IGNITE-3621 Implementation details

Now every cache has own TTL manager, which creates CleanupWorker = new extra thread. This can cause to extra hundreds of threads (redundant context switches = performance penalty). Also, under IGNITE-3513 every put can enter critical section to

IGNITE-1192 Implementation (Integration with Spring Data)

Guys, greetings! I am working on Spring Data integration. There are two ways how we can use Spring Data: 1. generating layer for Ignite usage; 2. using existing Spring Data configuration for persistence (Spring Data JPA, for example, or Mongo). I am sure that we should concentrate on first part

Re: IGNITE-1192 Implementation (Integration with Spring Data)

I have looked at Querydsl and QbE and I think their support should be postponed.

Re: IGNITE-1192 Implementation (Integration with Spring Data)

So there is no async support for query, therefore we can't support futures as return type (paragraph 2). On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 6:08 PM, Eduard Shangareev < eduard.shangar...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have looked at Querydsl and QbE and I think their support should be > postponed. >

Re: IGNITE-1192 Implementation (Integration with Spring Data)

nd provide cache name via @RepositoryConfig. IgniteRepository extends CrudRepository and deprecates unsupported operation (without id). On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 12:06 AM, Valentin Kulichenko < valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > Eduard, > > It's up to you :) I'm just saying th

Re: IGNITE-1192 Implementation (Integration with Spring Data)

t; Agree? > > -Val > > On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 4:17 AM, Eduard Shangareev < > eduard.shangar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > So there is no async support for query, therefore we can't support > futures > > as return type (paragraph 2). > > > > On

Re: IGNITE-1192 Implementation (Integration with Spring Data)

found how to publish our spring-data implementation to spring-projects repository. I will continue the investigation. But maybe someone already knows the answers. On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 2:46 PM, Eduard Shangareev < eduard.shangar...@gmail.com> wrote: > Guys, I have made a pul

Re: Ignite PDS WAL analysis with human readable records

Sincerely, > Dmitriy Pavlov > > пн, 18 сент. 2017 г. в 7:01, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>: > > > Can we get a sample print out from this utility? > > > > On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Eduard Shangareev < > > eduard.shangar...@gma

Re: Ignite PDS WAL analysis with human readable records

gt; should > > be enough. > > > > — > > Denis > > > > > On Sep 15, 2017, at 11:36 AM, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi Igniters, > > > > > > Eduard Shangareev created WAL converter u

Re: Apache Ignite 2.5 release

Guys, I have finished ttps://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7628. It looks like a good candidate to merge to 2.5. On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 1:32 PM, Ivan Rakov wrote: > Dmitriy, > > There are some notes about WAL compaction in "Persistence Under the Hood" > article:

Re: IEP-4, Phase 2. Using BL(A)T for in-memory caches.

t; Eduard, > > +1 to your proposed API for configuring Affinity Topology change policies. > Obviously we should use "auto" as default behavior. I believe, automatic > rebalancing is expected and more convenient for majority of users. > > Best Regards, > Ivan Rakov > >

Re: Orphaned, duplicate, and main-class tests!

Igniters, While making review I checked next main-method tests: org.apache.ignite.loadtests.mapper.GridContinuousMapperLoadTest1 org.apache.ignite.loadtests.mapper.GridContinuousMapperLoadTest2 And I have found that they are totally outdated! They use config which was changed a long time ago.

Re: Ignite 2.6 emergency release suggestion

Guys, I have found an issue which could cause JVM Crash. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-8768 (JVM Crash on node stop or deactivate while async evict in progress). Another one could hang node or throw AssertionError when we try to recycle data pages:

Re: IGNITE-4188, savepoints with atomic cache?

