pg-plugin for
> it [1].
>
> Algorithm configuration would look like this:
>
> --digest-algo=SHA512
>
>
> Maybe this will help.
>
> [1]
>
> http://maven.apache.org/plugins-archives/maven-gpg-plugin-LATEST/sign-mojo.html
>
> пн, 28 дек. 2020 г. в 01:25, Va
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Good point. Both serializers use
> reflection
> > > > API.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, we will allow users to configure
> > > > static
> > > &g
Adding correct emails...
On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 7:16 PM Valentin Kulichenko <
valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Kirill, Slava,
>
> I think you've been involved in creating this functionality. Could you
> please take a look at this ticket?
> https://issues.apache.o
Kirill, Slava,
I think you've been involved in creating this functionality. Could you
please take a look at this ticket?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13927
This is a blocker for the alpha1 release.
-Val
r the 'init' command. Created a ticket for this as well:
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13923
> >
> > -Val
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 11:21 AM Valentin Kulichenko <
> > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > &
Dear Community,
The release candidate is uploaded here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/3.0.0-alpha1-rc1/
Maven staging:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheignite-1502/
Git tag: https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/tree/3.0.0-alpha1-rc1
For more information
Hi Ilya,
Please see my comments below.
-Val
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 2:09 AM Ilya Kasnacheev
wrote:
> Hello!
>
> -1 (binding)
>
> After doing mvn clean install, the modules/cli/target/ignite executable
> file is malformed, it would not run.
>
> When running it with zsh, the following error is
I've created a ticket for the shell issue:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13959. Will fix it and restart
the vote.
-Val
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 9:34 AM Valentin Kulichenko <
valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Ilya,
>
> Please see my comments below.
>
>
Dear Community,
The release candidate is uploaded here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/3.0.0-alpha1-rc3/
Maven staging:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheignite-1504/
Git tag: https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/tree/3.0.0-alpha1-rc3
For more information
Mike, Denis,
Having error codes certainly makes sense. Please send the ticket link, and
we'll go from there.
-Val
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 7:50 PM Denis Magda wrote:
> Do back this idea up of having a glossary of common errors. There is even
> a ticket for that I created a couple of years ago.
I've fixed the issue. Since there are no other votes at this point, I will
restart the vote.
-Val
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 12:43 PM Valentin Kulichenko <
valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've identified an issue with tests on Windows:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/
Canceling due to failing build on Windows:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13950
-Val
Vote closed with four "+1" votes:
http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/RESULT-VOTE-Release-Apache-Ignite-3-0-0-alpha1-RC3-td50964.html
-Val
On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 1:10 PM Saikat Maitra
wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 3:01 PM Andrey Gura wrote:
>
> > +1
Igniters,
Apache Ignite 3.0.0 RC3 has been accepted.
4 "+1" votes received:
- Denis Magda (binding)
- Vladimir Pligin (non-binding)
- Andrey Gura (binding)
- Saikat Maitra (binding)
No "0" or "-1" votes.
Vote thread:
>
> 2020-12-28 22:15 GMT+03:00, Valentin Kulichenko <
> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com>:
> > Hi Ivan,
> >
> > Thanks for your response. I've looked into the PGP plugin, and
> > unfortunately it looks like it only can create signatures, but not
> > checksu
we expect to
> receive feedback? It would be interesting personally for me to see
> feedback/results summary.
>
> 2021-01-01 2:59 GMT+03:00, Valentin Kulichenko <
> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com>:
> > Igniters,
> >
> > Big thanks to everyone invo
e parent looks sufficient.
