/persistence/db/IgnitePdsWithTtlTest.java:264:
> > Abbrevation should be used for checkpointManager! Please, use mgr, instead
> > of Manager [IgniteAbbrevationsRule]
> > [ERROR]
> > /Users/sbt-izhikov-nv/work/ignite/modules/core/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/cache/persistence/db/IgnitePdsPartitionPreloadTest.java:63:
> > Abbrevation should be used for DEFAULT_REGION! Please, use dflt, instead of
> > DEFAULT [IgniteAbbrevationsRule]
> > [ERROR]
> > /Users/sbt-izhikov-nv/work/ignite/modules/core/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/cache/persistence/db/IgnitePdsWholeClusterRestartTest.java:47:
> > Abbrevation should be used for ENTRIES_COUNT! Please, use cnt, instead of
> > COUNT [IgniteAbbrevationsRule]
> > [ERROR]
> > /Users/sbt-izhikov-nv/work/ignite/modules/core/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/cache/persistence/db/IgnitePdsRebalancingOnNotStableTopologyTest.java:49:
> > Abbrevation should be used for CHECKPOINT_FREQUENCY! Please, use freq,
> > instead of FREQUENCY [IgniteAbbrevationsRule]
> > [ERROR]
> > /Users/sbt-izhikov-nv/work/ignite/modules/core/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/cache/persistence/db/IgnitePdsTransactionsHangTest.java:75:
> > Abbrevation should be used for MAX_KEY_COUNT! Please, use cnt, instead of
> > COUNT [IgniteAbbrevationsRule]
> > [ERROR]
> > /Users/sbt-izhikov-nv/work/ignite/modules/core/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/cache/persistence/db/IgnitePdsTransactionsHangTest.java:78:
> > Abbrevation should be used for CHECKPOINT_FREQUENCY! Please, use freq,
> > instead of FREQUENCY [IgniteAbbrevationsRule]
> > [ERROR]
> > /Users/sbt-izhikov-nv/work/ignite/modules/core/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/cache/persistence/db/SlowHistoricalRebalanceSmallHistoryTest.java:57:
> > Abbrevation should be used for SUPPLY_MESSAGE_LATCH! Please, use msg,
> > instead of MESSAGE [IgniteAbbrevationsRule]
> > [ERROR]
> > /Users/sbt-izhikov-nv/work/ignite/modules/core/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/cache/persistence/db/IgniteLogicalRecoveryTest.java:74:
> > Abbrevation should be used for SHARED_GROUP_NAME! Please, use grp, instead
> > of GROUP [IgniteAbbrevationsRule]
> > [ERROR]
> > /Users/sbt-izhikov-nv/work/ignite/modules/core/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/cache/persistence/db/IgniteLogicalRecoveryTest.java:200:
> > Abbrevation should be used for cacheLoader! Please, use ldr, instead of
> > Loader [IgniteAbbrevationsRule]
> > ```
> >
> > [1]
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Abbreviation+Rules#AbbreviationRules-VariableAbbreviation
> > [2] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/9153
> >
> >
> 

Re: [Discussion] Apache Ignite 2.11 Scope Freeze

[Dmitry Pavlov]

I've updated the page 
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.11

 since final freeze is technically possible only after branch divergence (see 
also https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process)

Sincerely

On 2021/06/04 09:56:15, Alexey Gidaspov  wrote: 
> I'm planning to diverge branch at 16:00 MSK 7 June, 2021
> 
> And here is 2.11 release wiki page [1]
> 
> [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.11
> 
> On 2021/06/04 09:11:49, Alexey Gidaspov  wrote: 
> > Hi, Igniters!
> > 
> > I'm going to start scope freeze and leave only Resolved tickets in it [1]. 
> > You are welcome to discuss. 
> > 
> > [1] 
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/a4be115d2bd4318ae958ac91aba40294dfd62f293b3cb264c8fcf0ae%40%3Cdev.ignite.apache.org%3E
> > 
> 

Re: Apache Ignite 2.11

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Sure, thanks for your reply

Folks, could you please advice how to setup JIRA account integration for 
non-committers?

For the page
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.11
I can see all issues, but Alexey's login seems to be not sufficient. Can wiki 
admins set up smth? Or Alexey should do some setup on his own?

On 2021/06/03 14:55:25, Maksim Timonin  wrote: 
> I mean I'm OK to release it with 2.12. So, I am glad to hear there are
> chances for 2.11, but I guess we can postpone it.
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 5:39 PM Dmitry Pavlov  wrote:
> 
> > ok, Maksim, keep us posted.
> >
> > We're in the middle of paperwork rigth now, so there is a chance ))
> >
> > On 2021/06/03 14:30:55, Maksim Timonin  wrote:
> > > > Regarding non-SQL index API it really depends on readiness. I guess if
> > it
> > > is not in the master, we can skip and release it next time.
> > >
> > > Hi, Dmitry! Yes, currently it is on review. I'm OK to release it within
> > the
> > > next release.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 5:26 PM Dmitry Pavlov  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Alexey,
> > > >
> > > > Releasing master as-is makes sence for me.
> > > >
> > > > Regarding non-SQL index API it really depends on readiness. I guess if
> > it
> > > > is not in the master, we can skip and release it next time.
> > > >
> > > > We've a bit overdue initial scope freeze date. It's not a big deal, but
> > > > still makes sense to start discussion, create and share wiki page and
> > > > create branch.
> > > >
> > > > Since committer privileges required to create branch, could you please
> > > > notify me in advance.
> > > >
> > > > Sincerely,
> > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > > >
> > > > On 2021/06/03 14:08:34, ��  <
> > > > olive.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > :scope:
> > > > >
> > > > > Here is a list [1] of 195 tickets, i picked for Apache Ignite 2.11
> > > > release
> > > > >
> > > > > Let's start discussion
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]
> > > >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14781?jql=project%20%3D%20IGNITE%20%20AND%20status%20%20%3D%20Resolved%20and%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.11%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20DESC
> > > > >
> > > > > On 2021/05/13 14:27:33, Dmitry Pavlov  wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Alexey,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > :pmc to sign distribution:
> > > > > > Formally, only PMC member can be a release manager, so part of
> > > > activities should be picked up by committer and PMC member. If noone
> > else
> > > > want to help you here, I would.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > :timeline:
> > > > > > And, could you estimate all phases of the release.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > :scope:
> > > > > > I guess we can just pick up master current state and release it.
> > But
> > > > if someone has some ideas if we should wait for particular feature to
> > be
> > > > completed before branch divergence/release candidate build, please let
> > know.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sincerely,
> > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 2021/05/13 09:45:02, Алексей Гидаспов 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > Dear Ignite Community!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I suggest starting Apache Ignite 2.11 release activities. Also
> > > > suggest
> > > > > > > myself to be a release manager for this release. I plan release
> > at
> > > > the end
> > > > > > > of june 2021.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ___
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > > > Alexey Gidaspov
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> 

Re: Apache Ignite 2.11

[Dmitry Pavlov]

ok, Maksim, keep us posted.

We're in the middle of paperwork rigth now, so there is a chance ))

On 2021/06/03 14:30:55, Maksim Timonin  wrote: 
> > Regarding non-SQL index API it really depends on readiness. I guess if it
> is not in the master, we can skip and release it next time.
> 
> Hi, Dmitry! Yes, currently it is on review. I'm OK to release it within the
> next release.
> 
> On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 5:26 PM Dmitry Pavlov  wrote:
> 
> > Hi Alexey,
> >
> > Releasing master as-is makes sence for me.
> >
> > Regarding non-SQL index API it really depends on readiness. I guess if it
> > is not in the master, we can skip and release it next time.
> >
> > We've a bit overdue initial scope freeze date. It's not a big deal, but
> > still makes sense to start discussion, create and share wiki page and
> > create branch.
> >
> > Since committer privileges required to create branch, could you please
> > notify me in advance.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Dmitriy Pavlov
> >
> > On 2021/06/03 14:08:34, ��  <
> > olive.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > :scope:
> > >
> > > Here is a list [1] of 195 tickets, i picked for Apache Ignite 2.11
> > release
> > >
> > > Let's start discussion
> > >
> > > [1]
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14781?jql=project%20%3D%20IGNITE%20%20AND%20status%20%20%3D%20Resolved%20and%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.11%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20DESC
> > >
> > > On 2021/05/13 14:27:33, Dmitry Pavlov  wrote:
> > > > Hi Alexey,
> > > >
> > > > :pmc to sign distribution:
> > > > Formally, only PMC member can be a release manager, so part of
> > activities should be picked up by committer and PMC member. If noone else
> > want to help you here, I would.
> > > >
> > > > :timeline:
> > > > And, could you estimate all phases of the release.
> > > >
> > > > :scope:
> > > > I guess we can just pick up master current state and release it. But
> > if someone has some ideas if we should wait for particular feature to be
> > completed before branch divergence/release candidate build, please let know.
> > > >
> > > > Sincerely,
> > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > > >
> > > > On 2021/05/13 09:45:02, Алексей Гидаспов 
> > wrote:
> > > > > Dear Ignite Community!
> > > > >
> > > > > I suggest starting Apache Ignite 2.11 release activities. Also
> > suggest
> > > > > myself to be a release manager for this release. I plan release at
> > the end
> > > > > of june 2021.
> > > > >
> > > > > ___
> > > > >
> > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > Alexey Gidaspov
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> 

Re: Apache Ignite 2.11

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Alexey,

Releasing master as-is makes sence for me.

Regarding non-SQL index API it really depends on readiness. I guess if it is 
not in the master, we can skip and release it next time.

We've a bit overdue initial scope freeze date. It's not a big deal, but still 
makes sense to start discussion, create and share wiki page and create branch.

Since committer privileges required to create branch, could you please notify 
me in advance.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/06/03 14:08:34, ��   
wrote: 
> :scope:
> 
> Here is a list [1] of 195 tickets, i picked for Apache Ignite 2.11 release
> 
> Let's start discussion
> 
> [1] 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14781?jql=project%20%3D%20IGNITE%20%20AND%20status%20%20%3D%20Resolved%20and%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.11%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20DESC
> 
> On 2021/05/13 14:27:33, Dmitry Pavlov  wrote: 
> > Hi Alexey,
> > 
> > :pmc to sign distribution:
> > Formally, only PMC member can be a release manager, so part of activities 
> > should be picked up by committer and PMC member. If noone else want to help 
> > you here, I would.
> > 
> > :timeline:
> > And, could you estimate all phases of the release. 
> > 
> > :scope:
> > I guess we can just pick up master current state and release it. But if 
> > someone has some ideas if we should wait for particular feature to be 
> > completed before branch divergence/release candidate build, please let know.
> > 
> > Sincerely,
> > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > 
> > On 2021/05/13 09:45:02, Алексей Гидаспов  wrote: 
> > > Dear Ignite Community!
> > > 
> > > I suggest starting Apache Ignite 2.11 release activities. Also suggest
> > > myself to be a release manager for this release. I plan release at the end
> > > of june 2021.
> > > 
> > > ___
> > > 
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Alexey Gidaspov
> > > 
> > 
> 

Re: Edit access to Apache Ignite wiki

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Alexey,

I've granted you edit permissions.
Please check availability.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/06/03 08:24:03, ��   
wrote: 
> My login is: agidaspov
> E-mail: olive.c...@gmail.com
> 
> On 2021/06/03 08:17:15, Dmitry Pavlov  wrote: 
> > Can you please sign in to cwiki and share your login?
> > 
> > wiki admins (PMC members) could grant access in that case.
> > 
> > On 2021/06/03 07:11:54, Алексей Гидаспов  wrote: 
> > > Hi, Igniters!
> > > 
> > > As a release manager of 2.11 Apache Ignite release I need edit access to
> > > cwiki.apache.org Apache Ignite space. Please tell me, how can I obtain it?
> > > 
> > 
> 

Re: Edit access to Apache Ignite wiki

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Can you please sign in to cwiki and share your login?

wiki admins (PMC members) could grant access in that case.

On 2021/06/03 07:11:54, Алексей Гидаспов  wrote: 
> Hi, Igniters!
> 
> As a release manager of 2.11 Apache Ignite release I need edit access to
> cwiki.apache.org Apache Ignite space. Please tell me, how can I obtain it?
> 

Re: Welcome

[Dmitry Pavlov]

BTW, Alexander,

could you restart dicsussion about mutes with new subject.

Something like 'Let's remove all mutes on the TC' so every community member 
migth notice that.

To scan dev./user. lists contibutors and committers usually look at subject. 
Most of the community might ignore topic 'welcome'

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/05/13 13:43:30, Dmitry Pavlov  wrote: 
> Hi Alexander,
> 
> Regarding tests and mutes, that's right there are 2466 muted tests. here is 
> the list https://mtcga.gridgain.com/mutes.html Use your TC credentials to 
> login.
> 
> I guess vast majority of muted tests are not actual. Test name in the code or 
> suite migth have changed, but TC was not updated. Some of tests could be 
> @Ignored by now, since we have JUnit4 capability to Ignore these tests in 
> code.
> 
> So, for now, muted tests are not really necessary. I'd better Ignore all 
> failures in code. If you would like to help here, feel free to create a new 
> ticket in the JIRA and assign it to yourself.
> 
> Peter, could you please advice how to provide permission to manage mutes? In 
> IgniteTests24Java8_RunAll and IgniteTests24Java8_RunAllNightly.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
> 
> 
> On 2021/05/13 12:58:31, Denis Magda  wrote: 
> > Hello Alexander and welcome to the community!
> > 
> > Thanks for supporting the project and development of Ignite. I've added you
> > to the list of contributors in JIRA. Look forward to your contributions.
> > 
> > -
> > Denis
> > 
> > 
> > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 4:28 AM aonikolaev  wrote:
> > 
> > > Hello, Ignite Community! My name is Alexander. I want to contribute to
> > > Apache
> > > Ignite. To me know that there are many muted tests the TeamCity, and me
> > > think I can try to start dealing with this. Please grant the rights to
> > > :Mute/unmute problems in project && Assign/unassign investigation
> > > My JIRA & username: aonikolaev.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
> > >
> > 
> 

Re: Apache Ignite 2.11

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Alexey,

:pmc to sign distribution:
Formally, only PMC member can be a release manager, so part of activities 
should be picked up by committer and PMC member. If noone else want to help you 
here, I would.

:timeline:
And, could you estimate all phases of the release. 

:scope:
I guess we can just pick up master current state and release it. But if someone 
has some ideas if we should wait for particular feature to be completed before 
branch divergence/release candidate build, please let know.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/05/13 09:45:02, Алексей Гидаспов  wrote: 
> Dear Ignite Community!
> 
> I suggest starting Apache Ignite 2.11 release activities. Also suggest
> myself to be a release manager for this release. I plan release at the end
> of june 2021.
> 
> ___
> 
> Best Regards,
> Alexey Gidaspov
> 

Re: Welcome

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Alexander,

Regarding tests and mutes, that's right there are 2466 muted tests. here is the 
list https://mtcga.gridgain.com/mutes.html Use your TC credentials to login.

I guess vast majority of muted tests are not actual. Test name in the code or 
suite migth have changed, but TC was not updated. Some of tests could be 
@Ignored by now, since we have JUnit4 capability to Ignore these tests in code.

So, for now, muted tests are not really necessary. I'd better Ignore all 
failures in code. If you would like to help here, feel free to create a new 
ticket in the JIRA and assign it to yourself.

Peter, could you please advice how to provide permission to manage mutes? In 
IgniteTests24Java8_RunAll and IgniteTests24Java8_RunAllNightly.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov


On 2021/05/13 12:58:31, Denis Magda  wrote: 
> Hello Alexander and welcome to the community!
> 
> Thanks for supporting the project and development of Ignite. I've added you
> to the list of contributors in JIRA. Look forward to your contributions.
> 
> -
> Denis
> 
> 
> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 4:28 AM aonikolaev  wrote:
> 
> > Hello, Ignite Community! My name is Alexander. I want to contribute to
> > Apache
> > Ignite. To me know that there are many muted tests the TeamCity, and me
> > think I can try to start dealing with this. Please grant the rights to
> > :Mute/unmute problems in project && Assign/unassign investigation
> > My JIRA & username: aonikolaev.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
> >
> 

Re: Extensions section on the downloads page

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Denis,

+1 from my side. 

Now extensions in the download page looks like a bit incomplete snippet of code.

It is better than nothing, but completed table would look better.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/05/12 14:02:04, Denis Magda  wrote: 
> Igniters, Val,
> 
> I came across the Extensions section that was restored on the downloads
> page. It looks clumsy, broken, and incomplete. We're listing spring boot
> artifacts without any reference to other modules:
> https://ignite.apache.org/download.cgi#extensions
> 
> How about:
> 
>- Removing the code snippets of the Spring Boot extensions
>- Add a paragraph and a list with references to all the extensions we
>have documented on our pages. See extensions and integrations section:
>https://ignite.apache.org/docs/latest/
> 
> @Igor Gusev , @Nikita Safonov
>  could
> you also join this thread?
> 
> -
> Denis
> 

Re: Thin Clients: enable partition awareness by default

[Dmitry Pavlov]

+1 

Without awareneess, on the contrary, we can get huge memory utilization on one 
server node. 
With awareness we're more scalable on that matter. 