Guys, I believe, that it's not the case when we should change default behaviour. So, #1 and make it default in 3.0. On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 6:46 PM, Dmitrii Ryabov wrote: > Vote for #2. I think no one will change this defaults in configuration in > #1. > > 2018-06-13 18:29 GMT+03:00 Anton

Re: Quick questions on segments and page map buckets

Hi, 1. It looks weird, yeah. Need to ask Sergey, who has changed it last time. 2. Because we could reuse memory. For example, after cache destroy or something like that. On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 9:58 PM, John Wilson wrote: > Hi, > > Two quick questions: > > >1. The design documentation

Re: Need review IGNITE-8673 Reconcile isClient* methods

Here - http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Issues-with-forceServerMode-on-clients-and-unclear-contract-of-isClient-isClientMode-methods-td31152.html :) On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 7:38 PM, Eduard Shangareev < eduard.shangar...@gmail.com> wrote: > It was discussed here. >

Need review IGNITE-8673 Reconcile isClient* methods

It was discussed here.

Issues with forceServerMode on clients and unclear contract of isClient/isClientMode methods

Hi, guys! I just have found that we widely misuse org.apache.ignite.cluster.ClusterNode#isClient method. Now it returns how a node is connected to cluster (as part of the ring or not). So, it's not the same as IgniteConfiguration#isClientMode! But! Actually, we treat as the same thing. At

Re: Quick questions on segments and page map buckets

> Which Sergey do you mean? I know a number of contributors. > > > > Sincerely, > > > > > > вт, 19 июн. 2018 г. в 22:15, Eduard Shangareev < > > eduard.shangar...@gmail.com>: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> 1. It looks we

Re: TDE: Upgrade Team City JDK

t; Do you looked at it or something? > > > В Ср, 27/06/2018 в 14:24 +0300, Eduard Shangareev пишет: > > Nikolay, Petr, > > > > We should make suites which are restricted by agents to make as small as > > possible. > > > > So, I strictly against adding

Re: TDE: Upgrade Team City JDK

Nikolay, Petr, We should make suites which are restricted by agents to make as small as possible. So, I strictly against adding such test (therefore restriction) to these suites. On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 11:39 AM, Petr Ivanov wrote: > IgniteSpiTestSuite is called from ’SPI’ build type and I’ve

Re: IEP-4, Phase 2. Using BL(A)T for in-memory caches.

of such > > interface (how you see it) and how and when it's methods will be invoked. > > > > On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 10:10 PM, Eduard Shangareev < > > eduard.shangar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Igniters, > > > I have described the issue with

Re: IEP-4, Phase 2. Using BL(A)T for in-memory caches.

n (without backups) for some cache group we would change AT immediately. Thank you for your attention. On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 6:57 PM, Eduard Shangareev < eduard.shangar...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dmitriy, > > I also think that we should think about 2.6 as the target. > > &g

Re: method arguments code style

Alexey, +1. I personally also follow this style. On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Alexey Goncharuk < alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote: > Actually, I've been following the suggested code style for quite a while. > I'm ok to add this to coding guidelines, however, I think we should allow > the

Re: Splitting cache and basic TC configuration on pure in-memory and persistent one

; > We already discussed this some time ago. AFAIK SSD disks do not have this > problem, so all we need is to replace HDD with SSD. > > On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 3:26 PM Eduard Shangareev < > eduard.shangar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Igniters, > > > > I

Splitting cache and basic TC configuration on pure in-memory and persistent one

Igniters, I am working on the stability of our TC test runs. Some of our execution timeouts (hangings, unexpected stops) happen because of issues in source code: test itself, test runners, configurations, bug, Linux OOM killer and so on. We could fix them by changing code. But almost all of

Re: ignite PureJavaCrc32 vs java.util.zip.CRC32 bench.

Evgeniy, Could you share benchmark code? And please share what version of JVM you have used. On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 10:44 PM Zhenya wrote: > I think it would break backward compatibility, as Nikolay mentioned above > we would take exception here: > > [1] > >

Re: Deprecate force server mode for clients.