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 12:30 PM Petr Ivanov wrote:
>
> > Is seems that parent is already updated in
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13987 <
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13987>
> >
&
The meetup has been scheduled, please RSVP here:
https://www.meetup.com/Apache-Ignite-Virtual-Meetup/events/275722317/
-Val
On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 11:21 AM Valentin Kulichenko <
valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Link to the Getting Started Guide:
> https://ignite.apache.or
Link to the Getting Started Guide:
https://ignite.apache.org/docs/3.0.0-alpha/quick-start/getting-started-guide
-Val
On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 7:55 PM Valentin Kulichenko <
valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Igniters,
>
> I'm excited to announce that the first alpha build
fully, a new plugin version will be released before we have any release
> candidate.
>
> Is it looks like a big deal?
>
> ср, 13 янв. 2021 г., 21:32 Valentin Kulichenko <
> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Hi Ivan,
> >
> > No, I haven't found a way ye
um-maven-plugin
> to our main pom.
>
> [1]
>
> https://github.com/apache/maven-apache-parent/commit/a46aa52b4b56d9b7aa62e1b8cbea5ff0af434a
>
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 10:41 PM Valentin Kulichenko <
> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Andrey,
> &
[1] https://ignite.apache.org
[2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+3.0
Regards,
Valentin Kulichenko
Apache Ignite PMC
Igniters,
I'm excited to announce that the first alpha build of the Ignite 3 is out
and available for download!
Ignite 3 is the new project that was initiated by the Ignite community last
year. Please refer to this page if you want to learn more:
gt;
>
> On Sun, Jan 3, 2021 at 4:00 PM Valentin Kulichenko <
> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Dear Community,
> >
> > The release candidate is uploaded here:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/3.0.0-alpha1-rc1/
>
you're having, or there is something else?
-Val
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 11:19 AM Valentin Kulichenko <
valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nikita,
>
> Can you show the error it fails with? Can you also try to exclude tests by
> running 'mvn clean package -DskipTests'?
>
>
> > > One blocker:
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13936
> > > and three minor:
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13938
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13937
> > > https://issues.apache.
Dear Community,
The release candidate is uploaded here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/3.0.0-alpha1-rc2/
Maven staging:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheignite-1503/
Git tag: https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/tree/3.0.0-alpha1-rc2
For more information
I think it should be the first option - just throw a clear exception if a
query with a non-colocated join is executed without the flag set.
Explicitly turning this mode on seems wrong, because in most cases this is
not what a user intends to do.
We also should make sure to run performance tests.
;> We can fix the code and set up the rule.
> >>>
> >>> This will help to prevent having a weird abbreviation like "mess" (from
> >>> "message") or "ign" (from "Ignite").
> >>> Also, the abbreviations list (hardcode
>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>> Konstantin Orlov
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 17 Jun 2021, at 08:34, Ivan Pa
Dmitry,
As the PMC chair, would you mind contacting legal regarding the matter?
This is not the only example of such code (e.g. [1]), so we should look
into this asap.
[1]
https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/modules/core/src/main/java/org/mindrot/BCrypt.java
As for this particular
gt; >> and adds new external dependency only when there is no other way out.
> >>
> >> [1].
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Username-password-authentication-for-thin-clients-tp26058p26954.html
> >>
> >> On 23.06.2021 3:08, Valen
Hi Dmitry,
I've restored the section. Thanks for pointing it out.
-Val
On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 6:35 AM Dmitry Pavlov wrote:
> Igniters,
>
> It seems that extensions sectoin was removed by Val's commit
>
>
>
iled
>
> See also:
> [1]
>
> http://www.mastertheboss.com/other/java-stuff/troubleshooting-outofmemoryerror-direct-buffer-memory
>
> See
>
> 16.05.2021 01:21, Valentin Kulichenko пишет:
> > Hi Ilya,
> >
> > Out of curiosity - what are the potential problems w
Hi Ilya,
Out of curiosity - what are the potential problems with memory buffers that
you're referring to?
-Val
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 5:06 AM Ilya Korol wrote:
> Hi, everyone.
>
> There is a proposal to remove suggestion that user should disable
> explicit GC calls in
Agree. I brought the section back because there was a broken link, and I
believe I removed it earlier by mistake. We definitely should add more
details though.