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/05/12 15:39:53, Igor Sapego  wrote: 
> +1 from me. There were no major issues with this feature and it gives
> good performance boost for many cases.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Igor
> 
> 
> On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 5:18 PM Ivan Daschinsky  wrote:
> 
> > Huge +1 from me. PA should be enabled by default.
> >
> > ср, 12 мая 2021 г. в 13:33, Pavel Tupitsyn :
> > >
> > > Igniters,
> > >
> > > Partition Awareness (PA) is implemented in 5 out of 6 thin clients [1].
> > >
> > > However, this feature is disabled by default in most clients for
> > > compatibility reasons:
> > > initially we only used one connection to the cluster, but with PA enabled
> > > we establish
> > > connections to every server node, which may be not desirable in some use
> > > cases.
> > >
> > > I expect those scenarios to be rare, and in most cases it makes sense to
> > > enable PA by default.
> > > Thoughts, objections?
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Thin+clients+features
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
> >
> 

Re: ASF report May 2021, due 12 May, eod

[Dmitry Pavlov]

The report has been filed to agenda.

See https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/ASF+Board+Report+Drafts 
for details

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/05/06 16:04:10, Dmitry Pavlov  wrote: 
> Hi Igniters,
> 
> Its time for our TLP to prepare next report to the Board.
> 
> Drafting report in reported on in a mailing thread is not so convinitent, so 
> I've started to prepare it here: 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/ASF+Board+Report+Drafts
> 
> It contains now very first version, you're welcome to suggest here in the 
> thread any of
> - significiant community decisions
> - released artifacts
> - any events/facts worth mentioning.
> 
> There are 2 issues that stops from publish the report rigth now,
> 
> 1) for some reason our user@iao list statistics is not collected since March 
> (since 10th week of 2021). Most likely Infra and/or com.devs could help here.
> 2) our downloads page does not show downloads for extensions: 
> https://ignite.apache.org/download.cgi#extensions is not visible for me. Is 
> it my local issue?
> 
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
> 

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [5998931] needs to be handled

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Here it seems that windows agents require a way more time to complete that.

I've set timeout as 40 minutes, let's see if it helps.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/05/08 18:55:25, dpavlov.ta...@gmail.com wrote: 
> Hi Igniters,
> 
>  I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are more than 
> welcomed to help.
> 
>  *New Critical Failure in master [Missing Tests] 
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_MissingTests?branch=%3Cdefault%3E
>  No changes in the build
> 
>- Here's a reminder of what contributors were agreed to do 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute 
>- Should you have any questions please contact dev@ignite.apache.org 
> 
> Best Regards,
> Apache Ignite TeamCity Bot 
> https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot
> Notification generated at 21:55:20 08-05-2021 
> 

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [5999911] needs to be handled

[Dmitry Pavlov]

I've increased the timeout to 60 minutes here.

Sincerely,


On 2021/05/09 15:25:24, dpavlov.ta...@gmail.com wrote: 
> Hi Igniters,
> 
>  I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are more than 
> welcomed to help.
> 
>  *New Critical Failure in master Control Utility 
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_ControlUtility?branch=%3Cdefault%3E
>  No changes in the build
> 
>- Here's a reminder of what contributors were agreed to do 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute 
>- Should you have any questions please contact dev@ignite.apache.org 
> 
> Best Regards,
> Apache Ignite TeamCity Bot 
> https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot
> Notification generated at 18:25:19 09-05-2021 
> 

Re: ASF report May 2021, due 12 May, eod

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Igniters,

It seems that extensions sectoin was removed by Val's commit

https://github.com/apache/ignite-website/commit/70edeaa1c24d9d60ba173bbd03bedb6a29f4cc22#diff-23dd22649c2608cb0d2665a931eec1b010bfa3b559afb398978d816790af8c25L1065

Was that by mistake? or done intentionally? 

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/05/06 16:04:10, Dmitry Pavlov  wrote: 
> Hi Igniters,
> 
> Its time for our TLP to prepare next report to the Board.
> 
> Drafting report in reported on in a mailing thread is not so convinitent, so 
> I've started to prepare it here: 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/ASF+Board+Report+Drafts
> 
> It contains now very first version, you're welcome to suggest here in the 
> thread any of
> - significiant community decisions
> - released artifacts
> - any events/facts worth mentioning.
> 
> There are 2 issues that stops from publish the report rigth now,
> 
> 1) for some reason our user@iao list statistics is not collected since March 
> (since 10th week of 2021). Most likely Infra and/or com.devs could help here.
> 2) our downloads page does not show downloads for extensions: 
> https://ignite.apache.org/download.cgi#extensions is not visible for me. Is 
> it my local issue?
> 
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
> 

ASF report May 2021, due 12 May, eod

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Igniters,

Its time for our TLP to prepare next report to the Board.

Drafting report in reported on in a mailing thread is not so convinitent, so 
I've started to prepare it here: 
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/ASF+Board+Report+Drafts

It contains now very first version, you're welcome to suggest here in the 
thread any of
- significiant community decisions
- released artifacts
- any events/facts worth mentioning.

There are 2 issues that stops from publish the report rigth now,

1) for some reason our user@iao list statistics is not collected since March 
(since 10th week of 2021). Most likely Infra and/or com.devs could help here.
2) our downloads page does not show downloads for extensions: 
https://ignite.apache.org/download.cgi#extensions is not visible for me. Is it 
my local issue?

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

Re: Empty test results for Security Test Suite ran against master branch on Team City

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi,

I guess it 's not correct since master tests count is 0. No reason to run a 
suite without tests.

Folks, why it could be the case? I've checked SUITE_NAME and suite in the code 
and it seems to be mached.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

On 2021/04/22 14:29:37, Shishkov Ilya  wrote: 
> Hello, Igniters!
> 
> As I see, there are no test results for Security Test Suite run against
> 'master' branch [1], for 'ignite-2.10' Security tests results are present
> as expected [2].
> Is this situation correct?
> 
> 1.
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Security/5977426?buildTab=log=1878=1579
> 2.
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Security/5976111?buildTab=log=67783=1599.68439.68448
> 

Re: [DISCUSSION] Add reviewer field to Apache Ignite JIRA project

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Infra request was created: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-18378

On 2019/02/13 12:38:06, Dmitriy Pavlov  wrote: 
> Igniters, is it still reasonable to add a reviewer field now?
> 
> AFAIK, count of PA tickets (our review dept) is less than it was when the
> topic is started. So this proposal can be not actual anymore.
> 
> If you agree, please consider picking up this ticket and contact INFRA for
> adding the field.
> If not, let's close this discussion as not needed
> 
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
> 
> чт, 27 сент. 2018 г. в 18:39, Dmitriy Pavlov :
> 
> > Hi Anton,
> >
> > Thank you for bringing this significant concern here.
> >
> > I'm going to use this field in total correspondence with assignee field
> > usage. We don't set assignee unless someone agrees to be a developer for
> > that feature.
> >
> > Otherwise, it is better to keep an issue as unassigned. Same implies to
> > the reviewer field.
> >
> > So reviewer is someone, who is ready and going to do the review. Unless we
> > not sure who will do a review, mention process continues to work.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Dmitriy Pavlov
> >
> >
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c6013b99940de32aae831a0b76e8fd53febe5040e9e0d67abb4f62a5@%3Cdev.community.apache.org%3E
> >
> >
> >
> > чт, 27 сент. 2018 г. в 18:23, Anton Vinogradov :
> >
> >> Currently, you may ask for a review by mention someone and asking him to
> >> review.
> >> And this approach looks good to me.
> >>
> >> In case we'll invent reviewer field who will set the reviewer?
> >> It's NOT ok to set somebody as a reviewer!
> >> You should ask somebody to be a reviewer first.
> >> And in case he agrees he will just make a review. No reason to set a
> >> useless field in that case.
> >>
> >> вт, 25 сент. 2018 г. в 19:39, Dmitriy Setrakyan :
> >>
> >> > I like the idea.
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 8:25 AM Dmitriy Pavlov 
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Hi Ignite Enthusiasts,
> >> > >
> >> > > During the planning of release 2.7, I've faced with the situation
> >> when it
> >> > > is completely not clear who is going to review ticket.
> >> > >
> >> > > Usually, we do not reassign tickets to a reviewer, but info about
> >> planned
> >> > > reviewer can be very useful for all reviewers, who select some
> >> > contribution
> >> > > to pick up into a review.
> >> > >
> >> > > Please share your vision about the idea of adding a reviewer field
> >> (type:
> >> > > user) in addition to the assignee field.
> >> > >
> >> > > If we agree I will try to ask the Infra team on Friday 28.09.
> >> > >
> >> > > Sincerely,
> >> > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> 

Re: Contribution

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Pankaj,

Welcome to the Apache Ignite community. I've added you to contributor list,
so now you can assign ticket to yourself.

Looking forward to your contributions!

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

P.S. Additional references for you that should boost your onboarding.

Please subscribe to both dev and user lists:
https://ignite.apache.org/community/resources.html#mail-lists

Get familiar with Ignite development process described here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Development+Process

Instructions on how to contribute can be found here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute

Project setup in Intellij IDEA:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Project+Setup

пт, 27 июл. 2018 г. в 18:22, pankaj kumar :

> Hello,
>
> I want to contribute to Ignite. My JIRA id is pankaj024.
> Please add me to the contributor list.
>
> Thank you
> Pankaj
>

Re: GridCacheReplicatedFullApiMultithreadedSelfTest1 not used, not compile. Remove?

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Merged to master. Thank you, Maxim.

пт, 27 июл. 2018 г. в 11:17, Maxim Muzafarov :

> Folks,
>
> I've found issue related to this test [1] (created 2016).
> Looks like it not used, I've prepared PR [2].
>
> If you have time, please, review changes.
>
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3499
> [2] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/4443
>
>
> On Fri, 20 Jul 2018 at 13:27 Dmitry Pavlov  wrote:
>
> > Hi Maxim,
> >
> > I think we should remove such code. And if nobody objects I can apply PR
> on
> > Monday.
> >
> > Ilya, please confirm you're agree.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Dmitriy Pavlov
> >
> > пт, 20 июл. 2018 г. в 13:16, Maxim Muzafarov :
> >
> > > Ignites,
> > >
> > > I've faced with test in Ignite code base that is fully commented. You
> can
> > > check it
> > > by yoursefl [1]. As it not used since 2014 and not even compile I'm
> > > suggesting
> > > to remove it.
> > >
> > > What do you think about it? Please, share your thoughts.
> > >
> > > Full name:
> > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.distributed.replicated.GridCacheReplicatedFullApiMultithreadedSelfTest1
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/modules/core/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/cache/distributed/replicated/GridCacheReplicatedFullApiMultithreadedSelfTest1.java
> > > --
> > > --
> > > Maxim Muzafarov
> > >
> >
> --
> --
> Maxim Muzafarov
>

Re: Data regions on client nodes

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Maxim, thank you.

If it seems it is technically possible, we can file ticket for this change.

I find this proposal reasonable, change makes perfectly sense to me.

We can wait Alex G. feedback on this change before starting actual
implementation. It can take for a while, because he is travelling now.

пт, 27 июл. 2018 г. в 14:35, Maxim Muzafarov :

> Guys,
>
> I can miss some details, but at the first glance we have everething we need
> to defer
> region memory allocation if it has no cache groups assignments. And it
> doesn't matter
> where it happens on client or server nodes.
>
> Currently region memory allocation happens at exchange future init method.
> At the
> node startup method initCachesOnLocalJoin executes. This method resposnible
> for
> memory allocation (through initiating cache managers) and it also starts
> caches.
> So, at this point we have all existing caches descriptors and can find out
> which
> cache matches which region to defer some regions initialization to the
> moment when
> newly cache assings to this region (happend at onCacheChangeRequest).
>
> Please, сorrect me if I'm wrong and missing something.
>
>
>
> On Wed, 25 Jul 2018 at 19:32 Dmitry Pavlov  wrote:
>
> > Hi Maxim,
> >
> > thank you for stepping in. How do you think, is it possible to check
> cache
> > assignment to region at stage of memory allocation?
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Dmitriy Pavlov
> >
> > ср, 25 июл. 2018 г. в 18:22, Maxim Muzafarov :
> >
> > > Folks,
> > >
> > > I've checked memory allocation. It looks like we are allocating memory
> > only
> > > on the first exchange future init on local join occurs on node. Also,
> > seems
> > > like we are allocating only the first chunk of memory (not the whole
> > bunch)
> > > and it calculates as:
> > >
> > > Math.max((maxSize - startSize) / (SEG_CNT - 1), 256L * 1024 * 1024)
> > >
> > > But, I'm agree with Val. It's better to allocate memory only when when
> > > the first cache assigned to this region.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Also, It seems like we have some problem with user notification about
> > > available
> > > physical resources. For client nodes method requiredOffheap() returns
> > > always
> > > zero [1]. That's why WARN message shown here [2] would be not not quite
> > > right
> > > if we have a lot of client nodes in cluster.
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/modules/core/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/managers/discovery/GridDiscoveryManager.java#L1501
> > > [2]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/modules/core/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/IgniteKernal.java#L1489
> > >
> > > сб, 21 июл. 2018 г. в 14:15, Dmitriy Setrakyan  >:
> > >
> > > > On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 5:22 AM, Valentin Kulichenko <
> > > > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Actually, I would go even further: only allocate a data region on a
> > > node
> > > > > when the first cache assigned to this region is deployed on that
> > node.
> > > > > Because issue is broader than client nodes and local caches. One
> can
> > > have
> > > > > server nodes without any caches as well - running only services,
> for
> > > > > example.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > It would be great if this was possible, but to my knowledge, regions
> > need
> > > > to be allocated on startup.
> > > >
> > > > Alexey Goncharuk, do you have any suggestions on this?
> > > >
> > > > D.
> > > >
> > > --
> > > --
> > > Maxim Muzafarov
> > >
> >
> --
> --
> Maxim Muzafarov
>

Re: Deprecating LOCAL cache

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Dmitriy,

I would like to stress this: I'm not saying local cache it useless. I'm
supposing it is not used widely. I want to figure out if I'm mistaking.

All folks involved into user list says it is not used, so why not to
deprecate? If we make a mistake, somebody will come to user list and say,
'Hey, why did you deprecate this, it is used for... in my project'

Being very experienced Igniter you probably know real life usage examples.
And I appreciate if you or somebody else in community could share it.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

пт, 27 июл. 2018 г. в 1:04, Dmitriy Setrakyan :

> Guys,
>
> I just want to make sure we are all on the same page. The main use case for
> LOCAL caches is to have a local hash map querable with SQL and
> automatically persisted to a 3rd party DB.
>
> I want to discourage people from saying "nobody needs some feature". None
> of the people in this discussion are users of any features - we are all
> developers of the features. Instead of guessing whether to deprecate
> something or not, I would actually see if it is even worth a discussion.
> How much effort is required to fix the bug found in the LOCAL cache?
>
> D.
>
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 12:19 PM, Dmitry Pavlov 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Alexey,
> >
> > There is nothing to be sorry about :) Сommunity appreciates an
> alternative
> > vision, this allows us to make as informed decisions as it possible.
> >
> > Thank you for finding this fact, it is very interesting.
> >
> > I'm not sure all these examples were prepared by experienced Ignite
> users.
> > So idea of deprecation may have one more argument. Deprecation will help
> us
> > to inform users about LOCAL cache: Probably local cache is not what they
> > need.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Dmitriy Pavlov
> >
> > чт, 26 июл. 2018 г. в 16:57, Alexey Zinoviev :
> >
> > > Sorry, guys, I'll put my 1 cent
> > >
> > > I'd like this idea  "Implement LOCAL caches as PARTITIONED caches over
> > the
> > > local node."
> > > It make sense for examples/testing in pseudo-distributed mode and so
> far.
> > >
> > > But I think that the deprecation based on user-list mentions is a wrong
> > > way. Please look here
> > > https://github.com/search?q=%22CacheMode.LOCAL%22+%26+ignite=Code
> > > There a lot of hello world examples with LOCAL mode.
> > >
> > > And of course, we can ask about that on user-list, not here, to vote
> for
> > > the deprecation like this.
> > >
> > > 2018-07-26 11:23 GMT+03:00 Vladimir Ozerov :
> > >
> > > > I meant LOCAL + non-LOCAL transactions of course.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 10:42 PM Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> > > dsetrak...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Vladimir,
> > > > >
> > > > > Are you suggesting that a user cannot span more than one local
> cache
> > > in a
> > > > > cross cache LOCAL transactions. This is extremely surprising to me,
> > as
> > > it
> > > > > would require almost no effort to support it. As far as mixing the
> > > local
> > > > > caches with distributed caches, then I agree, cross-cache
> > transactions
> > > do
> > > > > not make sense.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am not sure why deprecating local caches has become a pressing
> > > issue. I
> > > > > can see that there are a few bugs, but why not just fix them and
> move
> > > on?
> > > > > Can someone explain why supporting LOCAL caches is such a burden?
> > > > >
> > > > > Having said that, I am not completely opposed to deprecating LOCAL
> > > > caches.
> > > > > I just want to know why.
> > > > >
> > > > > D.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 10:55 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <
> > > voze...@gridgain.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Dima,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > LOCAL cache adds very little value to the product. It doesn't
> > support
> > > > > > cross-cache transactions, consumes a lot of memory, much slower
> > than
> > > > any
> > > > > > widely-used concurrent hash map. Let's go the same way as Java -
> > mark
> > > > > LOCAL
> > > > > > cache as "deprecated for removal", and then remove it in 3

Re: Deprecating LOCAL cache

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Alexey,

There is nothing to be sorry about :) Сommunity appreciates an alternative
vision, this allows us to make as informed decisions as it possible.