Andrey, It was discussed already here [1]. And the fix is almost merged. [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Issues-with-forceServerMode-on-clients-and-unclear-contract-of-isClient-isClientMode-methods-td31152.html On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 9:07 AM Andrey Mashenkov wrote:

Re: ignite PureJavaCrc32 vs java.util.zip.CRC32 bench.

thod, which use ByteBuffer was introduced. Since we > > >> moved > > >> to > > >> > > > java8, perhaps we really can get performance boost by using > > >> standard > > >> > > > java.lang.zip.CRC32 instead of PureJavaC

Re: Ticket review checklist

Hi, guys. I believe that we should update maintainers list before adding this review requirement. There should not be the situation when there is only one contributor who is responsible for a component. We already have issues with review speed and response time. On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 2:17 PM,

Re: Ticket review checklist

e code clearer (don't forget about some OOP-practise, replace if-else hell with inheritance - split refactoring (renaming, code format) from actual changes by separate commit On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 3:23 PM, Eduard Shangareev < eduard.shangar...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, guys

Re: New definition for affinity node (issues with baseline)

inity logic to take in count > > BLAT > > > >> appropriately? > > > >> > > > >> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 6:12 PM, Ivan Rakov <ivan.glu...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> Eduard, > >

Re: Ticket review checklist

> > > understand whether it is enough or not? > > > > > > > > >>> 4) Metrics > > > > -1, no clear boundaries, and decision on whether metrics are to be > > added > > > or > > > > not should be performed during design phase

New definition for affinity node (issues with baseline)

Hi, Igniters, I want to raise a topic about our affinity node definition. After adding baseline (affinity) topology (BL(A)T) things start being complicated. Plenty of bugs appears: IGNITE-8173 ignite.getOrCreateCache(cacheConfig).iterator() method works incorrect for replicated cache in case

Re: New definition for affinity node (issues with baseline)

be changed. Please provide > > summary of upcoming class renamings and changes of existing system parts. > > > > Best Regards, > > Ivan Rakov > > > > > > On 24.04.2018 17:46, Eduard Shangareev wrote: > > > >> Hi, Igniters, > >> >

Re: Ticket review checklist

ix something. Checklist is a > different thing - this is a set of rules which must be followed by anyone. > I do not understand how you can define documentation in this checklist. > Same problem with logging - what is "enough"? > > On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 4:51 PM, Eduard Shangareev

Re: Reconsider default WAL mode: we need something between LOG_ONLY and FSYNC

Ivan, I have reviewed your changes, looks good. On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Ivan Rakov wrote: > Igniters, > > I've completed development of https://issues.apache.org/jira > /browse/IGNITE-7754. TeamCity state is ok. Please, review my changes. > Please note that it

IEP-4, Phase 2. Using BL(A)T for in-memory caches.

Igniters, I have described the issue with current approach in "New definition for affinity node (issues with baseline)" topic[1]. Now we have 2 different affinity topology (one for in-memory, another for persistent caches). It causes problems: - we lose (in general) co-location between different

Re: New definition for affinity node (issues with baseline)

Guys, I have started a new topic to address the issue with DAT [1]. [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/IEP-4-Phase-2-Using-BL-A-T-for-in-memory-caches-td29942.html On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 11:43 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: > On Wed, Apr 25, 2018

Abbreviation code-style requirement.

Igniters, I want to discuss the appendix of our code-style: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Abbreviation+Rules. First of all, there is no any mention that it is a mandatory part. Secondly, some of them are very unintuitive and even misleading. For example, cp. In current

Re: Abbreviation code-style requirement.

Igniters, thank you for your feedback. I haven't seen any arguments against making abbreviation optional and not mandatory. So, could we update our wiki with code style to reflect our new vision on abbreviations? On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 2:01 PM Dmitriy Pavlov wrote: > Hi Ivan > > if by

Re: Is it time to move forward to JUnit4 (5)?

sed to do? Rewrite to JUnit4? > > If yes, then we should give them time to have a chance to get used to new > approach and resolve possible conflicts. > > Vladimir. > > пн, 10 дек. 2018 г. в 20:32, Eduard Shangareev < > eduard.shangar...@gmail.com > >: > > &g