-Val
On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 9:20 AM Dmitry Pavlov wrote:
> Hi Denis,
>
> +1 from my side.
>
> Now extensions in the download page
I also support removing this requirement. It’s not the first time someone
brings this up, and so far we haven’t been able to fix it. Not worth it in
my view.
-Val
On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 11:54 AM Nikolay Izhikov wrote:
> Hello, guys.
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> Dmitry,
>
> > Manual rule
Hi Sergey,
Sounds interesting, I do agree that it might be beneficial to improve the
lifecycle management in 3.0 - 2.x version is far from perfect.
Regarding your questions:
1. Can this be done via the metastore?
2. I think we should list the run levels that we think should be there, and
then
Folks,
This is a usability issue of the current API, which I don't think we can
easily fix right now without breaking compatibility.
There are two separate cases.
First - the value class is a user's POJO. This one is straightforward - we
analyze annotations and create indexes based on that. The
Hi Pavel,
I don't think we will need the pure embedded mode, but we still need to be
able to access the API from compute and services. That said, there are two
usages of the 'Ignite' API:
1. Remote, via the binary protocol.
2. Local - needed for compute and services. (This is how it works
lly “Ignition” naming always confused me. I think about
> it as some fancy named API entry point for Ignite. Perhaps it is a good
> moment to revisit naming.
>
> > On 8 Jul 2021, at 07:09, Valentin Kulichenko <
> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Pa
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jun 26, 2021 at 1:41 AM Nikita Ivanov
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Nikita Ivanov
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jun
Igniters,
Apache Ignite 3.0.0-alpha2 RC1 has been accepted.
4 "+1" votes received:
- Nikita Ivanov (binding)
- Igor Sapego (binding)
- Vyacheslav Koptilin (non-binding)
- Pavel Tupitsyn (binding)
No "0" or "-1" votes.
Vote thread:
Dear Community,
In the last several months, the development of Ignite 3 has been moving
forward significantly. On top of what we already had in the first Alpha, we
have the following features ready:
- Replication infrastructure based on Raft
- In-memory atomic storage with the basic insert-read
Hi Pavel,
Please see my comments below.
-Val
On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 2:23 PM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote:
> Igniters,
>
> While working on "IEP-76 Thin Client Protocol for Ignite 3.0" [1] (to be
> discussed separately), the following suggestions for the Table API came up:
>
> 1. Expose table IDs:
Ivan,
Regarding the API, please take a look at this package:
https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/tree/main/modules/api/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/table
'Table' is the primary API, which works with raw tuples. There are also
multiple views on top of it, including KeyValueView and
Folks,
*Anything* that a user provides to the system can potentially be considered
sensitive information. This includes the VM arguments. We can't predict
what exactly one can put there, so let's not make assumptions.
When dealing with security, we should be as conservative as possible. That
ity through obscurity, an obvious and a well-known anti
> pattern. I suppose that printing jvm options, that is registered by
> @IgniteSystemProperty annotation is an ideal variant
>
> чт, 1 июл. 2021 г., 19:25 Valentin Kulichenko <
> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com
> >:
>
Ivan,
I was answering your question about the KV API. The API I provided has been
discussed and agreed upon. One of the goals of the protocol is to implement
this API, so it should give you a clear idea of what we're looking for.
Of course, I agree with you that the protocol should be simple and
efault and block it wheb set to true
>
> чт, 1 июл. 2021 г., 19:45 Atri Sharma :
>
> > What if we allowed a blocklist of parameters that are never printed?
> >
> > On Thu, 1 Jul 2021, 22:06 Valentin Kulichenko, <
> > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
uments even if
> sensitive data is restricted?
>
> What do you think about an extra JVM option?