Thank you for finding this fact, it is very interesting.

I'm not sure all these examples were prepared by experienced Ignite users.
So idea of deprecation may have one more argument. Deprecation will help us
to inform users about LOCAL cache: Probably local cache is not what they
need.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

чт, 26 июл. 2018 г. в 16:57, Alexey Zinoviev :

> Sorry, guys, I'll put my 1 cent
>
> I'd like this idea  "Implement LOCAL caches as PARTITIONED caches over the
> local node."
> It make sense for examples/testing in pseudo-distributed mode and so far.
>
> But I think that the deprecation based on user-list mentions is a wrong
> way. Please look here
> https://github.com/search?q=%22CacheMode.LOCAL%22+%26+ignite=Code
> There a lot of hello world examples with LOCAL mode.
>
> And of course, we can ask about that on user-list, not here, to vote for
> the deprecation like this.
>
> 2018-07-26 11:23 GMT+03:00 Vladimir Ozerov :
>
> > I meant LOCAL + non-LOCAL transactions of course.
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 10:42 PM Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> dsetrak...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Vladimir,
> > >
> > > Are you suggesting that a user cannot span more than one local cache
> in a
> > > cross cache LOCAL transactions. This is extremely surprising to me, as
> it
> > > would require almost no effort to support it. As far as mixing the
> local
> > > caches with distributed caches, then I agree, cross-cache transactions
> do
> > > not make sense.
> > >
> > > I am not sure why deprecating local caches has become a pressing
> issue. I
> > > can see that there are a few bugs, but why not just fix them and move
> on?
> > > Can someone explain why supporting LOCAL caches is such a burden?
> > >
> > > Having said that, I am not completely opposed to deprecating LOCAL
> > caches.
> > > I just want to know why.
> > >
> > > D.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 10:55 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <
> voze...@gridgain.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dima,
> > > >
> > > > LOCAL cache adds very little value to the product. It doesn't support
> > > > cross-cache transactions, consumes a lot of memory, much slower than
> > any
> > > > widely-used concurrent hash map. Let's go the same way as Java - mark
> > > LOCAL
> > > > cache as "deprecated for removal", and then remove it in 3.0.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:10 PM Dmitrii Ryabov <
> somefire...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 to make LOCAL as filtered PARTITIONED cache. I think it would be
> > > much
> > > > > easier and faster than fixing all bugs.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2018-07-25 11:51 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> dsetrak...@apache.org
> > >:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I would stay away from deprecating such huge pieces as a whole
> > LOCAL
> > > > > cache.
> > > > > > In retrospect, we should probably not even have LOCAL caches, but
> > > now I
> > > > > am
> > > > > > certain that it is used by many users.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would do one of the following, whichever one is easier:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >- Fix the issues found with LOCAL caches, including
> persistence
> > > > > support
> > > > > >- Implement LOCAL caches as PARTITIONED caches over the local
> > > node.
> > > > In
> > > > > >this case, we would have to hide any distribution-related
> config
> > > > from
> > > > > >users, like affinity function, for example.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > D.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 9:05 AM, Valentin Kulichenko <
> > > > > > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > It sounds like the main drawback of LOCAL cache is that it's
> > > > > implemented
> > > > > > > separately and therefore has to be maintained separately. If
> > that's
> > > > the
> > > > > > > only issue, why not keep LOCAL cache mode on public API, but
> > > > implement
> > > > > it
> > > > > > > as a PARTITIONED cache with a node filter forcefully set?
> That's
> > > > > similar
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > what we do with REPLICATED caches which are actually
> PARTITIONED
> > > with
> > > > > > > infinite number of backups.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This way we fix the issues described by Stan and don't have to
> > > > > deprecate
> > > > > > > anything.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Val
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:53 AM Stanislav Lukyanov <
> > > > > > > stanlukya...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi Igniters,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I’d like to start a discussion about the deprecation of the
> > LOCAL
> > > > > > caches.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > LOCAL caches are an edge-case functionality
> > > > > > > > I haven’t done any formal analysis, but from my experience
> > LOCAL
> > > > > caches
> > > > > > > > are needed very rarely, if ever.
> > > > > > > > I think most usages of LOCAL 

Re: iep-6 metrics ticket review

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Ilya,

We all agreed change is good, but we'd like to be absolutely sure there is
no performance drop. Dmitriy G. was one from reviewer, so I hope he would
provide any additional info about change.

Could you please assist here?

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

чт, 26 июл. 2018 г. в 18:25, Aleksey Kuznetsov :

> Hi, Igniters!
>
> I have the ticket [1] reviewed, it introduce large changes to cache.
>
> How can I assure it causes no performance drop ?
>
> [1] : https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6846
>
> ср, 11 апр. 2018 г. в 3:32, Valentin Kulichenko <
> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com>:
>
> > This is on my plate, will try to take a look this week.
> >
> > -Val
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 10:28 AM, Denis Magda  wrote:
> >
> > > Val,
> > >
> > > As an initial reviewer and reporter, could you have a look and sign the
> > > contribution off?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Denis
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 12:56 AM, Aleksey Kuznetsov <
> > > alkuznetsov...@gmail.com
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi ,Igniters!
> > > >
> > > > Do we still need this ticket, about invoke metrics : [1] ?
> > > >
> > > > If yes, than could somebody review it ?
> > > >
> > > > If no, should we close this ticket ?
> > > >
> > > > [1] : https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6846
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > *Best Regards,*
> > > >
> > > > *Kuznetsov Aleksey*
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [1532575] needs to be handled

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Sergey, thank you. I hope community members will pick up this issue.

чт, 26 июл. 2018 г. в 14:21, Sergey Chugunov :

> No functionality was broken, the problem is in the test itself. I created a
> ticket [1] to fix it and going to mute it on TC.
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9087
>
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 8:42 PM Sergey Chugunov  >
> wrote:
>
> > I'll take a look at this test as I'm an author of it.
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 6:56 PM  wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Ignite Developer,
> >>
> >> I am MTCGA.Bot, and I've detected some issue on TeamCity to be
> addressed.
> >> I hope you can help.
> >>
> >>  *New test failure in master
> >>
> IgniteCacheClientReconnectTest.testClientInForceServerModeStopsOnExchangeHistoryExhaustion
> >>
> >>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=2977382929811006222=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
> >>  Changes may led to failure were done by
> >>  - somefireone
> >>
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826273=false
> >>  - vinokurov.pasha
> >>
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826253=false
> >>  - dmitriy.govorukhin
> >>
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826250=false
> >>  - kaa.dev
> >>
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826246=false
> >>  - vanen31
> >>
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826242=false
> >>  - garus.d.g
> >>
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826234=false
> >>  - ivandasch
> >>
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826229=false
> >>  - av
> >>
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826218=false
> >>  - estanilovskiy
> >>
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826197=false
> >>  - dmitriy.govorukhin
> >>
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826195=false
> >>
> >> - If your changes can led to this failure(s), please create
> issue
> >> with label MakeTeamCityGreenAgain and assign it to you.
> >> -- If you have fix, please set ticket to PA state and write to
> >> dev list fix is ready
> >> -- For case fix will require some time please mute test and set
> >> label Muted_Test to issue
> >> - If you know which change caused failure please contact change
> >> author directly
> >> - If you don't know which change caused failure please send
> >> message to dev list to find out
> >> Should you have any questions please contact dpav...@apache.org or
> write
> >> to dev.list
> >> Best Regards,
> >> MTCGA.Bot
> >> Notification generated at Wed Jul 25 18:02:09 MSK 2018
> >>
> >
>

Re: Need review IGNITE-9050

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi, Igniters, especially Native Persistence Experts, please step in.

Tests are still running, so I suggest to avoid merge until we'll get
run-all results.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

ср, 25 июл. 2018 г. в 16:24, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
dmitriy.govoruk...@gmail.com>:

> Igniters,
>
> I completed work on
> IGNITE-9050 
> (WALIterator
> should throw an exception if iterator stopped in the WAL archive but not in
> WAL work).
>
> review link - CR-697
> 
>

Re: Data regions on client nodes

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Maxim,

thank you for stepping in. How do you think, is it possible to check cache
assignment to region at stage of memory allocation?

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

ср, 25 июл. 2018 г. в 18:22, Maxim Muzafarov :

> Folks,
>
> I've checked memory allocation. It looks like we are allocating memory only
> on the first exchange future init on local join occurs on node. Also, seems
> like we are allocating only the first chunk of memory (not the whole bunch)
> and it calculates as:
>
> Math.max((maxSize - startSize) / (SEG_CNT - 1), 256L * 1024 * 1024)
>
> But, I'm agree with Val. It's better to allocate memory only when when
> the first cache assigned to this region.
>
>
>
> Also, It seems like we have some problem with user notification about
> available
> physical resources. For client nodes method requiredOffheap() returns
> always
> zero [1]. That's why WARN message shown here [2] would be not not quite
> right
> if we have a lot of client nodes in cluster.
>
>
> [1]
>
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/modules/core/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/managers/discovery/GridDiscoveryManager.java#L1501
> [2]
>
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/modules/core/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/IgniteKernal.java#L1489
>
> сб, 21 июл. 2018 г. в 14:15, Dmitriy Setrakyan :
>
> > On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 5:22 AM, Valentin Kulichenko <
> > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Actually, I would go even further: only allocate a data region on a
> node
> > > when the first cache assigned to this region is deployed on that node.
> > > Because issue is broader than client nodes and local caches. One can
> have
> > > server nodes without any caches as well - running only services, for
> > > example.
> > >
> >
> > It would be great if this was possible, but to my knowledge, regions need
> > to be allocated on startup.
> >
> > Alexey Goncharuk, do you have any suggestions on this?
> >
> > D.
> >
> --
> --
> Maxim Muzafarov
>

Re: Deprecating LOCAL cache

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Igniters,

I've never seen the LOCAL cache in the user list for 1 year. I've tried to
search in archives and found only that mention
http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/LOCAL-cache-and-EntryProcessor-td7419.html
in
2016.

Who can provide any additional usage examples?

My vote goes to deprecate until it is not clear for everyone, that LOCAL
cache is widely used feature.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

ср, 25 июл. 2018 г. в 12:10, Dmitrii Ryabov :

> +1 to make LOCAL as filtered PARTITIONED cache. I think it would be much
> easier and faster than fixing all bugs.
>
> 2018-07-25 11:51 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan :
>
> > I would stay away from deprecating such huge pieces as a whole LOCAL
> cache.
> > In retrospect, we should probably not even have LOCAL caches, but now I
> am
> > certain that it is used by many users.
> >
> > I would do one of the following, whichever one is easier:
> >
> >- Fix the issues found with LOCAL caches, including persistence
> support
> >- Implement LOCAL caches as PARTITIONED caches over the local node. In
> >this case, we would have to hide any distribution-related config from
> >users, like affinity function, for example.
> >
> > D.
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 9:05 AM, Valentin Kulichenko <
> > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > It sounds like the main drawback of LOCAL cache is that it's
> implemented
> > > separately and therefore has to be maintained separately. If that's the
> > > only issue, why not keep LOCAL cache mode on public API, but implement
> it
> > > as a PARTITIONED cache with a node filter forcefully set? That's
> similar
> > to
> > > what we do with REPLICATED caches which are actually PARTITIONED with
> > > infinite number of backups.
> > >
> > > This way we fix the issues described by Stan and don't have to
> deprecate
> > > anything.
> > >
> > > -Val
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:53 AM Stanislav Lukyanov <
> > > stanlukya...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Igniters,
> > > >
> > > > I’d like to start a discussion about the deprecation of the LOCAL
> > caches.
> > > >
> > > > LOCAL caches are an edge-case functionality
> > > > I haven’t done any formal analysis, but from my experience LOCAL
> caches
> > > > are needed very rarely, if ever.
> > > > I think most usages of LOCAL caches I’ve seen were misuses: the users
> > > > actually needed a simple HashMap, or an actual PARTITIONED cache.
> > > >
> > > > LOCAL caches are easy to implement on top of PARTITIONED
> > > > If one requires a LOCAL cache (which is itself questionable, as
> > discussed
> > > > above) it is quite easy to implement one on top of PARTITIONED cache.
> > > > A node filter of form `node -> node.id().equals(localNodeId)` is
> > enough
> > > > to make the cache to be stored on the node that created it.
> > > > Locality of access to the cache (i.e. making it unavailable from
> other
> > > > nodes) can be achieved on the application level.
> > > >
> > > > LOCAL caches are hard to maintain
> > > > A quick look at the open issues mentioning “local cache” suggests
> that
> > > > this is a corner case for implementation of many Ignite features:
> > > >
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=text%20~%20%
> > > 22local%20cache%22%20and%20%20project%20%3D%20IGNITE%
> > > 20and%20status%20%3D%20open
> > > > In particular, a recent SO question brought up the fact that LOCAL
> > caches
> > > > don’t support native persistence:
> > > >
> > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/51511892/how-to-
> > > configure-persistent-storage-for-apache-ignite-cache
> > > > Having to ask ourselves “how does it play with LOCAL caches” every
> time
> > > we
> > > > write any code in Ignite seems way to much for the benefits we gain
> > from
> > > it.
> > > >
> > > > Proposal
> > > > Let’s deprecate LOCAL caches in 2.x and remove them in 3.0.
> > > > As a part of deprecation let’s do the following:
> > > > - Put @Deprecated on the CacheMode.LOCAL
> > > > - Print a warning every time a LOCAL cache is created
> > > > - Remove all mentions of LOCAL caches from readme.io, if any, except
> > for
> > > > the page about cache modes
> > > > - On the page about cache modes explain that LOCAL is deprecated and
> > can
> > > > be replaced with a PARTITIONED cache with a node filter
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Stan
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Documenting Ignite

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Artem,

Could you please check if you can edit now.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

ср, 25 июл. 2018 г. в 14:03, Artem Budnikov :

> Hi Dmitry,
>
> I've added a comment to the issue.
>
> My Confluence ID is a.budnikov. Could you please grant me permissions
> required to edit pages. Thanks!
>
>
> Artem
>
> On 24.07.2018 16:58, Dmitry Pavlov wrote:
>
> I've noticed now INFRA asks for feedback from us.
>
> Artem, will you provide feedback on done change in
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-16803
>
> вт, 24 июл. 2018 г. в 11:01, Dmitry Pavlov :
>
>> Hi Artem,
>>
>> This is page in Ignite space, so you could do updates. Of course, if you
>> have access to Ignite space in wiki. If not, please sign up and share your
>> wiki login (id).
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Dmitriy Pavlov
>>
>> вт, 24 июл. 2018 г. в 10:25, Artem Budnikov > >:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> Despite what I've been told about INFRA, it responded exceptionally
>>> quickly and added the field :-)
>>>
>>> I think the page describing the process of creating IGNITE issues
>>> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute#HowtoContribute-TicketCreation>
>>> needs to be updated to reflect the changes related to documentation
>>> process. Could someone do this?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Artem
>>> On 23.07.2018 18:00, Artem Budnikov wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> I created an issue in the Apache INFRA project:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-16803
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Artem
>>>
>>>
>>> On 19.07.2018 22:58, Dmitry Pavlov wrote:
>>>
>>> I appologize, initially I misundersood proposal. I've concluded that new
>>> doc issue will be created automatically by closing original ticket, -
>>> this
>>> can be done by plugin only.
>>>
>>> If we just introduce flag or combobox for indicate doc is required,
>>> there
>>> is no technical issues, it is defenetely possible. So +1 from my side
>>> without concerns.
>>>
>>> чт, 19 июл. 2018 г. в 22:02, Denis Magda 
>>> :
>>>
>>> Ok, if all our doc writers are in the agreement then let's give a couple
>>> of
>>> days to our fellow Igniters to share alternate opinions.
>>>
>>> Artem, if you don't hear back by Monday then feel free to create an
>>> INFRA
>>> ticket.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Denis
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:43 AM Prachi Garg 
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> I totally agree with Denis's point -
>>>
>>> "Another benefit of having "Docs Required" flag enabled by default, is
>>>
>>> that
>>>
>>> Artem and Prachi can see all such tickets months and weeks before a
>>> release, figure out details from source code contributors and complete
>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>> docs in advance."
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 2:49 PM, Dmitry Pavlov 
>>> 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, I agree. My concern is related only to process implementation
>>>
>>> aspect,
>>>
>>> I wonder if it is technically possible.
>>>
>>> Generally I like idea of automatic control.
>>>
>>> ср, 18 июл. 2018 г. в 23:21, Denis Magda 
>>> :
>>>
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> Artem's proposal might simplify and make our doc tickets tracking less
>>> error-prone. The current approach implies that a contributor keeps in
>>>
>>> mind
>>>
>>> what needs to go to the docs. If he/she has a good memory, a doc JIRA
>>> counterpart will be created once the contribution is accepted. But the
>>> practice shows that the memory lets us down :)
>>>
>>> Another benefit of having "Docs Required" flag enabled by default, is
>>>
>>> that
>>>
>>> Artem and Prachi can see all such tickets months and weeks before a
>>> release, figure out details from source code contributors and complete
>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>> docs in advance.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Denis
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 8:39 AM Artem Budnikov <
>>> a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dmitry,
>>>
>>> The goal I had in mind by pro

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [1532044] needs to be handled

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Great, thanks! I hope all TC failures would be fixed as fast as this one.