[Result][VOTE] Creation dedicated list for github notifiacations

Igniters, The result is successful. No "-1". 11 "+1". 2 "0". Vote thread: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-Creation-dedicated-list-for-github-notifiacations-td38485.html

Re: [Result][VOTE] Creation dedicated list for github notifiacations

t; > > > Sincerely, > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > чт, 29 нояб. 2018 г. в 21:44, Eduard Shangareev < > > eduard.shangar...@gmail.com>: > > > >> Igniters, > >> The result is successful. > >> > >> No "-1". > &

Re: Default failure handler was changed for tests

Guys, I didn't get. What is the problem in saving No-Op for several tests? Why should we keep No-Op for all? On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 3:20 PM Павлухин Иван wrote: > Anton, > > Yes I meant that patch. And I would like to respell a name "massive > no-op handler restore" to "use no-op failure

Re: New API for changing configuration of persistent caches

ackups(2)); > > 2) Call from control.sh in one line without race conditions with concurrent > cache changes: > control.sh --cache --change cacheMode=REPLICATED backups=2 > > On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 7:32 PM Eduard Shangareev < > eduard.shangar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >

Re: New API for changing configuration of persistent caches

uration. How do we solve this? > > Vladimir. > > ср, 21 нояб. 2018 г. в 18:02, Eduard Shangareev < > eduard.shangar...@gmail.com > >: > > > Vladimir, > > > > I propose not to change cache configuration in runtime but restart cache > > with the new c

Re: New API for changing configuration of persistent caches

нояб. 2018 г. в 18:24, Eduard Shangareev < > eduard.shangar...@gmail.com > >: > > > Vladimir, > > > > How does .Net user start caches right now? > > > > On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 6:10 PM Vladimir Ozerov > > wrote: > > > > > Eduard,

Re: New API for changing configuration of persistent caches

e configuration are > available only on server nodes and only from Java. > > ср, 21 нояб. 2018 г. в 18:36, Eduard Shangareev < > eduard.shangar...@gmail.com > >: > > > Vladimir, > > > > I don't see any difference here. > > > > The same possibilities

Re: New API for changing configuration of persistent caches

n Java, when it is very easy to > make it available from everywhere? > > ср, 21 нояб. 2018 г. в 18:50, Eduard Shangareev >: > > > Vladimir, > > > > It would be Java API specific. > > For a user, we would add a new command for console.sh which would take an >

New API for changing configuration of persistent caches

Igniters, I propose new public API to change the cache configuration of persistent caches with keeping data. It would look like: Ignite ignite = ...; ignite.restartCaches(cfg1, ... cfgN); where cfgX is a new cache configuration, which contains the name of an existing persistent cache. The

Re: New API for changing configuration of persistent caches

hich will not require > full CacheConfiguration object. This might be a kind of builder or so. And > once user set properties he want to change to the builder, we can analyze > them and either change them in runtime without PME, change with a single > PME or change with full cache restart. &g

Re: New API for changing configuration of persistent caches

examples? > 2) How will it interact with PME? > 3) How will it interact with CREATE INDEX and ALTER TABLE commands? > > On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 4:48 PM Eduard Shangareev < > eduard.shangar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Igniters, > > > > I propose new public API to change t

Re: New API for changing configuration of persistent caches

Dmitriy, >From my point of view, it's not good to have such unexpected behavior (and change old one) for cache and getOrCreateCache method. It should be a conscious decision, not an accident. On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 5:01 PM Eduard Shangareev wrote: > Vladimir, > > 1) Affinity coul

Re: [DISCUSSION] Design document. Rebalance caches by transferring partition files

increase more than twice; - checkpoint-threads shouldn't wait for anything; - in best case, we receive partition without any extra effort. On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 8:54 PM Eduard Shangareev < eduard.shangar...@gmail.com> wrote: > Maxim, > > I have looked through your algorithm of re

Re: [DISCUSSION] Design document. Rebalance caches by transferring partition files

eceiver and applied there? > > On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 7:52 PM Eduard Shangareev < > eduard.shangar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > So, after some discussion, I could describe another approach on how to > > build consistent partition on the fly. > > > > 1.