>
> чт, 1 июл. 2021 г. в 19:51, Valentin Kulichenko <
> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Ivan,
> >
> > IP addresses (e.g. IGNITE_TCP_DISCOVERY_ADDRESSES
21 г., 19:51 Valentin Kulichenko <
> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com
> >:
>
> > Ivan,
> >
> > IP addresses (e.g. IGNITE_TCP_DISCOVERY_ADDRESSES) and file paths
> > (e.g. IGNITE_CONFIG_URL) are often considered sensitive information. Data
> > related to
Daschinsky wrote:
> Val, am I right, that kv view over the tuples is just simple mapping from
> POJO to tuple? No collections, no nested objects? I have discussed this in
> private with Igor and Pavel and they told me different info.
>
> чт, 1 июл. 2021 г., 19:43 Vale
Pavel Tupitsyn wrote:
> Val,
>
> My suggestion is to have Ignition class in ignite-client module.
>
> On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 11:01 PM Valentin Kulichenko <
> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Pavel,
> >
> > Ivan actually brings a good point.
>>
> > >> As for me, I want to take part in implementing python and golang thin
> > >> clients for ignite 3, so consider my remarks using this info. I am not
> > >> just
> > >> a rude critic,
> > >> I am just interested in con
> >
> > > > Val,
> > > >
> > > > > I don't think there is a significantly better way
> > > > > of doing this in Java.
> > > >
> > > > Yep looks like there is no way to return two values without boxing.
> > > &
Pavel,
That's a good point, but I don't think there is a significantly better way
of doing this in Java.
There should be a way to check if a field is nullable or not though. Schema
already provides this information, doesn't it?
-Val
On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 11:03 AM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote:
>
orner.com/article/out-parameter-in-c-sharp-7/
>
>
> вт, 6 июл. 2021 г., 22:30 Valentin Kulichenko <
> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com
> >:
>
> > Pavel,
> >
> > Optionals are available in Java and we can use them. This is still boxing
> > though, and I don't k
ally) have both sync and async variants
> of
> > > > every
> > > > > > > method, where applicable,
> > > > > > > including the method that connects the client to the cluster.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
.baeldung.com/java-redis-lettuce
>
> чт, 8 июл. 2021 г., 23:47 Valentin Kulichenko <
> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com
> >:
>
> > Ivan,
> >
> > Can you please clarify what you mean by "separate creation of client and
> > connection"? Can you give a
t; On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 6:13 AM Valentin Kulichenko <
> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Ivan,
> >
> > Ignition IS the entry point to Ignite, so I'm not sure I got your point
> :)
> > Where is the contradiction?
> >
> > Either way, p
I
> > - Make Ignition a class, not an interface
> > - Add static Ignition#startClient
> >
> > Sounds good?
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 6:13 AM Valentin Kulichenko <
> > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Iv
Igniters,
I'm happy to announce that Ignite 3 project reached a significant
milestone, as we release the 2nd alpha version of the product.
On top of the functionality that was previously released, Alpha 2 adds
the following major features:
- Replication infrastructure based on Raft.
- New
> have a use case in mind for this? If not, I would keep this internal
> > >
> > > Ok, we can keep the Table.schema(ver) method internal, as long as
> > > Table.schemas() is public and includes schema versions.
> > >
> > >
> > > > We already
rs are running and
> for
> > > > > operational ease (and also compliance, in some cases, e.g. to make
> > > > > auditing easier), people can configure cloud based IP finders to
> share
> > > > > the same container (blob container in Azure, S3 container in
Hi Nikolay,
Is there a specific motivation behind your proposal? I do acknowledge that
the semantics of the toBinary method is a little weird, but my concern is
that the way it works with arrays is just an example. Are you suggesting
changing collections, primitives, and other "first citizen"
level :) Either way, that's off-topic. I would recommend
reviewing the related IEPs and starting a separate discussion if you have
any questions or concerns.
>
> сб, 1 мая 2021 г. в 00:51, Valentin Kulichenko <
> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > Hi Nikola
er iteration.