вт, 24 июл. 2018 г. в 17:41, Alexey Goncharuk :

> Thanks, merged to master.
>
> вт, 24 июл. 2018 г. в 16:28, Anton Vinogradov :
>
>> Seems, it works.
>> Cancelled hanged suites, they hangs because of problems fixed at master.
>>
>> вт, 24 июл. 2018 г. в 15:20, Anton Vinogradov :
>>
>> > Started more [1] Data Structures tasks to make sure fix works.
>> >
>> > [1]
>> >
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_DataStructures_IgniteTests24Java8=pull%2F4415%2Fhead=buildTypeStatusDiv
>> >
>> > вт, 24 июл. 2018 г. в 14:59, Alexey Goncharuk <
>> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com
>> > >:
>> >
>> >> I will merge the fix once the TC passes for the new PR.
>> >>
>> >> вт, 24 июл. 2018 г. в 13:13, Andrey Mashenkov <
>> andrey.mashen...@gmail.com
>> >> >:
>> >>
>> >> > Hi Dmitry,
>> >> >
>> >> > Looks like DataStructure sute timeouts is caused by IGNITE-8892 fix
>> [1].
>> >> > The issue here is IgniteSetImpl uses internal CacheQueryFuture in
>> wrong
>> >> > way.
>> >> >
>> >> > I've already run PR branch with a fix on TC and it looks fine [2].
>> >> >
>> >> > [1] issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-8892
>> >> > [2]
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1534153=queuedBuildOverviewTab
>> >> >
>> >> > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 12:53 PM Dmitry Pavlov <
>> dpavlov@gmail.com>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > Hi Igniters,
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Test caused suite timeout 3 times in a row
>> >> > > ⚠ IgniteDataStructureWithJobTest.testJobWithRestart (last started)
>> >> > > ⚠ IgniteDataStructureWithJobTest.testJobWithRestart (last started)
>> >> > > ⚠ IgniteDataStructureWithJobTest.testJobWithRestart (last started)
>> >> > > History -
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_DataStructures=%3Cdefault%3E=buildTypeStatusDiv
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Could it be related to IGNITE-8783 change?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Test seems to be waiting for all job responses from worker nodes
>> >> before
>> >> > > stopping grid.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Anton, please step in.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Sincerely,
>> >> > > Dmitriy Pavlov
>> >> > >
>> >> > > вт, 24 июл. 2018 г. в 3:17, :
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > Hi Ignite Developer,
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > I am MTCGA.Bot, and I've detected some issue on TeamCity to be
>> >> > addressed.
>> >> > > > I hope you can help.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >  *New Critical Failure in master Data Structures
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_DataStructures=%3Cdefault%3E=buildTypeStatusDiv
>> >> > > >  Changes may led to failure were done by
>> >> > > >  - somefireone
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826273=false
>> >> > > >  - vinokurov.pasha
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826253=false
>> >> > > >  - dmitriy.govorukhin
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826250=false
>> >> > > >  - kaa.dev
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826246=false
>> >> > > >  - vanen31
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >

Re: Documenting Ignite

[Dmitry Pavlov]

I've noticed now INFRA asks for feedback from us.

Artem, will you provide feedback on done change in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-16803

вт, 24 июл. 2018 г. в 11:01, Dmitry Pavlov :

> Hi Artem,
>
> This is page in Ignite space, so you could do updates. Of course, if you
> have access to Ignite space in wiki. If not, please sign up and share your
> wiki login (id).
>
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
>
> вт, 24 июл. 2018 г. в 10:25, Artem Budnikov :
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> Despite what I've been told about INFRA, it responded exceptionally
>> quickly and added the field :-)
>>
>> I think the page describing the process of creating IGNITE issues
>> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute#HowtoContribute-TicketCreation>
>> needs to be updated to reflect the changes related to documentation
>> process. Could someone do this?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Artem
>> On 23.07.2018 18:00, Artem Budnikov wrote:
>>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I created an issue in the Apache INFRA project:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-16803
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Artem
>>
>>
>> On 19.07.2018 22:58, Dmitry Pavlov wrote:
>>
>> I appologize, initially I misundersood proposal. I've concluded that new
>> doc issue will be created automatically by closing original ticket, -
>> this
>> can be done by plugin only.
>>
>> If we just introduce flag or combobox for indicate doc is required, there
>> is no technical issues, it is defenetely possible. So +1 from my side
>> without concerns.
>>
>> чт, 19 июл. 2018 г. в 22:02, Denis Magda 
>> :
>>
>> Ok, if all our doc writers are in the agreement then let's give a couple
>> of
>> days to our fellow Igniters to share alternate opinions.
>>
>> Artem, if you don't hear back by Monday then feel free to create an INFRA
>> ticket.
>>
>> --
>> Denis
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:43 AM Prachi Garg 
>>  wrote:
>>
>> I totally agree with Denis's point -
>>
>> "Another benefit of having "Docs Required" flag enabled by default, is
>>
>> that
>>
>> Artem and Prachi can see all such tickets months and weeks before a
>> release, figure out details from source code contributors and complete
>>
>> the
>>
>> docs in advance."
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 2:49 PM, Dmitry Pavlov 
>> 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, I agree. My concern is related only to process implementation
>>
>> aspect,
>>
>> I wonder if it is technically possible.
>>
>> Generally I like idea of automatic control.
>>
>> ср, 18 июл. 2018 г. в 23:21, Denis Magda 
>> :
>>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> Artem's proposal might simplify and make our doc tickets tracking less
>> error-prone. The current approach implies that a contributor keeps in
>>
>> mind
>>
>> what needs to go to the docs. If he/she has a good memory, a doc JIRA
>> counterpart will be created once the contribution is accepted. But the
>> practice shows that the memory lets us down :)
>>
>> Another benefit of having "Docs Required" flag enabled by default, is
>>
>> that
>>
>> Artem and Prachi can see all such tickets months and weeks before a
>> release, figure out details from source code contributors and complete
>>
>> the
>>
>> docs in advance.
>>
>> --
>> Denis
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 8:39 AM Artem Budnikov <
>> a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dmitry,
>>
>> The goal I had in mind by proposing that suggestion was to rectify
>>
>> the
>>
>> fact that JIRA issues for documentation are created on an ad-hoc
>>
>> basis,
>>
>> and often issues are created when the lack of documentation becomes
>>
>> an
>>
>> issue for somebody. So we need to be more proactive.
>>
>> I think manual tracking of issues is possible but as efficient as the
>> current situation with the docs. Manual tracking will have to be
>>
>> shared
>>
>> between multiple contributors and performed outside of JIRA, which
>>
>> has
>>
>> its own limitation. If you have any suggestions for improvement
>>
>> without
>>
>> creating fields in JIRA, please share your thoughts.
>>
>> If you are concerned that it's not possible to add a field, then we
>> should contact Apache Infra and

Re: Hello

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Nikolai,

I've added you to the list of contributors, so you could assign issues to
yourself.

Looking forward to your contributions!

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

P.S. Additional references for you that should boost your onboarding.

Please subscribe to both dev and user lists:
https://ignite.apache.org/community/resources.html#mail-lists

Get familiar with Ignite development process described here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Development+Process

Instructions on how to contribute can be found here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute

Project setup in Intellij IDEA:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Project+Setup

вт, 24 июл. 2018 г. в 12:44, Nikolai Kulagin :

> I'm new to Ignite and I would like to join apache ignite development.
>
> My JIRA's login is zzzadruga.
>
> Going to start from IGNITE-9044 and IGNITE-9046

Re: Hello

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Sure, I'd be happy to help.

вт, 24 июл. 2018 г. в 12:47, Vyacheslav Daradur :

> Welcome to the community, Nikolai!
>
> Dmitry, could you help with contributor permissions in Jira?
>
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 12:44 PM Nikolai Kulagin
>  wrote:
> >
> > I'm new to Ignite and I would like to join apache ignite development.
> >
> > My JIRA's login is zzzadruga.
> >
> > Going to start from IGNITE-9044 and IGNITE-9046
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards, Vyacheslav D.
>

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [1532044] needs to be handled

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Igniters,

Test caused suite timeout 3 times in a row
⚠ IgniteDataStructureWithJobTest.testJobWithRestart (last started)
⚠ IgniteDataStructureWithJobTest.testJobWithRestart (last started)
⚠ IgniteDataStructureWithJobTest.testJobWithRestart (last started)
History -
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_DataStructures=%3Cdefault%3E=buildTypeStatusDiv

Could it be related to IGNITE-8783 change?

Test seems to be waiting for all job responses from worker nodes before
stopping grid.

Anton, please step in.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

вт, 24 июл. 2018 г. в 3:17, :

> Hi Ignite Developer,
>
> I am MTCGA.Bot, and I've detected some issue on TeamCity to be addressed.
> I hope you can help.
>
>  *New Critical Failure in master Data Structures
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_DataStructures=%3Cdefault%3E=buildTypeStatusDiv
>  Changes may led to failure were done by
>  - somefireone
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826273=false
>  - vinokurov.pasha
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826253=false
>  - dmitriy.govorukhin
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826250=false
>  - kaa.dev
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826246=false
>  - vanen31
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826242=false
>  - garus.d.g
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826234=false
>  - ivandasch
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826229=false
>  - av
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826218=false
>  - estanilovskiy
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826197=false
>  - dmitriy.govorukhin
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=826195=false
>
> - If your changes can led to this failure(s), please create issue
> with label MakeTeamCityGreenAgain and assign it to you.
> -- If you have fix, please set ticket to PA state and write to dev
> list fix is ready
> -- For case fix will require some time please mute test and set
> label Muted_Test to issue
> - If you know which change caused failure please contact change
> author directly
> - If you don't know which change caused failure please send
> message to dev list to find out
> Should you have any questions please contact dpav...@apache.org or write
> to dev.list
> Best Regards,
> MTCGA.Bot
> Notification generated at Tue Jul 24 03:17:09 MSK 2018
>

Re: Documenting Ignite

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Artem,

This is page in Ignite space, so you could do updates. Of course, if you
have access to Ignite space in wiki. If not, please sign up and share your
wiki login (id).

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

вт, 24 июл. 2018 г. в 10:25, Artem Budnikov :

> Hi everyone,
>
> Despite what I've been told about INFRA, it responded exceptionally
> quickly and added the field :-)
>
> I think the page describing the process of creating IGNITE issues
> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute#HowtoContribute-TicketCreation>
> needs to be updated to reflect the changes related to documentation
> process. Could someone do this?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Artem
> On 23.07.2018 18:00, Artem Budnikov wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I created an issue in the Apache INFRA project:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-16803
>
> Cheers,
>
> Artem
>
>
> On 19.07.2018 22:58, Dmitry Pavlov wrote:
>
> I appologize, initially I misundersood proposal. I've concluded that new
> doc issue will be created automatically by closing original ticket, - this
> can be done by plugin only.
>
> If we just introduce flag or combobox for indicate doc is required, there
> is no technical issues, it is defenetely possible. So +1 from my side
> without concerns.
>
> чт, 19 июл. 2018 г. в 22:02, Denis Magda 
> :
>
> Ok, if all our doc writers are in the agreement then let's give a couple
> of
> days to our fellow Igniters to share alternate opinions.
>
> Artem, if you don't hear back by Monday then feel free to create an INFRA
> ticket.
>
> --
> Denis
>
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:43 AM Prachi Garg 
>  wrote:
>
> I totally agree with Denis's point -
>
> "Another benefit of having "Docs Required" flag enabled by default, is
>
> that
>
> Artem and Prachi can see all such tickets months and weeks before a
> release, figure out details from source code contributors and complete
>
> the
>
> docs in advance."
>
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 2:49 PM, Dmitry Pavlov 
> 
> wrote:
>
> Yes, I agree. My concern is related only to process implementation
>
> aspect,
>
> I wonder if it is technically possible.
>
> Generally I like idea of automatic control.
>
> ср, 18 июл. 2018 г. в 23:21, Denis Magda 
> :
>
> Hi folks,
>
> Artem's proposal might simplify and make our doc tickets tracking less
> error-prone. The current approach implies that a contributor keeps in
>
> mind
>
> what needs to go to the docs. If he/she has a good memory, a doc JIRA
> counterpart will be created once the contribution is accepted. But the
> practice shows that the memory lets us down :)
>
> Another benefit of having "Docs Required" flag enabled by default, is
>
> that
>
> Artem and Prachi can see all such tickets months and weeks before a
> release, figure out details from source code contributors and complete
>
> the
>
> docs in advance.
>
> --
> Denis
>
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 8:39 AM Artem Budnikov <
> a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dmitry,
>
> The goal I had in mind by proposing that suggestion was to rectify
>
> the
>
> fact that JIRA issues for documentation are created on an ad-hoc
>
> basis,
>
> and often issues are created when the lack of documentation becomes
>
> an
>
> issue for somebody. So we need to be more proactive.
>
> I think manual tracking of issues is possible but as efficient as the
> current situation with the docs. Manual tracking will have to be
>
> shared
>
> between multiple contributors and performed outside of JIRA, which
>
> has
>
> its own limitation. If you have any suggestions for improvement
>
> without
>
> creating fields in JIRA, please share your thoughts.
>
> If you are concerned that it's not possible to add a field, then we
> should contact Apache Infra and find out.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Artem Budnikov
>
>
> On 18.07.2018 16:14, Dmitry Pavlov wrote:
>
> Hi Artem,
>
> I sometimes receive feedback that Ignite docs has potential for
> improvement, while I found our docs quite intuitive and simple to
> understand. So if experienced tech writer will join community it
>
> could
>
> benefit all of us, and users, of course. So you're very welcome to
>
> the
>
> community!
>
> About idea of fields introduction I guess we will need assistance
>
> of
>
> Apache
>
> Infra team, because Ignite shares JIRA with all other Apache
>
> project.
>
> And
>
> I'm not sure that technical implementation of proposed process is
>
> even
>
> possible without plu

Re: Implementing custom affinity logic

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi,

 In case these questions are not related to some PR/Issue or contribution,
than user list probably is better place to ask these questions.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

пн, 23 июл. 2018 г. в 13:24, kotamrajuyashasvi :

> Hi
>
> I m working on an ignite project where I want to have certain records to be
> collocated based
> on a custom calculated value which is obtained from the fields of the
> primary key object.
>
> For example the Primary key pojos have fields a,b,c. I want all records
> having same value of (a+b)/c
> collocated on same node/partition.
>
> I have gone through the ignite documentation and found that custom
> AffinityKeyMapper is the
> one that can be used. Also there is an option to use custom Affinity
> function but extra logic has to be added for partition to node mapping
> etc..
>
> 1. How can I achieve my above requirement? What are the correct options and
> where can
> I get a working example of custom AffinityKeyMapper or AffinityFunction
> ?
>
> 2. Once after achieving custom affinity how to test if all records are
> getting collocated as expected. One
> option that I found was to use scan query and scan a particular
> partition and test each record if it
> should actually belong to the scanned partition. But if there are huge
> number of records I'm facing
> OOM while running scan query for a partition. So I would like to know
> how to achieve this/ test to
> confirm for sure the collocation is as expected.
>
> 3. What is the performance impact of using custom affinity logic when
> compared to using no affinity and
> using @AffinityKeyMapped annotation to achieve affinity where the
> scenario is to collocate based on
> a single field.
>
> 4. When using @AffinityKeyMapped or no affinity is used, is
>
>
> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheDefaultAffinityKeyMapper
> is used as default
> AffinityKeyMapper ? or there is any other default module that is used
> for calculating affinity ?
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
>

Re: Apache Ignite 2.7: scope, time and release manager

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Denis, Nikolay,

I've issued a number of tickets to update dependencies versions. I would
like all these updates are available within 2.7.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

сб, 21 июл. 2018 г. в 3:28, Pavel Petroshenko :

> Hi Denis, Nikolay,
>
> The proposed 2.7 release timing sounds reasonable to me.
> Python [1], PHP [2], and Node.js [3] thin clients should take the train.
>
> p.
>
> [1] https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7782
> [2] https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7783
> [3] https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 2:35 PM, Denis Magda  wrote:
>
> > Igniters,
> >
> > Let's agree on the time and the scope of 2.7. As for the release manager,
> > we had a conversation with Nikolay Izhikov and he decided to try the role
> > out. Thanks, Nikolay!
> >
> > Nikolay, we need to prepare a page like that [1] once the release terms
> are
> > defined.
> >
> > I propose us to roll Ignite 2.7 at the end of September. Folks who are
> > working on SQL, core, C++/NET, thin clients, ML, service grid
> > optimizations, data structures please enlist what you're ready to
> deliver.
> >
> >
> > [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.6
> >
>

Re: Code duplicates in ssh tests

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Ok, I agree here, that we can remove one test. Feel free to create an issue
and PR if nobody else mind. Let us wait at least until Mon 23 Jul before
merge.