Re: New API for changing configuration of persistent caches

h as well. > > чт, 22 нояб. 2018 г. в 10:05, Eduard Shangareev < > eduard.shangar...@gmail.com > >: > > > Vovan, > > > > We couldn't avoid API with cache configuration. > > Almost all of ~70 properties could be changed, some of them are instances &g

Re: New API for changing configuration of persistent caches

tform, which is a showstopper - > all API should be available from all platforms unless it is proven to be > impossible to implement. > > Vladimir. > > чт, 22 нояб. 2018 г. в 1:06, Eduard Shangareev < > eduard.shangar...@gmail.com > >: > > > Vovan, > > > >

Re: New API for changing configuration of persistent caches

t I meant another case - Java node > creates a cache. Then .NET node wants to change it. Proposed API cannot > handle it. > > ср, 21 нояб. 2018 г. в 19:03, Eduard Shangareev >: > > > Vladimir, > > > > I didn't get how does .Net user start caches right now? XML and re

[VOTE] Creation dedicated list for github notifiacations

This was discussed already [1]. So, I want to complete this discussion with moving outside dev-list GitHub-notification to dedicated list. Please start voting. +1 - to accept this change. 0 - you don't care. -1 - to decline this change. This vote will go for 72 hours. [1]

Re: [DISCUSSION] Design document. Rebalance caches by transferring partition files

Maxim, I have looked through your algorithm of reading partition consistently. And I have some questions/comments. 1. The algorithm requires heavy synchronization between checkpoint-thread and new-approach-rebalance-threads, because you need strong guarantees to not start writing or reading to

Re: New API for changing configuration of persistent caches

roperties in CacheConfiguration. ~50 of them are plain, ~20 > are custom classes. My variant allows to change plain properties from any > platform, and the rest 20 from any platform when user has relevant > BinaryType. > > On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 11:30 AM Eduard Shangareev < > edua

cache.loadCache() for persistent cache throws AssertionError

Igniters, do we support this combination (allowed persistence + read/write through)? If no, what exception should be thrown? java.lang.AssertionError at org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.persistence.GridCacheOffheapManager$GridCacheDataStore.invoke(GridCacheOffheapManager.java:2104) at

Re: cache.loadCache() for persistent cache throws AssertionError

; > > Hello! > > > > > > Yes, we do support persistence + cache store. > > > > > > Regards, > > > -- > > > Ilya Kasnacheev > > > > > > > > > вт, 2 апр. 2019 г. в 18:23, Eduard Shangareev &l

Re: Lightweight version of partitions map exchange

Nikita, It sounds cool. But I didn't get about in-memory caches. The baseline is not used for their affinity calculation. So, this improvement would be switched off for them or completely (when such caches are presented), wouldn't it? On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 3:14 PM Pavel Kovalenko wrote: > Hi

Re: Review IGNITE-11411 'Remove tearDown, setUp from JUnit3TestLegacySupport'

Hi. I am interested in. If nobody did it I would do it next week. On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 10:20 AM Ivan Fedotov wrote: > Hi Igniters! > > Now I am working on iep-30[1] which is about fully 4->5 migration and > includes some moments according to JUnit 3->4 migration. > I am on the first stage

Re: [DISCUSSION] Fixed test order to reduce flakyness

Dmitriy, Please, clarify the idea. What do we want to achieve by this? Making tests more stable by hiding some issues in our tests/codebase? On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 6:57 PM Павлухин Иван wrote: > Dmitriy, > > Sounds like a good idea to me. Problems related to tests isolation are > very common

Re: Running single test multiple times on TeamCity

Ivan, We already have IgniteReproducingSuite, and there was a corresponding TC configuration, but it was removed (maybe by accident). We could resurrect TC configuration. + We can improve Suite to provide test class name by parameter instead of changing code. On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:22 AM

Re: [DISCUSSION] [IGNOTE-11141] The new java method to create a cache from a template