>
> Val, I have moved the configuration to TcpDiscoverySpi.
>
> Please see and let me know your thoughts and comments.
>
> Regards,
>
> Atri
>
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 2:11 AM Valentin Kulichenko
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Atri,
> >
> >
r-side: create, set result, raise error, cancel from server.
> > >> 2. Client-side: get result, handle error, cancel from client
> > >>
> > >> Java's CompletableFuture looks like both the client-side and
> > >> server-side API. The "Completeable"
Andrey,
Can you compile a full list of these risky methods, and elaborate on what
the risks are?
Generally, CompletableFuture is a much better option, because it's
standard. But we need to make sure it actually fits our needs and doesn't
do more harm than good.
-Val
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at
ave control of these results as well. E.g. premature completion in
> case when a result is no longer needed is possible usage.
>
> Also I thinkg it might be a good time to ponder about Future/Promise
> APIs in general. Why such API is our choice? Can we choose e.g.
> Reactive AP
; > > and cancel the underlying operation without an extra class,
> > > something like
> > >
> > > fut.exceptionally(t -> {
> > > if (t instanceof CancellationException) {
> > > // Cancel Ignite operation
>
s
> > > > > async
> > > > > > > operations is supposed to be completed with a value only by
> > Ignite
> > > > > > itself,
> > > > > > > not by the user. If we follow the same approach in I
to the call? I want to make Ignite
> > > better and also think that the current 2.x version with all the
> > > advantages and disadvantages is far from exhausted its capabilities.
> > > I'm pretty sure the same motivation page exists for 3.0 version
>
users jump
> > through more hoops. I have changed the signature to accept Callable
> > returning T.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Atri
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 5:29 AM Valentin Kulichenko
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Atri,
> >
a call?
> >
> > I also think that we should start a vote about the future releases on
> > our Apache Ignite web-site and user-list, thus all who are using the
> > Apache Ignite may choose the best option they like.
> >
> >
> > [1]
> >
> ht
Hi Denis,
I think Pavel's main point is that behavior is unpredictable. For example,
AFAIK, putAsync can be executed in the main thread instead of the striped
pool thread if the operation is local. The listener can also be executed in
the main thread - this happens if the future is completed
Mar 2021, 12:09 Atri Sharma, wrote:
>
> > Hi Val,
> >
> > Thanks for taking a look. I have updated the PR, please see and let me
> > know your thoughts and feedback.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Atri
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 6:1
Hi Atri,
First and foremost, we need to clarify the API for this functionality.
There are two options presented in the ticket, but no clear decision about
which one should be used. I personally think that the original signature
(the one in the ticket description) makes more sense, but it looks
Hi Maxim,
I disagree with the suggestions. Several community members have already
pointed out the discussion about Ignite 3.0 [1]. During that discussion, we
did agree on the scope of the changes for 3.0, as well as the general
direction for the product. The new repo was created not to "develop
Atri,
I've added my comments in the PR.
-Val
On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 7:29 AM Denis Magda wrote:
> @Valentin Kulichenko , @Nikolay Izhikov
> , @samvi...@yandex.ru ,
>
> I saw you reviewing the ticket. Could you please double-check the changes?
> "IGNITE-2399: Impleme
Petr,
Any suggestions on how to fix this? One of the ideas that come to my mind
is to unify the process. For example, by enforcing that all changes are
merged only through PRs. That, however, means that all contributors are
forced to work with GitHub, which is not necessarily a great thing.
Hi folks,
Did you have a discussion? How did it go? Can someone summarize the results?
-Val
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 2:00 AM Kseniya Romanova
wrote:
> Hi! Scheduled open call for Friday
> https://www.meetup.com/Moscow-Apache-Ignite-Meetup/events/277518672/
> Please join to see the zoom link.
t
> hesitate to let me know.