пт, 20 июл. 2018 г. в 17:57, Иван Федотов :

> Hi, Dmitry.
>
> I thought about elements order, but if we go deeper in
> ignite.cluster().stopNodes() method, we can see that in ClusterIgniteImpl
> [1] all nodes id will be collected in HashSet in forNodesIds method [2].
>
> So I think that in this case it's not important what use initially, HashSet
>  or ArrayList.
>
> [1]
>
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/modules/core/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/cluster/IgniteClusterImpl.java#L250
> [2]
>
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/modules/core/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/cluster/ClusterGroupAdapter.java#L454
>
>
> 2018-07-20 16:52 GMT+03:00 Dmitry Pavlov :
>
> > Hi Ivan,
> >
> > I can suppose that it is related to elements order. Is it reasonable to
> > keep 2 tests with 1 common mehod? One test will call this method with
> > HashSet, and other with ArrayList.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Dmitriy Pavlov
> >
> > пт, 20 июл. 2018 г. в 15:01, Иван Федотов :
> >
> > > Hi, Igniters!
> > >
> > > I’m working on ssh module and found some code duplicates in
> > > IgniteProjectionStartStopRestartSelfTest.
> > >
> > > 1. Tests testRestartNodesByIds and testRestartNodesByIdsC are fully
> > > duplicate themself [1]. I tried to found what differences should they
> > have
> > > and looked at similar tests: testStopNodesByIds and testStopNodesByIdsC
> > > [2]. It relates to the second point.
> > >
> > > 2. The only difference is that in testStopNodesByIds we stop nodes by
> > > passing HashSet of Ids and in testStopNodesByIdsC we stop by passing
> > > ArrayList of Ids. In my opinion it does not matter, because stopNodes
> > > methods have Collection as argument and we can pass to it both HashSet
> > and
> > > ArrayList. So, I think that code in these tests are also duplicate each
> > > other.
> > >
> > > What do you think? Can we remove one of these tests in both cases?
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > > https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/modules/
> > ssh/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/
> > IgniteProjectionStartStopRestartSelfTest.java#L878
> > >
> > > [2]
> > >
> > > https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/modules/
> > ssh/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/
> > IgniteProjectionStartStopRestartSelfTest.java#L659
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Ivan Fedotov.
> > >
> > > ivanan...@gmail.com
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Ivan Fedotov.
>
> ivanan...@gmail.com
>

Re: Code duplicates in ssh tests

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Ivan,

I can suppose that it is related to elements order. Is it reasonable to
keep 2 tests with 1 common mehod? One test will call this method with
HashSet, and other with ArrayList.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

пт, 20 июл. 2018 г. в 15:01, Иван Федотов :

> Hi, Igniters!
>
> I’m working on ssh module and found some code duplicates in
> IgniteProjectionStartStopRestartSelfTest.
>
> 1. Tests testRestartNodesByIds and testRestartNodesByIdsC are fully
> duplicate themself [1]. I tried to found what differences should they have
> and looked at similar tests: testStopNodesByIds and testStopNodesByIdsC
> [2]. It relates to the second point.
>
> 2. The only difference is that in testStopNodesByIds we stop nodes by
> passing HashSet of Ids and in testStopNodesByIdsC we stop by passing
> ArrayList of Ids. In my opinion it does not matter, because stopNodes
> methods have Collection as argument and we can pass to it both HashSet and
> ArrayList. So, I think that code in these tests are also duplicate each
> other.
>
> What do you think? Can we remove one of these tests in both cases?
>
>
> [1]
>
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/modules/ssh/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/IgniteProjectionStartStopRestartSelfTest.java#L878
>
> [2]
>
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/modules/ssh/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/IgniteProjectionStartStopRestartSelfTest.java#L659
>
>
> --
> Ivan Fedotov.
>
> ivanan...@gmail.com
>

Re: Desynchronization of true repo and github repo

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Yes, very strange thing, I've also checked this commit in mirror before,
and it is appeared only now. I have no clue about reasons.

пт, 20 июл. 2018 г. в 15:02, Nikolay Izhikov :

> When I'm try to push 8633d34e to master, GitHub repo doesn't contain Yury
> commit.
>
> It appear on GitHub only after my merge and push.
>
> пт, 20 июля 2018 г., 14:53 Dmitry Pavlov :
>
> > Hi Yury,
> >
> > it seems commit has appeared now:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/26e405281792d38b5505cde22b5c6a91749c4990
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Dmitriy Pavlov
> >
> > пт, 20 июл. 2018 г. в 14:02, Yury Babak :
> >
> > > Igniters,
> > >
> > > Few hours ago I pushed the  commit
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=commit;h=26e405281792d38b5505cde22b5c6a91749c4990
> > >
> > >
> > > into https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/ignite
> > >
> > > But I dont see this commit in github repo, may be we have some problem
> > with
> > > synchronization between those two repos?
> > >
> > > Can someone check it?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Yury
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
> > >
> >
>

Re: Desynchronization of true repo and github repo

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Yury,

it seems commit has appeared now:
https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/26e405281792d38b5505cde22b5c6a91749c4990

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

пт, 20 июл. 2018 г. в 14:02, Yury Babak :

> Igniters,
>
> Few hours ago I pushed the  commit
> <
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=commit;h=26e405281792d38b5505cde22b5c6a91749c4990>
>
> into https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/ignite
>
> But I dont see this commit in github repo, may be we have some problem with
> synchronization between those two repos?
>
> Can someone check it?
>
> Regards,
> Yury
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
>

Re: GridCacheReplicatedFullApiMultithreadedSelfTest1 not used, not compile. Remove?

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Maxim,

I think we should remove such code. And if nobody objects I can apply PR on
Monday.

Ilya, please confirm you're agree.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

пт, 20 июл. 2018 г. в 13:16, Maxim Muzafarov :

> Ignites,
>
> I've faced with test in Ignite code base that is fully commented. You can
> check it
> by yoursefl [1]. As it not used since 2014 and not even compile I'm
> suggesting
> to remove it.
>
> What do you think about it? Please, share your thoughts.
>
> Full name:
>
> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.distributed.replicated.GridCacheReplicatedFullApiMultithreadedSelfTest1
>
> [1]
>
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/modules/core/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/cache/distributed/replicated/GridCacheReplicatedFullApiMultithreadedSelfTest1.java
> --
> --
> Maxim Muzafarov
>

Fwd: The Apache Ignite Book

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Igniters,

We somethimes mention lack of overall view and documentaion about Ignite,
and I guess it could be changed soon.

FYI, please find forwarded message below, and I hope you will have a free
minute to review.

At least I can see free book sample available and I find deep technical
details about the product.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

-- Forwarded message -
From: srecon 
Date: пт, 20 июл. 2018 г. в 11:06
Subject: The Apache Ignite Book
To: 


Dear Igniters,
  we are happy to announce that a free sample chapter of our new title "The
Apache Ignite book" has been published on  leanpub
  . The full table of contents of the book
also available at leanpub.
  This is an agile-published book and the first portion of the book will be
published soon. We want this book to be the perfect guide for the Ignite
users. So, any suggestions, comments, ideas, and critics are welcome.

Best regards
  Shamim



--
Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/

Re: Documenting Ignite

[Dmitry Pavlov]

I appologize, initially I misundersood proposal. I've concluded that new
doc issue will be created automatically by closing original ticket, - this
can be done by plugin only.

If we just introduce flag or combobox for indicate doc is required, there
is no technical issues, it is defenetely possible. So +1 from my side
without concerns.

чт, 19 июл. 2018 г. в 22:02, Denis Magda :

> Ok, if all our doc writers are in the agreement then let's give a couple of
> days to our fellow Igniters to share alternate opinions.
>
> Artem, if you don't hear back by Monday then feel free to create an INFRA
> ticket.
>
> --
> Denis
>
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:43 AM Prachi Garg  wrote:
>
> > I totally agree with Denis's point -
> >
> > "Another benefit of having "Docs Required" flag enabled by default, is
> that
> > Artem and Prachi can see all such tickets months and weeks before a
> > release, figure out details from source code contributors and complete
> the
> > docs in advance."
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 2:49 PM, Dmitry Pavlov 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Yes, I agree. My concern is related only to process implementation
> aspect,
> >> I wonder if it is technically possible.
> >>
> >> Generally I like idea of automatic control.
> >>
> >> ср, 18 июл. 2018 г. в 23:21, Denis Magda :
> >>
> >> > Hi folks,
> >> >
> >> > Artem's proposal might simplify and make our doc tickets tracking less
> >> > error-prone. The current approach implies that a contributor keeps in
> >> mind
> >> > what needs to go to the docs. If he/she has a good memory, a doc JIRA
> >> > counterpart will be created once the contribution is accepted. But the
> >> > practice shows that the memory lets us down :)
> >> >
> >> > Another benefit of having "Docs Required" flag enabled by default, is
> >> that
> >> > Artem and Prachi can see all such tickets months and weeks before a
> >> > release, figure out details from source code contributors and complete
> >> the
> >> > docs in advance.
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Denis
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 8:39 AM Artem Budnikov <
> >> > a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Dmitry,
> >> >>
> >> >> The goal I had in mind by proposing that suggestion was to rectify
> the
> >> >> fact that JIRA issues for documentation are created on an ad-hoc
> basis,
> >> >> and often issues are created when the lack of documentation becomes
> an
> >> >> issue for somebody. So we need to be more proactive.
> >> >>
> >> >> I think manual tracking of issues is possible but as efficient as the
> >> >> current situation with the docs. Manual tracking will have to be
> shared
> >> >> between multiple contributors and performed outside of JIRA, which
> has
> >> >> its own limitation. If you have any suggestions for improvement
> without
> >> >> creating fields in JIRA, please share your thoughts.
> >> >>
> >> >> If you are concerned that it's not possible to add a field, then we
> >> >> should contact Apache Infra and find out.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Best regards,
> >> >>
> >> >> Artem Budnikov
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On 18.07.2018 16:14, Dmitry Pavlov wrote:
> >> >> > Hi Artem,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I sometimes receive feedback that Ignite docs has potential for
> >> >> > improvement, while I found our docs quite intuitive and simple to
> >> >> > understand. So if experienced tech writer will join community it
> >> could
> >> >> > benefit all of us, and users, of course. So you're very welcome to
> >> the
> >> >> > community!
> >> >> >
> >> >> > About idea of fields introduction I guess we will need assistance
> of
> >> >> Apache
> >> >> > Infra team, because Ignite shares JIRA with all other Apache
> project.
> >> >> And
> >> >> > I'm not sure that technical implementation of proposed process is
> >> even
> >> >> > possible without plugins. Could we consider some manual processing
> of
> >> >> > co

Re: TC issue. Spring Data build.

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Nikolay,

There was an issue in spring data when we were migrating to spring data
2.0. And if you PR is based on old master branch issue can happen.

Is this PR's base quite fresh?

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

чт, 19 июл. 2018 г. в 14:32, Nikolay Izhikov :

> Hello, Igniters.
>
> I faced with TC issue for my PR [1]
> Seems like some TC misconfiguration.
> Locally, all runs OK.
>
> AFAIK, other Igniters also gets this error on TC.
>
> Please, help me with TC configuration.
>
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1512664=buildResultsDiv=IgniteTests24Java8_SpringData#testNameId-4044715836195573554
>
> Caused by: org.springframework.beans.BeanInstantiationException: Failed to
> instantiate [org.apache.ignite.Ignite]: Factory method 'igniteInstance'
> threw exception; nested exception is
> java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: Could not initialize class
> org.apache.ignite.internal.IgniteVersionUtils
> at
> org.springframework.beans.factory.support.SimpleInstantiationStrategy.instantiate(SimpleInstantiationStrategy.java:185)
> at
> org.springframework.beans.factory.support.ConstructorResolver.instantiateUsingFactoryMethod(ConstructorResolver.java:579)
> ... 61 more
> Caused by: java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: Could not initialize class
> org.apache.ignite.internal.IgniteVersionUtils
> at
> org.apache.ignite.internal.IgniteKernal.ackAsciiLogo(IgniteKernal.java:1892)
> at org.apache.ignite.internal.IgniteKernal.start(IgniteKernal.java:843)
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/4378

Re: Place Ignite Abbrev Plugin to ASF Ignite supplementary git repo

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Vyacheslav,

For Abbrev plugin I also thought that ASF git repo as primary and
https://github.com/apacheignite mirror would cover all cases.

Thank you for sharing your vision.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

чт, 19 июл. 2018 г. в 9:08, Vyacheslav Daradur :

> I vote for a separate repo for the Ignite Abbrev Plugin project.
>
> The reason is:
> Ignite Abbrev Plugin - build on top of IntelliJ Platform SDK [1] and
> can't be easily packaged without it, moreover, it doesn't depend on
> Ignite internals (unlike .NET/C++ clients).
>
> One more place where we could place the project (if this repo
> maintained by Ignite's commiters) [2].
>
> [1] http://www.jetbrains.org/intellij/sdk/docs/welcome.html
> [2] https://github.com/apacheignite
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 12:48 AM Dmitry Pavlov 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Denis,
> >
> > This option can be considered also. I have no arguments against this
> > solution.
> >
> > In the same time I think Ignite developer will need pre-build
> distributive
> > (Jar) of plugin, probably in /idea subfolder.
> >
> > So standalone ASF repo & [build/link to build] in main repo can be still
> > considered. This option can save checkout time, and reduce main repo
> size.
> >
> > I hope this make sense. I would appreciate Igniter's opinion on this
> topic.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Dmitriy Pavlov
> >
> > ср, 18 июл. 2018 г. в 23:05, Denis Magda :
> >
> > > Hi Dmitriy,
> > >
> > > Yes, I would have this tool at hands soon as I check out Ignite repo
> and
> > > start setting it up. However, instead of a new repo let's place it
> under
> > > {ignite}/dev-tools folder. What do you think?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Denis
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 4:37 AM Dmitry Pavlov 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Igniters,
> > > >
> > > > There is one mode widely used tool in Apache Ignite, abbreviation
> plugin
> > > > for Intelli J Idea. This plugin is used by almost all experienced
> Ignite
> > > > contributors.
> > > >
> > > > I would like to say thanks to all contributors which created this
> plugin:
> > > > vkazakov, sevdokimov, daradurvs, agoncharuk. And because this plugin
> is
> > > > also a part of our process I also want to place plugin code to ASF
> > > > repository.
> > > >
> > > > What do you think about placing plugin code to supplementary Apache
> > > > repository? Please share your vision till 24 July.
> > > >
> > > > Sincerely,
> > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Abbreviation+Rules#AbbreviationRules-IntelliJIdeaPlugin
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > https://github.com/dspavlov/ignite-abbrev-plugin
> > > >
> > >
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards, Vyacheslav D.
>

Re: Place Ignite TC helper to ASF Ignite supplementary git repo

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Dmitriy,

Yes, I'm going to create INFRA ticket for new ASF supplementary repository
for project, I just want to be absolutely sure, that Community supports my
plan.

Or do you mean I need to create ticket to find out if domain
mtcga.ignite.apache.org is possible to create?