Hi, Sergey! Could you give some example of how it is supposed to use? On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 6:02 PM Sergey Moldachev wrote: > Hi, Igniters! > > I want to add the new java method *cacheConfiguration(String cacheName)* in > to *Ignite* core interface as part of the task >

Re: [DISCUSSION] [IGNITE-11141] The new java method to create a cache from a template

ate subject (fixed a typo) > > ср, 13 февр. 2019 г. в 19:55, Eduard Shangareev < > eduard.shangar...@gmail.com > >: > > > Hi, Sergey! > > > > Could you give some example of how it is supposed to use? > > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 6:02 PM Ser

Re: Make the TeamCity console quiet.

Maksim, sounds good. 1) Can we just turn off log rollover? 2) I believe, that we need the ability to override this by setting parameter for Run All. On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 4:12 PM Maksim Stepachev wrote: > Ivan, > > Yes. It happens because we use the RollingFileAppender for a file logging.

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [4483209] needs to be handled

692660105095122533=%3Cdefault%3E=testDetails >> > >> > *New test failure in master-nightly >> DiskPageCompressionConfigValidationTest.testIncorrectDynamicCacheStartRequest >> >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8=1915110918646

Re: Asynchronous registration of binary metadata

Denis, How would we deal with races between registration and metadata usages with such fast-fix? I believe, that we need to move it to distributed metastorage, and await registration completeness if we can't find it (wait for work in progress). Discovery shouldn't wait for anything here. On Tue,

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-3621) Make GridCacheTtlManager singleto

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-3621: - Summary: Make GridCacheTtlManager singleto Key: IGNITE-3621 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3621 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Bug

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-3662) Improving Integration with Spring Data

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-3662: - Summary: Improving Integration with Spring Data Key: IGNITE-3662 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3662 Project: Ignite Issue Type

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-4332) Usage of cache.getEntry inside GridCacheQueryManager.runQuery causes to remote operations

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-4332: - Summary: Usage of cache.getEntry inside GridCacheQueryManager.runQuery causes to remote operations Key: IGNITE-4332 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-5871) IgniteCacheP2pUnmarshallingRebalanceErrorTest.testResponseMessageOnUnmarshallingFailed fails

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-5871: - Summary: IgniteCacheP2pUnmarshallingRebalanceErrorTest.testResponseMessageOnUnmarshallingFailed fails Key: IGNITE-5871 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-5870) IgniteTopologyValidatorGridSplitCacheTest#testTopologyValidator fails

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-5870: - Summary: IgniteTopologyValidatorGridSplitCacheTest#testTopologyValidator fails Key: IGNITE-5870 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5870

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-6068) We try to add entry to partition which was concurrently evicted

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-6068: - Summary: We try to add entry to partition which was concurrently evicted Key: IGNITE-6068 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6068 Project

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-5843) Ignite PDS: We don't save cache configuration if we get it on join

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-5843: - Summary: Ignite PDS: We don't save cache configuration if we get it on join Key: IGNITE-5843 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5843 Project

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-6005) [Test failed] GridCachePartitionedDataStructuresFailoverSelfTest.testSemaphoreNonFailoverSafe

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-6005: - Summary: [Test failed] GridCachePartitionedDataStructuresFailoverSelfTest.testSemaphoreNonFailoverSafe Key: IGNITE-6005 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-5998) Assertion during partition creation in tests

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-5998: - Summary: Assertion during partition creation in tests Key: IGNITE-5998 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5998 Project: Ignite

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-5999) Assertion Moving partition is below zero

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-5999: - Summary: Assertion Moving partition is below zero Key: IGNITE-5999 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5999 Project: Ignite Issue

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-6000) Assertion during destroy GridH2Table

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-6000: - Summary: Assertion during destroy GridH2Table Key: IGNITE-6000 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6000 Project: Ignite Issue Type

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-5978) [Test Failed] IgnitePartitionedCountDownLatchSelfTest.testLatchMultinode1