>
> вт, 20 апр. 2021 г. в 02:06, Valentin Kulichenko <
> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Did you have a discussion? How did it go? Can someone summarize the
> > results?
> >
> > -Val
>
Zhenya,
Could you clarify what you mean by "one instance is shared between numerous
of fabric"? What is the exact scenario and what are the implications of
running multiple compute tasks in parallel? A code sample demonstrating the
scenario might be helpful as well.
-Val
On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at
Igniters,
As far as I know, the tracing feature [1] is still marked as experimental.
However, It seems that we've had it for a while, it's being used, the API
is stabilized, and there are no known performance issues associated with it.
That said, should we remove the "experimental" mark and move
Hi Atri,
Can you describe the scenario in a little more detail? What exactly do you
mean by a container shared by multiple clusters? What are the consequences
of this? How does the proposed solution solve the problem?
Also, I would suggest revisiting the design - I'm not sure such filtering
Pavel,
The configuration framework is designed to support dynamic configuration
changes - I doubt this is needed for the client side. I think we should
start with simple POJOs or builders.
-Val
On Sat, Aug 21, 2021 at 7:03 AM Ivan Daschinsky wrote:
> As for me, it is very strange purpose and
Igniters,
I would like to discuss a potential change to the coding guidelines for
Ignite 3. Currently, we're using the existing guidelines inherited from
Ignite 2, which are described here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Coding+Guidelines
Current guidelines, however, exist
_checks.xml
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 12:02 PM Alexei Scherbakov
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > пт, 20 авг. 2021 г. в 10:54, Alexander Polovtcev <
> > alexpolovt...@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
n affect performance
>
>
> However, I'm not so sure about Java, where async/await are not present,
> overall async usage seems to be rarer, and removing sync methods may become
> an obstacle for the users in some cases.
> Let's create a separate discussion and see what others thin
Hi Pavel,
I've looked at the IEP and the public API - looks good to me.
Quick question - do you plan to add sync methods to the interfaces, or
you're thinking to only leave async? If the latter, what are the arguments
for this? The reason I'm asking is that I'm actually thinking about
suggesting
I don't think we should ban anything. Streams API is just a tool in the
toolbox - it should be used appropriately. It's up to the contributor and
reviewer(s) to identify whether a particular usage might cause performance
issues.
-Val
On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 8:01 AM Alexander Polovtcev
wrote:
>
lers [1].
>
> [1] https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md
>
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 9:49 PM Valentin Kulichenko <
> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I don't think we should ban anything. Streams API is just a tool in the
> >
ve a lot of boiler plate/wrapper that
> we
> > wrote to get what you're suggesting here.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Courtney Robinson
> > Founder and CEO, Hypi
> > Tel: ++44 208 123 2413 (GMT+0) <https://hypi.io>
> >
> > <https://hypi.io>
&g
How do we handle the "equality" part in 2.x? The same problem exists there
as well, but we still somehow return a Map.
Generally, I like Pavel's ideas, but there are a couple of issues with
them. Firstly, Java developers are really used to maps in this context.
Introducing something else might be
Hi Pavel,
I've created a thread.
-Val
On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 12:02 PM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote:
> Val,
>
> Would you like me to start the discussion about sync-over-async in Ignite 3
> Java APIs, or do you plan to do it yourself?
>
> On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 10:10 PM V
Igniters,
I would like to gather some opinions on whether we want to focus on sync vs
async APIs in Ignite 3.
Here are some initial considerations that I have:
1. Ignite 2.x is essentially "sync first". Async APIs exist, but they use
non-standard IgniteFuture and provide counterintuitive
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
Hello Abhinav,
Spark 3 support definitely becomes higher priority for Ignite as more
people transition to it from Spark 2. I'm sure someone in the community
will pick this up soon.
In the meantime, could you please give a little more detail on how you use
Ignite with Spark? Are you using the
701 - 800 of 1097 matches
Mail list logo