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

чт, 19 июл. 2018 г. в 1:43, Dmitriy Setrakyan :

> Dmitriy,
>
> I think you should file an INFRA ticket and ask if this is possible.
>
> D.
>
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 3:12 PM, Denis Magda  wrote:
>
> > Dmitriy,
> >
> > Things for clearing the things out. No objections from my side then.
> >
> > Let's see what other Ignite fellows think on your proposal. Someone might
> > have a different perspective.
> >
> > --
> > Denis
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 1:58 PM Dmitry Pavlov 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Denis,
> > >
> > > It will made things simple.
> > >
> > > 1) For example any comitter will be able to change rules of
> notification
> > > and fix the Bot if something goes wrong. Now it is my github repo. ASF
> > repo
> > > will guarantee that code will be always accessible by community
> members.
> > >
> > > 2) Being a part of ASF repo the Bot will be simple thing that less
> > > experienced developer can start with. The Bot uses latest AI release as
> > DB
> > > with persistence enabled, so bot developer became at least Apache
> Ignite
> > > user, and as most - new contributor.
> > >
> > > If we agree to place this bot to ASF, next step could be asking Infra
> > Team
> > > to provide 2nd level apache domain, e.g. mtcga.ignite.apache.org for
> web
> > > UI. I guess it would be plus if our tool code is available in ASF repo,
> > but
> > > not in some private git repo.
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > >
> > > ср, 18 июл. 2018 г. в 23:03, Denis Magda :
> > >
> > > > Hi Dmitriy,
> > > >
> > > > The whole year has passed since this initiative launch, hell, the
> times
> > > > passes by :)
> > > >
> > > > What would be the benefits of having the tool in the Apache repo?
> Does
> > it
> > > > simplify the things for us.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Denis
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 3:59 AM Dmitry Pavlov  >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Igniters,
> > > > >
> > > > > Almost 1 year has passed since Make Teamcity Green Again was
> > initially
> > > > > proposed. During this process we managed to get almost successful
> Run
> > > > Alls
> > > > > in master, but currently regressions still occur. We all tried a
> lot
> > of
> > > > > things: careful examination of PR tests, continuous monitoring of
> > > master,
> > > > > suite responsible contributor, tickets creation and so on.
> > > > >
> > > > > According to Igniter's feedback most productive thing was master
> > > > monitoring
> > > > > and timely fix of new failures. But contributor’s enthusiasm is
> > limited
> > > > and
> > > > > monitoring is not most enjoyable thing, so it's time to automate
> this
> > > > > activity. I’ve created MTCGA.Bot which sends emails about new
> > failures
> > > > and
> > > > > in addition has a couple of useful features.
> > > > >
> > > > > The Bot is being developed only based on your feedback. 30 Ignite
> > > > > developers already tried it. I'm going to run short
> > > webinar/presentation
> > > > at
> > > > > Mon 23 July and tell more about Bot capabilites, so everyone can
> make
> > > an
> > > > > impression.
> > > > >
> > > > > I would like to continue development and I propose to place TC
> Helper
> > > > code
> > > > > to Apache Ignite supplementary repository (same as ignite-release).
> > > What
> > > > do
> > > > > you think about it? Please share your vision till 24 July.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sincerely,
> > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > > > >
> > > > > References:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/
> > Make+Teamcity+Green+Again#MakeTeamcityGreenAgain-MTCGABot
> > > > >
> > > > > https://github.com/dspavlov/ignite-teamcity-helper
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Place Ignite TC helper to ASF Ignite supplementary git repo

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Vyacheslav,

Thank you for your feedback.

https://github.com/apacheignite will have mirror from ASF repository, as
docs or main repo have.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

чт, 19 июл. 2018 г. в 8:54, Vyacheslav Daradur :

> I vote for a separate repo for the TC helper project.
>
> IMO TC Helper - is an application project and a separate repo is a
> more convenient way to the project developing.
>
> One more place where we could place the project (if the place
> maintained by Ignite's commiters):
> https://github.com/apacheignite
>
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 1:43 AM Dmitriy Setrakyan 
> wrote:
> >
> > Dmitriy,
> >
> > I think you should file an INFRA ticket and ask if this is possible.
> >
> > D.
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 3:12 PM, Denis Magda  wrote:
> >
> > > Dmitriy,
> > >
> > > Things for clearing the things out. No objections from my side then.
> > >
> > > Let's see what other Ignite fellows think on your proposal. Someone
> might
> > > have a different perspective.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Denis
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 1:58 PM Dmitry Pavlov 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Denis,
> > > >
> > > > It will made things simple.
> > > >
> > > > 1) For example any comitter will be able to change rules of
> notification
> > > > and fix the Bot if something goes wrong. Now it is my github repo.
> ASF
> > > repo
> > > > will guarantee that code will be always accessible by community
> members.
> > > >
> > > > 2) Being a part of ASF repo the Bot will be simple thing that less
> > > > experienced developer can start with. The Bot uses latest AI release
> as
> > > DB
> > > > with persistence enabled, so bot developer became at least Apache
> Ignite
> > > > user, and as most - new contributor.
> > > >
> > > > If we agree to place this bot to ASF, next step could be asking Infra
> > > Team
> > > > to provide 2nd level apache domain, e.g. mtcga.ignite.apache.org
> for web
> > > > UI. I guess it would be plus if our tool code is available in ASF
> repo,
> > > but
> > > > not in some private git repo.
> > > >
> > > > Sincerely,
> > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > > >
> > > > ср, 18 июл. 2018 г. в 23:03, Denis Magda :
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Dmitriy,
> > > > >
> > > > > The whole year has passed since this initiative launch, hell, the
> times
> > > > > passes by :)
> > > > >
> > > > > What would be the benefits of having the tool in the Apache repo?
> Does
> > > it
> > > > > simplify the things for us.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Denis
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 3:59 AM Dmitry Pavlov <
> dpavlov@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Igniters,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Almost 1 year has passed since Make Teamcity Green Again was
> > > initially
> > > > > > proposed. During this process we managed to get almost
> successful Run
> > > > > Alls
> > > > > > in master, but currently regressions still occur. We all tried a
> lot
> > > of
> > > > > > things: careful examination of PR tests, continuous monitoring of
> > > > master,
> > > > > > suite responsible contributor, tickets creation and so on.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > According to Igniter's feedback most productive thing was master
> > > > > monitoring
> > > > > > and timely fix of new failures. But contributor’s enthusiasm is
> > > limited
> > > > > and
> > > > > > monitoring is not most enjoyable thing, so it's time to automate
> this
> > > > > > activity. I’ve created MTCGA.Bot which sends emails about new
> > > failures
> > > > > and
> > > > > > in addition has a couple of useful features.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The Bot is being developed only based on your feedback. 30 Ignite
> > > > > > developers already tried it. I'm going to run short
> > > > webinar/presentation
> > > > > at
> > > > > > Mon 23 July and tell more about Bot capabilites, so everyone can
> make
> > > > an
> > > > > > impression.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would like to continue development and I propose to place TC
> Helper
> > > > > code
> > > > > > to Apache Ignite supplementary repository (same as
> ignite-release).
> > > > What
> > > > > do
> > > > > > you think about it? Please share your vision till 24 July.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sincerely,
> > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > > > > >
> > > > > > References:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/
> > > Make+Teamcity+Green+Again#MakeTeamcityGreenAgain-MTCGABot
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://github.com/dspavlov/ignite-teamcity-helper
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards, Vyacheslav D.
>

Re: Documenting Ignite

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Yes, I agree. My concern is related only to process implementation aspect,
I wonder if it is technically possible.

Generally I like idea of automatic control.

ср, 18 июл. 2018 г. в 23:21, Denis Magda :

> Hi folks,
>
> Artem's proposal might simplify and make our doc tickets tracking less
> error-prone. The current approach implies that a contributor keeps in mind
> what needs to go to the docs. If he/she has a good memory, a doc JIRA
> counterpart will be created once the contribution is accepted. But the
> practice shows that the memory lets us down :)
>
> Another benefit of having "Docs Required" flag enabled by default, is that
> Artem and Prachi can see all such tickets months and weeks before a
> release, figure out details from source code contributors and complete the
> docs in advance.
>
> --
> Denis
>
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 8:39 AM Artem Budnikov <
> a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dmitry,
>>
>> The goal I had in mind by proposing that suggestion was to rectify the
>> fact that JIRA issues for documentation are created on an ad-hoc basis,
>> and often issues are created when the lack of documentation becomes an
>> issue for somebody. So we need to be more proactive.
>>
>> I think manual tracking of issues is possible but as efficient as the
>> current situation with the docs. Manual tracking will have to be shared
>> between multiple contributors and performed outside of JIRA, which has
>> its own limitation. If you have any suggestions for improvement without
>> creating fields in JIRA, please share your thoughts.
>>
>> If you are concerned that it's not possible to add a field, then we
>> should contact Apache Infra and find out.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Artem Budnikov
>>
>>
>> On 18.07.2018 16:14, Dmitry Pavlov wrote:
>> > Hi Artem,
>> >
>> > I sometimes receive feedback that Ignite docs has potential for
>> > improvement, while I found our docs quite intuitive and simple to
>> > understand. So if experienced tech writer will join community it could
>> > benefit all of us, and users, of course. So you're very welcome to the
>> > community!
>> >
>> > About idea of fields introduction I guess we will need assistance of
>> Apache
>> > Infra team, because Ignite shares JIRA with all other Apache project.
>> And
>> > I'm not sure that technical implementation of proposed process is even
>> > possible without plugins. Could we consider some manual processing of
>> > completed issues in relation to doc requrement?
>> >
>> > Sincerely,
>> > Dmitriy Pavlov
>> >
>> > ср, 18 июл. 2018 г. в 15:06, Artem Budnikov <
>> a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> >> Hi Igniters,
>> >>
>> >> Being a technical writer, I'm going to contribute to Ignite's
>> >> documentation, and I believe documentation is an important part of
>> every
>> >> product, especially such a complex product as Apache Ignite.
>> >>
>> >> I'd like to put forward a suggestion on how to increase our chances of
>> >> making Ignite documentation more comprehensive. The basic idea is to
>> >> have a Jira issue with the Component field set to "Documentation" for
>> >> every feature that needs to be documented. This will ensure that there
>> >> are documentation issues that cover the entire product functionality.
>> >> Then someone can take on an issue and contribute an article on the
>> subject.
>> >>
>> >> This is how I envision it to work technically. A new field (checkbox)
>> is
>> >> added to the Apache Ignite Jira project. The checkbox indicates that
>> the
>> >> feature requested in this issue needs to be documented. The checkbox is
>> >> selected by default. If the feature does not require documentation,
>> then
>> >> the author unchecks the checkbox. If it does require documentation, the
>> >> author creates a related Jira issue selecting "Documentation" in the
>> >> Component field, providing details on what exactly should be
>> documented.
>> >>
>> >> The field is called "Requires documentation" or similarly. It could be
>> >> also useful to create a new issue type for documentation issues
>> >> exclusively.
>> >>
>> >> Once this is done, we'll be able to filter out
>> >>
>> >>   1. issues that do not require documentation,
>> >>   2. issues that have related documentation tickets, and
>> >>   3. issues that require documentation but have no related issues
>> (which
>> >>  means that the author forgot to create a documentation issue for
>> it).
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Please share your thoughts about this.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Best regards,
>> >>
>> >> Artem Budnikov
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>

Re: Place Ignite Abbrev Plugin to ASF Ignite supplementary git repo

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Denis,

This option can be considered also. I have no arguments against this
solution.

In the same time I think Ignite developer will need pre-build distributive
(Jar) of plugin, probably in /idea subfolder.

So standalone ASF repo & [build/link to build] in main repo can be still
considered. This option can save checkout time, and reduce main repo size.

I hope this make sense. I would appreciate Igniter's opinion on this topic.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

ср, 18 июл. 2018 г. в 23:05, Denis Magda :

> Hi Dmitriy,
>
> Yes, I would have this tool at hands soon as I check out Ignite repo and
> start setting it up. However, instead of a new repo let's place it under
> {ignite}/dev-tools folder. What do you think?
>
> --
> Denis
>
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 4:37 AM Dmitry Pavlov 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Igniters,
> >
> > There is one mode widely used tool in Apache Ignite, abbreviation plugin
> > for Intelli J Idea. This plugin is used by almost all experienced Ignite
> > contributors.
> >
> > I would like to say thanks to all contributors which created this plugin:
> > vkazakov, sevdokimov, daradurvs, agoncharuk. And because this plugin is
> > also a part of our process I also want to place plugin code to ASF
> > repository.
> >
> > What do you think about placing plugin code to supplementary Apache
> > repository? Please share your vision till 24 July.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Dmitriy Pavlov
> >
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Abbreviation+Rules#AbbreviationRules-IntelliJIdeaPlugin
> >
> >
> > https://github.com/dspavlov/ignite-abbrev-plugin
> >
>

Re: Place Ignite TC helper to ASF Ignite supplementary git repo

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Denis,

It will made things simple.

1) For example any comitter will be able to change rules of notification
and fix the Bot if something goes wrong. Now it is my github repo. ASF repo
will guarantee that code will be always accessible by community members.

2) Being a part of ASF repo the Bot will be simple thing that less
experienced developer can start with. The Bot uses latest AI release as DB
with persistence enabled, so bot developer became at least Apache Ignite
user, and as most - new contributor.

If we agree to place this bot to ASF, next step could be asking Infra Team
to provide 2nd level apache domain, e.g. mtcga.ignite.apache.org for web
UI. I guess it would be plus if our tool code is available in ASF repo, but
not in some private git repo.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

ср, 18 июл. 2018 г. в 23:03, Denis Magda :

> Hi Dmitriy,
>
> The whole year has passed since this initiative launch, hell, the times
> passes by :)
>
> What would be the benefits of having the tool in the Apache repo? Does it
> simplify the things for us.
>
> --
> Denis
>
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 3:59 AM Dmitry Pavlov 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Igniters,
> >
> > Almost 1 year has passed since Make Teamcity Green Again was initially
> > proposed. During this process we managed to get almost successful Run
> Alls
> > in master, but currently regressions still occur. We all tried a lot of
> > things: careful examination of PR tests, continuous monitoring of master,
> > suite responsible contributor, tickets creation and so on.
> >
> > According to Igniter's feedback most productive thing was master
> monitoring
> > and timely fix of new failures. But contributor’s enthusiasm is limited
> and
> > monitoring is not most enjoyable thing, so it's time to automate this
> > activity. I’ve created MTCGA.Bot which sends emails about new failures
> and
> > in addition has a couple of useful features.
> >
> > The Bot is being developed only based on your feedback. 30 Ignite
> > developers already tried it. I'm going to run short webinar/presentation
> at
> > Mon 23 July and tell more about Bot capabilites, so everyone can make an
> > impression.
> >
> > I would like to continue development and I propose to place TC Helper
> code
> > to Apache Ignite supplementary repository (same as ignite-release). What
> do
> > you think about it? Please share your vision till 24 July.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Dmitriy Pavlov
> >
> > References:
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Make+Teamcity+Green+Again#MakeTeamcityGreenAgain-MTCGABot
> >
> > https://github.com/dspavlov/ignite-teamcity-helper
> >
>

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [1499957] needs to be handled

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Maxim,

Sure, thank you for this idea.

I've accumulated notification types and rules here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Make+Teamcity+Green+Again#MakeTeamcityGreenAgain-NotificationTypes

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov


ср, 18 июл. 2018 г. в 13:59, Maxim Muzafarov :

> Dmitry,
>
> Got it. Thanks!
>
> I've found brief MTCGABot description here [1].
> Can we also add there this notification rules?
>
> [1]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Make+Teamcity+Green+Again#MakeTeamcityGreenAgain-MTCGABot
>
> ср, 18 июл. 2018 г. в 12:52, Dmitry Pavlov :
>
> > Hi Maxim,
> >
> > Notification will be send for each sequential group of builds having
> > failures 3+ times in a row. Let's define 0 as success, 1 as failure.
> >
> > So history 01110111 will generate two notifications. First
> > transition 0->1 can be bug introduced test failure. This bug can be fixed
> > with some changes after 111->0. And second transition can be potentially
> > new problem, and test failure would be re-notified.
> >
> > But if transition 0->1 ocurred only once, and failure continues to
> happen,
> > than no new notifcation will be generated.
> >
> > As always, I appreciate feedback and proposals.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Dmitriy Pavlov
> >
> > ср, 18 июл. 2018 г. в 12:45, Maxim Muzafarov :
> >
> > > Dmitry,
> > >
> > > Will this notification continously send on new failure fot particular
> > > test-case if we already have JIRA ticket for investigation? Should we
> > mute
> > > this test on TC to stop notifications?
> > >
> > > вт, 17 июл. 2018 г. в 22:30, Dmitry Pavlov :
> > >
> > > > Odd flaky tests notifications were fixed.
> > > >
> > > > If test changes its status more than 6 times in last 50 runs, than it
> > is
> > > > required to fail 7 times in a row to be considered as new failure.
> > Normal
> > > > test can be considered as new failure if it fails 3 times.
> > > >
> > > > I would appreciate any feedback and proposals of rules change to make
> > > > MTCGA.Bot as useful as it humanly possible.
> > > >
> > > > вт, 17 июл. 2018 г. в 10:26, Dmitry Pavlov :
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Igniters,
> > > > >
> > > > > Seems this test is flaky: it has frequent changes of its status.
> This
> > > can
> > > > > be detected in Bot. and I'll update Bot once issue
> > > > > https://github.com/dspavlov/ignite-teamcity-helper/issues/14 is
> > > > completed.
> > > > >
> > > > > So please ignore this failure for now, as it is not new. Of course
> if
> > > you
> > > > > know how to fix flakiness, fix is always preferred.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sincerely,
> > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > вт, 17 июл. 2018 г. в 2:06, :
> > > > >
> > > > >> Hi Ignite Developer,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I am MTCGA.Bot, and I've detected some issue on TeamCity to be
> > > > addressed.
> > > > >> I hope you can help.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>  *New test failure in master
> > > > >> CacheStopAndDestroySelfTest.testTckStyleCreateDestroyClose
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=139506597706397620=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
> > > > >>  Changes may led to failure were done by - ivandasch
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825683=false
> > > > >>
> > > > >> - If your changes can led to this failure(s), please
> create
> > > > issue
> > > > >> with label MakeTeamCityGreenAgain and assign it to you.
> > > > >> -- If you have fix, please set ticket to PA state and
> write
> > to
> > > > >> dev list fix is ready
> > > > >> -- For case fix will require some time please mute test
> and
> > > set
> > > > >> label Muted_Test to issue
> > > > >> - If you know which change caused failure please contact
> > > change
> > > > >> author directly
> > > > >> - If you don't know which change caused failure please
> send
> > > > >> message to dev list to find out
> > > > >> Should you have any questions please contact dpav...@apache.org
> or
> > > > write
> > > > >> to dev.list
> > > > >> Best Regards,
> > > > >> MTCGA.Bot
> > > > >> Notification generated at Tue Jul 17 02:06:49 MSK 2018
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > --
> > > --
> > > Maxim Muzafarov
> > >
> >
> --
> --
> Maxim Muzafarov
>

Re: Pushing IGNITE-6826 forward

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Stanislav,

I wish this push will have effect.