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-5978: - Summary: [Test Failed] IgnitePartitionedCountDownLatchSelfTest.testLatchMultinode1 Key: IGNITE-5978 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5978

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-5980) [Test Failed] IgniteAtomicLongChangingTopologySelfTest.testClientAtomicLongCreateCloseFailover

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-5980: - Summary: [Test Failed] IgniteAtomicLongChangingTopologySelfTest.testClientAtomicLongCreateCloseFailover Key: IGNITE-5980 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-5979) [Test Failed] GridCacheAtomicInvalidPartitionHandlingSelfTest.testPrimaryFullAsync

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-5979: - Summary: [Test Failed] GridCacheAtomicInvalidPartitionHandlingSelfTest.testPrimaryFullAsync Key: IGNITE-5979 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5979

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-5997) [Test Failed] DynamicIndexPartitionedAtomicConcurrentSelfTest.testCoordinatorChange

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-5997: - Summary: [Test Failed] DynamicIndexPartitionedAtomicConcurrentSelfTest.testCoordinatorChange Key: IGNITE-5997 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5997

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-5954) Ignite Cache Failover: GridCacheAtomicNearRemoveFailureTest.testPutAndRemove fails

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-5954: - Summary: Ignite Cache Failover: GridCacheAtomicNearRemoveFailureTest.testPutAndRemove fails Key: IGNITE-5954 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5954

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-5943) Communication. We could reject client connection while it has received EVT_NODE_JOINED

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-5943: - Summary: Communication. We could reject client connection while it has received EVT_NODE_JOINED Key: IGNITE-5943 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5943

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-5974) [Test Failed] IgniteClientDiscoveryDataStructuresTest.testSemaphore

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-5974: - Summary: [Test Failed] IgniteClientDiscoveryDataStructuresTest.testSemaphore Key: IGNITE-5974 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5974

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-5973) [Test Failed] GridCacheAbstractDataStructuresFailoverSelfTest.testSemaphoreNonFailoverSafe

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-5973: - Summary: [Test Failed] GridCacheAbstractDataStructuresFailoverSelfTest.testSemaphoreNonFailoverSafe Key: IGNITE-5973 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-5975) [Test Failed] GridCachePartitionedDataStructuresFailoverSelfTest.testSemaphoreSingleNodeFailure

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-5975: - Summary: [Test Failed] GridCachePartitionedDataStructuresFailoverSelfTest.testSemaphoreSingleNodeFailure Key: IGNITE-5975 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-5976) [Test Failed] IgniteClientDiscoveryDataStructuresTest.testReentrantLock

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-5976: - Summary: [Test Failed] IgniteClientDiscoveryDataStructuresTest.testReentrantLock Key: IGNITE-5976 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5976

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-5972) [Test Failed] IgniteCountDownLatchAbstractSelfTest.testLatchBroadcast

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-5972: - Summary: [Test Failed] IgniteCountDownLatchAbstractSelfTest.testLatchBroadcast Key: IGNITE-5972 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5972

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-5977) [Test Failed] IgniteClientDiscoveryDataStructuresTest.testSequence

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-5977: - Summary: [Test Failed] IgniteClientDiscoveryDataStructuresTest.testSequence Key: IGNITE-5977 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5977

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-6423) LFD could be corrupted if partition have been evicted and returned to node

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-6423: - Summary: LFD could be corrupted if partition have been evicted and returned to node Key: IGNITE-6423 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6423

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-6425) Races during transaction finalization

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-6425: - Summary: Races during transaction finalization Key: IGNITE-6425 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6425 Project: Ignite Issue Type

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-6434) Assertion error in checkpointer during topology change

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-6434: - Summary: Assertion error in checkpointer during topology change Key: IGNITE-6434 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6434 Project: Ignite

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-6460) Wrong consistentId for lightweight ClusterNode instances

Eduard Shangareev created IGNITE-6460: - Summary: Wrong consistentId for lightweight ClusterNode instances Key: IGNITE-6460 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6460 Project: Ignite

  1   2   >