Just two proposals that will help Igniters to easily jump into such emails:
1. Include ticket short description into subject, not only number.
2. Include link to JIRA issue into body so it could be easily clicked to
find out details.
It can seem not important, but saves a minute for everyone.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

ср, 18 июл. 2018 г. в 16:32, Stanislav Lukyanov :

> Hi Igniters,
>
> There is a small but annoying issue with examples using MulticastIpFinder
> by default.
> The JIRA is  IGNITE-6826.
>
> AntonK and DmitriiR have suggested PRs to fix this, but PavelT had some
> concerns and the fix stuck as the result.
>
> Pavel, could you please suggest necessary changes to the PRs so that guys
> can move forward with integration?
>
> Thanks,
> Stan
>

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Apache Ignite 2.6.0 Release (RC1)

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Ilya,

Thank you for noticing this.

We should somehow update https://ignite.apache.org/latest data. I guess
PMCs or site admin can do this update.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

ср, 18 июл. 2018 г. в 16:31, Ilya Kasnacheev :

> Hello!
>
> Since we have releases 2.6.0, can we perhaps prop up the node start
> message, which is currently still:
>
> [16:28:05] New version is available at ignite.apache.org: 2.4.0
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Ilya Kasnacheev
>
> 2018-07-17 21:59 GMT+03:00 Denis Magda :
>
> > Andrey G.,
> >
> > As a PMC member and release manager of 2.6, could you please help the
> folks
> > to finish this step?
> >
> > --
> > Denis
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 9:58 AM Pavel Tupitsyn 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I think it makes sense that only PMCs have rights to do so,
> > > especially because publishing a package can not be undone of re-done,
> > only
> > > a new version can be published if there is some issue.
> > > Also, restricted SVN area is the only feasible way to share secrets
> with
> > > the team that I know of.
> > >
> > > Another approach could be NuGet Organizations, where membership is
> > managed
> > > on NuGet website.
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 7:32 PM Petr Ivanov 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Oh, I see.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I have no access there. I guess only PMC can upload packages to
> > > nuget.org
> > > > …
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On 17 Jul 2018, at 18:21, Pavel Tupitsyn 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Oh sorry I missed the question.
> > > > > * The build script '[Prepare Vote #3] Build NuGet packages'
> produces
> > > the
> > > > > artifacts (.nupkg files).
> > > > > * Then we have to manually upload them to NuGet org, which requires
> > an
> > > > API
> > > > > key or an account with access to these packages
> > > > >
> > > > > API key can be found in [1] (which is linked in [2])
> > > > >
> > > > > Upload can be done with a command like 'ls *.nupkg | % { nuget push
> > > > > $_.FullName APIKEY }' (Powershell),
> > > > > or a similar one on Linux/Mac with .NET Core or Mono.
> > > > >
> > > > > Let me know if you need more details.
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]
> > > >
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/pmc/ignite/credentials/nuget.org
> > > > > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/
> > Release+Process
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 5:55 PM Petr Ivanov 
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Just tell us please HOW it should be done, please.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> With what build or script or other procedure?
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> On 17 Jul 2018, at 17:44, Pavel Tupitsyn 
> > > wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Peter,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> I can do it anytime when we confirm the right Artifacts build.
> > > > >>> Can you please clarify what " Before uploading, please check this
> > [1]
> > > > >> build.
> > > > >>> " is about?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Thanks,
> > > > >>> Pavel
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 8:36 AM Peter Ivanov <
> mr.wei...@gmail.com>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > >  Pavel,
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >  Can you give a cue where can be uploaded Nuget packages found?
> > > > 
> > > >  On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 at 23:37, Pavel Tupitsyn <
> > ptupit...@apache.org>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Petr,
> > > > >
> > > > > This is the same build that I have linked. Is there anything I
> > > should
> > > > >> pay
> > > > > attention to?
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 11:05 PM Petr Ivanov <
> > mr.wei...@gmail.com>
> > > >  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Pavel,
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Before uploading, please check this [1] build.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> [1]
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > 
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1502954=
> > ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote3BuildNuGetPackages
> > =buildLog&_focus=230#_state=230
> > > > >> <
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > 
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1502954=
> > ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote3BuildNuGetPackages
> > =buildLog&_focus=230#_state=230
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> On 16 Jul 2018, at 22:56, Pavel Tupitsyn <
> ptupit...@apache.org
> > >
> > > >  wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> I will upload NuGet packages. Is this the right TC build?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > 
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1502954=
> > ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote3BuildNuGetPackages
> > =buildResultsDiv
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 8:43 PM Andrey Gura <
> ag...@apache.org>
> > > >  wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > >  Ignite site is updated. Most artifacts are published.
> > > > 
> > > >  

Re: Documenting Ignite

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Artem,

I sometimes receive feedback that Ignite docs has potential for
improvement, while I found our docs quite intuitive and simple to
understand. So if experienced tech writer will join community it could
benefit all of us, and users, of course. So you're very welcome to the
community!

About idea of fields introduction I guess we will need assistance of Apache
Infra team, because Ignite shares JIRA with all other Apache project. And
I'm not sure that technical implementation of proposed process is even
possible without plugins. Could we consider some manual processing of
completed issues in relation to doc requrement?

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

ср, 18 июл. 2018 г. в 15:06, Artem Budnikov :

> Hi Igniters,
>
> Being a technical writer, I'm going to contribute to Ignite's
> documentation, and I believe documentation is an important part of every
> product, especially such a complex product as Apache Ignite.
>
> I'd like to put forward a suggestion on how to increase our chances of
> making Ignite documentation more comprehensive. The basic idea is to
> have a Jira issue with the Component field set to "Documentation" for
> every feature that needs to be documented. This will ensure that there
> are documentation issues that cover the entire product functionality.
> Then someone can take on an issue and contribute an article on the subject.
>
> This is how I envision it to work technically. A new field (checkbox) is
> added to the Apache Ignite Jira project. The checkbox indicates that the
> feature requested in this issue needs to be documented. The checkbox is
> selected by default. If the feature does not require documentation, then
> the author unchecks the checkbox. If it does require documentation, the
> author creates a related Jira issue selecting "Documentation" in the
> Component field, providing details on what exactly should be documented.
>
> The field is called "Requires documentation" or similarly. It could be
> also useful to create a new issue type for documentation issues
> exclusively.
>
> Once this is done, we'll be able to filter out
>
>  1. issues that do not require documentation,
>  2. issues that have related documentation tickets, and
>  3. issues that require documentation but have no related issues (which
> means that the author forgot to create a documentation issue for it).
>
>
> Please share your thoughts about this.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Artem Budnikov
>
>

Place Ignite Abbrev Plugin to ASF Ignite supplementary git repo

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Igniters,

There is one mode widely used tool in Apache Ignite, abbreviation plugin
for Intelli J Idea. This plugin is used by almost all experienced Ignite
contributors.

I would like to say thanks to all contributors which created this plugin:
vkazakov, sevdokimov, daradurvs, agoncharuk. And because this plugin is
also a part of our process I also want to place plugin code to ASF
repository.

What do you think about placing plugin code to supplementary Apache
repository? Please share your vision till 24 July.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Abbreviation+Rules#AbbreviationRules-IntelliJIdeaPlugin


https://github.com/dspavlov/ignite-abbrev-plugin

Place Ignite TC helper to ASF Ignite supplementary git repo

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Igniters,

Almost 1 year has passed since Make Teamcity Green Again was initially
proposed. During this process we managed to get almost successful Run Alls
in master, but currently regressions still occur. We all tried a lot of
things: careful examination of PR tests, continuous monitoring of master,
suite responsible contributor, tickets creation and so on.

According to Igniter's feedback most productive thing was master monitoring
and timely fix of new failures. But contributor’s enthusiasm is limited and
monitoring is not most enjoyable thing, so it's time to automate this
activity. I’ve created MTCGA.Bot which sends emails about new failures and
in addition has a couple of useful features.

The Bot is being developed only based on your feedback. 30 Ignite
developers already tried it. I'm going to run short webinar/presentation at
Mon 23 July and tell more about Bot capabilites, so everyone can make an
impression.

I would like to continue development and I propose to place TC Helper code
to Apache Ignite supplementary repository (same as ignite-release). What do
you think about it? Please share your vision till 24 July.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

References:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Make+Teamcity+Green+Again#MakeTeamcityGreenAgain-MTCGABot

https://github.com/dspavlov/ignite-teamcity-helper

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [1499957] needs to be handled

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Maxim,

Notification will be send for each sequential group of builds having
failures 3+ times in a row. Let's define 0 as success, 1 as failure.

So history 01110111 will generate two notifications. First
transition 0->1 can be bug introduced test failure. This bug can be fixed
with some changes after 111->0. And second transition can be potentially
new problem, and test failure would be re-notified.

But if transition 0->1 ocurred only once, and failure continues to happen,
than no new notifcation will be generated.

As always, I appreciate feedback and proposals.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

ср, 18 июл. 2018 г. в 12:45, Maxim Muzafarov :

> Dmitry,
>
> Will this notification continously send on new failure fot particular
> test-case if we already have JIRA ticket for investigation? Should we mute
> this test on TC to stop notifications?
>
> вт, 17 июл. 2018 г. в 22:30, Dmitry Pavlov :
>
> > Odd flaky tests notifications were fixed.
> >
> > If test changes its status more than 6 times in last 50 runs, than it is
> > required to fail 7 times in a row to be considered as new failure. Normal
> > test can be considered as new failure if it fails 3 times.
> >
> > I would appreciate any feedback and proposals of rules change to make
> > MTCGA.Bot as useful as it humanly possible.
> >
> > вт, 17 июл. 2018 г. в 10:26, Dmitry Pavlov :
> >
> > > Hi Igniters,
> > >
> > > Seems this test is flaky: it has frequent changes of its status. This
> can
> > > be detected in Bot. and I'll update Bot once issue
> > > https://github.com/dspavlov/ignite-teamcity-helper/issues/14 is
> > completed.
> > >
> > > So please ignore this failure for now, as it is not new. Of course if
> you
> > > know how to fix flakiness, fix is always preferred.
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > >
> > >
> > > вт, 17 июл. 2018 г. в 2:06, :
> > >
> > >> Hi Ignite Developer,
> > >>
> > >> I am MTCGA.Bot, and I've detected some issue on TeamCity to be
> > addressed.
> > >> I hope you can help.
> > >>
> > >>  *New test failure in master
> > >> CacheStopAndDestroySelfTest.testTckStyleCreateDestroyClose
> > >>
> >
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=139506597706397620=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
> > >>  Changes may led to failure were done by - ivandasch
> > >>
> >
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825683=false
> > >>
> > >> - If your changes can led to this failure(s), please create
> > issue
> > >> with label MakeTeamCityGreenAgain and assign it to you.
> > >> -- If you have fix, please set ticket to PA state and write to
> > >> dev list fix is ready
> > >> -- For case fix will require some time please mute test and
> set
> > >> label Muted_Test to issue
> > >> - If you know which change caused failure please contact
> change
> > >> author directly
> > >> - If you don't know which change caused failure please send
> > >> message to dev list to find out
> > >> Should you have any questions please contact dpav...@apache.org or
> > write
> > >> to dev.list
> > >> Best Regards,
> > >> MTCGA.Bot
> > >> Notification generated at Tue Jul 17 02:06:49 MSK 2018
> > >>
> > >
> >
> --
> --
> Maxim Muzafarov
>

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [1499957] needs to be handled

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Odd flaky tests notifications were fixed.

If test changes its status more than 6 times in last 50 runs, than it is
required to fail 7 times in a row to be considered as new failure. Normal
test can be considered as new failure if it fails 3 times.

I would appreciate any feedback and proposals of rules change to make
MTCGA.Bot as useful as it humanly possible.

вт, 17 июл. 2018 г. в 10:26, Dmitry Pavlov :

> Hi Igniters,
>
> Seems this test is flaky: it has frequent changes of its status. This can
> be detected in Bot. and I'll update Bot once issue
> https://github.com/dspavlov/ignite-teamcity-helper/issues/14 is completed.
>
> So please ignore this failure for now, as it is not new. Of course if you
> know how to fix flakiness, fix is always preferred.
>
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
>
>
> вт, 17 июл. 2018 г. в 2:06, :
>
>> Hi Ignite Developer,
>>
>> I am MTCGA.Bot, and I've detected some issue on TeamCity to be addressed.
>> I hope you can help.
>>
>>  *New test failure in master
>> CacheStopAndDestroySelfTest.testTckStyleCreateDestroyClose
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=139506597706397620=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
>>  Changes may led to failure were done by - ivandasch
>> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825683=false
>>
>> - If your changes can led to this failure(s), please create issue
>> with label MakeTeamCityGreenAgain and assign it to you.
>> -- If you have fix, please set ticket to PA state and write to
>> dev list fix is ready
>> -- For case fix will require some time please mute test and set
>> label Muted_Test to issue
>> - If you know which change caused failure please contact change
>> author directly
>> - If you don't know which change caused failure please send
>> message to dev list to find out
>> Should you have any questions please contact dpav...@apache.org or write
>> to dev.list
>> Best Regards,
>> MTCGA.Bot
>> Notification generated at Tue Jul 17 02:06:49 MSK 2018
>>
>

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [1464083] needs to be handled

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Same as for previous notification, this is another 3 timeouts in a row
occurred. I hope soon we will be able to fix all timeouts, so such
notifications will not appear.

вт, 17 июл. 2018 г. в 22:17, :

> Hi Ignite Developer,
>
> I am MTCGA.Bot, and I've detected some issue on TeamCity to be addressed.
> I hope you can help.
>
>  *New Critical Failure in master Data Structures
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_DataStructures=%3Cdefault%3E=buildTypeStatusDiv
>  Changes may led to failure were done by
>  - jokserfn
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825129=false
>  - irakov
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825127=false
>  - irakov
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825126=false
>  - ivandasch
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825120=false
>  - dmitriy.govorukhin
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825119=false
>  - polyakov.alexandr.alexandrovich
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825110=false
>  - vpyatkov
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825105=false
>  - akuznetsov
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825014=false
>  - dmitriyff
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825013=false
>
> - If your changes can led to this failure(s), please create issue
> with label MakeTeamCityGreenAgain and assign it to you.
> -- If you have fix, please set ticket to PA state and write to dev
> list fix is ready
> -- For case fix will require some time please mute test and set
> label Muted_Test to issue
> - If you know which change caused failure please contact change
> author directly
> - If you don't know which change caused failure please send
> message to dev list to find out
> Should you have any questions please contact dpav...@apache.org or write
> to dev.list
> Best Regards,
> MTCGA.Bot
> Notification generated at Tue Jul 17 22:17:10 MSK 2018
>

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [1492273] needs to be handled

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Igniters,

The Bot was updated to handle timeouts & JVM crashes in suites in a special
way. These type of failures are named Critical.  If 3 or more (timeouts/JMV
crashes) occured several times in a row, such notification will be send.
Also it is required that last run was completed with timeout.

As for DS failure: I think fix is ready for this situation, I saw issue in
PA state.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

вт, 17 июл. 2018 г. в 22:03, :

> Hi Ignite Developer,
>
> I am MTCGA.Bot, and I've detected some issue on TeamCity to be addressed.
> I hope you can help.
>
>  *New Critical Failure in master Data Structures
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_DataStructures=%3Cdefault%3E=buildTypeStatusDiv
>  No changes in build
>
> - If your changes can led to this failure(s), please create issue
> with label MakeTeamCityGreenAgain and assign it to you.
> -- If you have fix, please set ticket to PA state and write to dev
> list fix is ready
> -- For case fix will require some time please mute test and set
> label Muted_Test to issue
> - If you know which change caused failure please contact change
> author directly
> - If you don't know which change caused failure please send
> message to dev list to find out
> Should you have any questions please contact dpav...@apache.org or write
> to dev.list
> Best Regards,
> MTCGA.Bot
> Notification generated at Tue Jul 17 22:03:32 MSK 2018
>

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [1507197] needs to be handled

[Dmitry Pavlov]

These tests were intentionally failed with link to
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9004 ticket. This avoids suite
timeout.

вт, 17 июл. 2018 г. в 16:36, :

> Hi Ignite Developer,
>
> I am MTCGA.Bot, and I've detected some issue on TeamCity to be addressed.
> I hope you can help.
>
>  *New test failure in master
> IgniteChangeGlobalStateTest.testStopPrimaryAndActivateFromServerNode
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=-2989101115659545850=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
>
>  *New test failure in master
> IgniteChangeGlobalStateTest.testDeActivateFromServerNode
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=7926906195866783751=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
>
>  *New test failure in master
> IgniteChangeGlobalStateTest.testTryUseDataStructureInActiveCluster
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=1237675547622950789=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
>
>  *New test failure in master
> IgniteChangeGlobalStateTest.testDeActivateFromClientNode
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=5257935054027107459=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
>
>  *New test failure in master
> IgniteChangeGlobalStateTest.testStopPrimaryAndActivateFromClientNode
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=-1121005557998407806=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
>
>  *New test failure in master
> IgniteChangeGlobalStateTest.testActiveAndInActiveAtTheSameTimeCluster
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=-5091897751321880348=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
>
>  *New test failure in master
> IgniteChangeGlobalStateTest.testDeActivateCheckCacheDestroy
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=-5133427611595249025=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
>
>  *New test failure in master
> IgniteChangeGlobalStateTest.testTryUseServiceInActiveCluster
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=-8663243603806743793=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
>
>  *New test failure in master
> IgniteChangeGlobalStateTest.testTryUseCacheInActiveCluster
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=-5647678860514408799=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
>
>  *New test failure in master
> IgniteChangeGlobalStateTest.testActivateOnAlreadyActivatedCluster
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=-1285441177699096481=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
>  Changes may led to failure were done by - dpavlov
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825785=false
>  - garus.d.g
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825781=false
>  - slava.koptilin
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825780=false
>  - slava.koptilin
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825779=false
>  - isapego
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825778=false
>  - nizhikov
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825776=false
>  - ivandasch
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825775=false
>  - isapego
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825774=false
>  - dmitriy.govorukhin
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825773=false
>  - dmitriy.govorukhin
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825772=false
>  - dmitriy.govorukhin
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825771=false
>  - dmitriy.govorukhin
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825770=false
>  - andrey.mashenkov
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825769=false
>  - vozerov
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825768=false
>  - dmitriy.govorukhin
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825767=false
>  - garus.d.g
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825766=false
>  - maxmuzaf
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825765=false
>  - nizhikov
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825764=false
>  - nizhikov
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825763=false
>  - d.w.sorokin
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825762=false
>  - andrey.mashenkov
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825761=false
>  - vozerov
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825760=false
>  - mcherkasov
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825759=false
>  - ilantukh
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825758=false
>  - alexey.goncharuk
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825757=false
>  - ilantukh
> 

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [1490762] needs to be handled

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Igniters,

this test was intentionally failed with link to
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9004 ticket.

I hope Igniters will figure out why it was failing suite.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

вт, 17 июл. 2018 г. в 16:22, :

> Hi Ignite Developer,
>
> I am MTCGA.Bot, and I've detected some issue on TeamCity to be addressed.
> I hope you can help.
>
>  *New test failure in master
> IgniteChangeGlobalStateTest.testConcurrentActivateFromClientNodeAndServerNode
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=-2144060973300403257=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
>  No changes in build
>
> - If your changes can led to this failure(s), please create issue
> with label MakeTeamCityGreenAgain and assign it to you.
> -- If you have fix, please set ticket to PA state and write to dev
> list fix is ready
> -- For case fix will require some time please mute test and set
> label Muted_Test to issue
> - If you know which change caused failure please contact change
> author directly
> - If you don't know which change caused failure please send
> message to dev list to find out
> Should you have any questions please contact dpav...@apache.org or write
> to dev.list
> Best Regards,
> MTCGA.Bot
> Notification generated at Tue Jul 17 16:21:52 MSK 2018
>

Re: MTCGA: new failures in builds [1485687] needs to be handled

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi, Stanislav L. replied in ticket
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9005

пн, 16 июл. 2018 г. в 18:15, kcheng.mvp :

> I checked the source code and found that this issue may be caused by this
> line
>
> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheProcessor #1452
>
> CacheEvictionManager evictMgr = (nearEnabled || cfg.isOnheapCacheEnabled())
> ? new GridCacheEvictionManager() : new CacheOffheapEvictionManager();
>
> as in this case a new CacheOffheapEvictionManager() will return, but this
> implementation does not do any eviction bean register/unregister, as there
> are no any policy.
>
> are my findings wrong?
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
>

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [1499957] needs to be handled

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Igniters,

Seems this test is flaky: it has frequent changes of its status. This can
be detected in Bot. and I'll update Bot once issue
https://github.com/dspavlov/ignite-teamcity-helper/issues/14 is completed.

So please ignore this failure for now, as it is not new. Of course if you
know how to fix flakiness, fix is always preferred.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov


вт, 17 июл. 2018 г. в 2:06, :

> Hi Ignite Developer,
>
> I am MTCGA.Bot, and I've detected some issue on TeamCity to be addressed.
> I hope you can help.
>
>  *New test failure in master
> CacheStopAndDestroySelfTest.testTckStyleCreateDestroyClose
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=139506597706397620=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
>  Changes may led to failure were done by - ivandasch
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825683=false
>
> - If your changes can led to this failure(s), please create issue
> with label MakeTeamCityGreenAgain and assign it to you.
> -- If you have fix, please set ticket to PA state and write to dev
> list fix is ready
> -- For case fix will require some time please mute test and set
> label Muted_Test to issue
> - If you know which change caused failure please contact change
> author directly
> - If you don't know which change caused failure please send
> message to dev list to find out
> Should you have any questions please contact dpav...@apache.org or write
> to dev.list
> Best Regards,
> MTCGA.Bot
> Notification generated at Tue Jul 17 02:06:49 MSK 2018
>

Re: Ignite guide for community developes

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Sure, I will do. Sign up to JIRA and wiki, it is open for everyone. Then I
need username(s) to add appropriate contributor role.

пн, 16 июл. 2018 г. в 20:53, Yakov Zhdanov :

> I think you need to signup to Apache jira and let us know your user ID so
> we can add you to contributors. Dmitry Pavlov, can you please help.
>
> --Yakov
>
> 2018-07-12 18:54 GMT+03:00 vgrigorev :
>
> > Hi colleges!
> >
> > I would like move topic to suitable place.
> >
> > Please only clarify how to do it:
> > In a page about creating IEP
> > link
> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/
> > Ignite+Enhancement+Proposal?showChildren=false>
> > There are no appropriate information.
> >
> > If you can do it please do.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
> >
>

Re: TeamCity: Mass run-all during weekend

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Igniters,

Unfortunately current run seems to show a more regress than previous:
- tests 512 suites 41 failed during current run all
- versus tests 433 suites 23 was at the end of may.

Such a significiant difference seemed to come not from randomized nature of
failures but from newly introduced issues.

I've attached full report:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpageattachments.action?pageId=73631266

Failures that looks as new are marked with red crossed icon in the report.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

пт, 13 июл. 2018 г. в 18:33, Dmitry Pavlov :

> Hi Igniters,
>
> I am going to start mass run-all during weekend and will shedule 30 builds
> at 20.30 MSK today, if nobody minds.
>
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
>

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [1490510, 1490413] needs to be handled

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Please ignore this also.

These failures came from mass weekend tests master run and flaky tests
which unluckily failed simultaneously 3 times a row, so bot considered it
as new failures.

сб, 14 июл. 2018 г., 0:22 :

> Hi Ignite Developer,
>
> I am MTCGA.Bot, and I've detected some issue on TeamCity to be addressed.
> I hope you can help.
>
>  *New test failure in master
> IgnitePdsCorruptedStoreTest.testCacheMetaCorruption
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=6523479222827749257=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
>  No changes in build
>
>  *New test failure in master
> IgnitePdsAtomicCacheHistoricalRebalancingTest.testTopologyChangesWithConstantLoad
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=7534554859858291194=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
>
>  *New test failure in master
> IgnitePdsTxCacheRebalancingTest.testTopologyChangesWithConstantLoad
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=-3769512162483462816=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
>  Changes may led to failure were done by - ilya.kasnacheev
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825627=false
>  - vinokurov.pasha
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825609=false
>  - agura
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825604=false
>  - ezagumennov
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825579=false
>  - amedvedev
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825566=false
>
> - If your changes can led to this failure(s), please create issue
> with label MakeTeamCityGreenAgain and assign it to you.
> -- If you have fix, please set ticket to PA state and write to dev
> list fix is ready
> -- For case fix will require some time please mute test and set
> label Muted_Test to issue
> - If you know which change caused failure please contact change
> author directly
> - If you don't know which change caused failure please send
> message to dev list to find out
> Should you have any questions please contact dpav...@apache.org or write
> to dev.list
> Best Regards,
> MTCGA.Bot
> Notification generated at Sat Jul 14 00:21:58 MSK 2018
>

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [1398134] needs to be handled

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi, it seems it is duplicate, so please ignore.

I will find out how duplicate notification ocurred.

пт, 13 июл. 2018 г. в 22:51, :

> Hi Ignite Developer,
>
> I am MTCGA.Bot, and I've detected some issue on TeamCity to be addressed.
> I hope you can help.
>
>  *New test failure in master
> IgniteNativeIoPdsRecoveryAfterFileCorruptionTest.testPageRecoveryAfterFileCorruption
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=-7843429397229340143=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
>  No changes in build
>
> - If your changes can led to this failure(s), please create issue
> with label MakeTeamCityGreenAgain and assign it to you.
> -- If you have fix, please set ticket to PA state and write to dev
> list fix is ready
> -- For case fix will require some time please mute test and set
> label Muted_Test to issue
> - If you know which change caused failure please contact change
> author directly
> - If you don't know which change caused failure please send
> message to dev list to find out
> Should you have any questions please contact dpav...@apache.org or write
> to dev.list
> Best Regards,
> MTCGA.Bot
> Notification generated at Fri Jul 13 22:51:51 MSK 2018
>

Re: MTCGA: new failures in builds [1485687] needs to be handled

[Dmitry Pavlov]

I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9005 to fix

Stanislav L. kindly agreed to fix this failure.

пт, 13 июл. 2018 г. в 12:09, Dmitry Pavlov :

> I suspect this change may case this failure:
> kcheng.mvp (kcheng.mvp) IGNITE-8776  Eviction policy MBeans are never
> registered if
> so I'm going to take a look.
>
> пт, 13 июл. 2018 г. в 10:59, :
>
>> Hi Ignite Developer,
>>
>> I am MTCGA.Bot, and I've detected some issue on TeamCity to be addressed.
>> I hope you can help.
>>
>>  *New test failure in master
>> GridCacheLifecycleAwareSelfTest.testLifecycleAware
>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=7246907407546697403=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
>>  Changes may led to failure were done by dpavlov
>> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825539=false,
>> eduard.shangareev
>> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825536=false,
>> kcheng.mvp
>> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825531=false,
>> dmitriyff
>> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825495=false,
>> alexey.scherbakoff
>> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825466=false,
>> anovikov
>> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825458=false,
>> akuznetsov
>> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825455=falseIf
>> your changes can led to this failure(s), please create issue with label
>> MakeTeamCityGreenAgain and assign it to you.If you have fix, please
>> set ticket to PA state and write to dev list fix is readyFor case
>> fix will require some time please mute test and set label Muted_Test to
>> issueIf you know which change caused failure please
>> contact change author directlyIf you don't know which change
>> caused failure please send message to dev list to find
>> outShould you have any questions please contact
>> dpav...@apache.org or write to dev.listBest
>> Regards,MTCGA.BotNotification generated at Fri Jul 13 10:58:57 MSK
>> 2018
>
>

TeamCity: Mass run-all during weekend

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Igniters,

I am going to start mass run-all during weekend and will shedule 30 builds
at 20.30 MSK today, if nobody minds.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

Re: MTCGA: new failures in builds [1479951] needs to be handled

[Dmitry Pavlov]

Hi Maxim,

Q1, always dev list. I've asked Igniters to add match before VCS username &
TC user, but it was not always done. So it is only one option currently to
notify developers.

Q2. there is such plans
https://github.com/dspavlov/ignite-teamcity-helper/issues/9 - It will be
done in very nearest future. I will do my absolute best to find a time slot
to finish this feature.

Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov

пт, 13 июл. 2018 г. в 10:14, Maxim Muzafarov :

> Dmity,
>
> Nice idea for such notification. Can you, please, clarify few questions:
>
> * Q1 *:  For such failures (5 times ok than 3 times fail) this notification
> would be sent to whole developer list or just for authous of problem
> commits?
>
> * Q2 *:  Can we also add notification about new "execution timeouts" for
> important Ignite test suites? (e.g. Caches, Activate\Deactivate, PDS)
>
> чт, 12 июл. 2018 г. в 19:29, Dmitry Pavlov :
>
> > I've pushed fix of failure to master.
> >
> > чт, 12 июл. 2018 г. в 16:25, Dmitry Pavlov :
> >
> > > Hi Igniters,
> > >
> > > this notification was generated because this test was stable passing
> (at
> > > least 5 ok) in master and became stable failed (at least 3 failures).
> > >
> > > Such notifications would not be generated for each case of flaky
> > failures,
> > > so I hope this feature will help us to identify and fix new failures.
> > >
> > > I'll fix message format to be more readable soon.
> > >
> > > It would be pleasure to me to run short talk (webinar) about tests,
> > MTCGA,
> > > and MTCGA.Bot (Ignite TC helper). Please reply if you are interested.
> > >
> > > I would also highly appreciate any kind of feedback.
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > >
> > > чт, 12 июл. 2018 г. в 16:14, :
> > >
> > >> Hi Ignite Developer,
> > >>
> > >> I am MTCGA.Bot, and I've detected some issue on TeamCity to be
> > addressed.
> > >> I hope you can help.
> > >>
> > >>  *New test failure in master
> > >>
> >
> IgnitePdsCheckpointSimulationWithRealCpDisabledTest.testCheckpointSimulationMultiThreaded
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=-1615751728537497724=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails
> > >>  Changes may led to failure were done by alexey.goncharuk
> > >>
> >
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825445=false
> > ,
> > >> eshangareev
> > >>
> >
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825442=false
> > ,
> > >> sergey.chugunov
> > >>
> >
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825439=false
> > ,
> > >> irakov
> > >>
> >
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825436=false
> > ,
> > >> irakov
> > >>
> >
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825428=false
> > ,
> > >> ivandasch
> > >>
> >
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825411=false
> > ,
> > >> sbt-pereslegin-pa1
> > >>
> >
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825407=false
> > ,
> > >> alexey.scherbakoff
> > >>
> >
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825404=false
> > ,
> > >> akuznetsov
> > >>
> >
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825396=false
> > ,
> > >> vsisko
> > >>
> >
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825371=false
> > ,
> > >> pivanov
> > >>
> >
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825366=false
> > ,
> > >> dmitriyff
> > >>
> >
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825351=false
> > ,
> > >> dmitriyff
> > >>
> >
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=825348=false
> > If
> > >> your changes can led to this failure(s), please create issue with
> label
> > >> MakeTeamCityGreenAgain and assign it to you.If you have fix,
> > please
> > >> set ticket to PA state and write to dev list fix is readyFor
> > case
> > >> fix will require some time please mute test and set label Muted_Test
> to
> > >> issueIf you know which change caused failure please
> > >> contact change author directlyIf you don't know which change
> > >> caused failure please send message to dev list to find
> > >> outShould you have any questions please contact
> > >> dpav...@apache.org or write to dev.listBest
> > >> Regards,MTCGA.BotNotification generated at Thu Jul 12 16:14:23
> > MSK
> > >> 2018
> > >
> > >
> >
>