Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.16.0 RC0

Finally i build it (some local maven problems). Check compilation, run calcite tests. +1 (non-binding)   >  >>  >>>Hello, Zhenya. >>> >>>Java profiles should be activated automatically (on reload maven >>>project). Which JDK are you using? Is the proje

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.16.0 RC0

Thanks Nikita. remove «.idea» folder, call Invalidate and Restart from Idea but it not helps ( Idea: IntelliJ IDEA 2023.2.5 jdk 11.0.17 build from IDE not from maven   >Hello, Zhenya. > >Java profiles should be activated automatically (on reload maven >project). Which JDK a

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.16.0 RC0

Hi, probably it`s a kind of problem from my side, but cloning by tag and further steps: * change profile to java-8 * Reload all maven Projects * Try to run: ScriptTestSuite will raise guava dependency problem: /ignite/internal/processors/query/calcite/sql/IgniteSqlRollback.java:20:33 java:

Remove nightly builds for ignite-2.14

I found that nightly builds for 2.14 still active [1] can someone fix it ?   [1]  https://ci2.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_RunAllNightly/7245960?hideProblemsFromDependencies=false=false+Inspection=true=true    

Re: Continuous integrations tests is broken on ci

increase the timeout, or split the snapshots suite >into 2 parts. > >Actually we don't have a policy for this parameter, for example "Disk page >compressions 1" use 3h timeout, "Snapshots with indexes" - 1h. > >I propose to increase the timeout up to 3h as a q

Continuous integrations tests is broken on ci

Igniters, seems continuous integrations tests are broken for ci.* [1] and are ok for ci2.* [2] seems it`s impossible to build and get visa for apache ignite 2 on ci.* environment.    [1]  https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_Snapshots?branch==builds [2] 

Re[2]: [DISCUSSION] Removal of ignitevisorcmd

+1 for remove.   >+1 This module seems to be completely abandoned > >чт, 1 дек. 2022 г., 00:46 Ilya Kasnacheev < ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com >: >  >> Hello! >> >> Let's go ahead and remove what we don't use. Most of that stuff is deep >> legacy, even if it contains some rare gems of

Re: [VOTE] Release pyignite 0.6.0.rc1

+1, thanks Ivan !     >Dear Igniters! > >Release candidate binaries for subj are uploaded and ready for vote >You can find them here: >https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/pyignite/0.6.0.rc1 > >If you follow the link above, you will find source packages (*.zip) >and binary packages

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.14.0 RC0

I think it`s important to mention that local caches are not supported since this version [1].   [1]  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15759     >Dear Community, >  >The release candidate is ready. > >I have uploaded release candidate to

Re[2]: Apache calcite dependency update issue.

>: >> >> > I suppose that we are not in rush, because we have just cut off a release >> > branch for 2.14. Let us wait for a new release of Calcite. By the way, >> has >> > that bug been already reported? >> > >> > вт, 30 авг. 2022 г., 20:35

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Ivan Daschinsky

Join the congratulations !   >Hi Igniters! > >The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Ignite has invited >Ivan Daschinsky to become a member of the PMC and we are pleased to >announce that he has accepted. > >Ivan contributed the Ignite Python thin client. And he is still maintaining

Apache calcite dependency update issue.

Igniters, i found that new release of apache calcite was released (1.31) [1]. This release contains great improvement [2] which makes possible to resolve [3],  but also contains a bug [4] with natural join validation (possibly not one, but apache ignite sql test suite highlight only this one).

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.13.0 RC2

Nikita thanks for your effort ! Download sources, run examples. +1 from me.   >Dear Community, > >The release candidate is ready. > >I have uploaded a release candidate to: >https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/2.13.0-rc2/

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.13.0 RC1

Nikita, thanks !  I found that below link is unavailable:   >TC [2] Compare w/ Previous Release >https://ci2.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/ignite2_Release_ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_IgniteRelease72CheckFileConsistency/6398741 >     

Re[4]: Apache Ignite 2.13 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

gt;> > >> > But the 2.12 branch was cut on October 15, 2021. There are many fixes >> > and features that were merged into the master during this period. The >> > total time between branches cut is 5 months (if there is no delay >> > happens). Seems it is not

Re[2]: [DISCUSSION] Error handling in Ignite 3

Ivan, thanks for this effort, as for me - looks good.   >Hi everyone, > >I'd like to continue the discussion. I created IEP with the attempt to >summarize >all the information above, you can find it here [1]. What do you think? > >[1]

Re[2]: Apache Ignite 2.13 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

Maxim, i think that more frequent releases are useful. Ready to release branch means that it passed all known tests and also have an appropriate votes. More code changes creates more difficulties in final tests and sometimes migration. No need to switch between neighbor minor versions for user

Re[2]: java 17 support

Petr, how can you explain the lifecycle of product ? It managed by community. I`m +1 for moving forward.   >  >>  >>>Adding ability to compile Ignite 2 with JDK11+ will require so much >>>refactoring and, sometimes, rethinking of approaches, that it will become >>>different project in some

Re[2]: Adding a system view of recently completed compute tasks

Ok, thanks, now it`s clear, seems we need additional documentation here and also property renaming.   >Judging by the code, this is the task session timeout.        

Re[2]: Adding a system view of recently completed compute tasks

Ok, whats the purpose of  END_TIME property in such a case?   >Thanks Zhenya, but here we can see only the current working tasks, after they >are completed it is not possible to get the actual time of work, for example, >for statistics.        

Re: Adding a system view of recently completed compute tasks

Hi, seems ignite already contain such view [1], plz explain the difference? thanks.   [1]  https://ignite.apache.org/docs/latest/monitoring-metrics/system-views#tasks   >  >>  >>>Hello everyone! >>> >>>I want to add a new system view to get the last N (configurable by system >>>property,

Re: [PROPOSAL] Release Calcite-based SQL engine as an experimental feature

Alex, great ! If someone wants to touch codebase somehow plz use this branch [1] Test passed can be found here [2] [3]   [1]  https://github.com/apache/ignite/tree/sql-calcite/modules/calcite [2] 

Re[2]: NUMA aware allocator, PR review request

+1 with Ivan, let`s store it in core product just because it looks like  inalienable functionality and release cycle of extensions a little bit different.   >Anton, I disagree. > >1. This should be released with main distro. >2. This should not be abandoned. >3. There is not any release

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Welcome Semyon Danilov as a new committer

Wellcome Semyon ! Andrey what`s Ivan are you talking at the end of the message or this is some kind of phraseologism that all russians are ivans ?:)   >Igniters, > >The Apache Ignite Project Management Committee (PMC) has invited >Semyon Danilov to become a new committer and are happy to

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Welcome Maxim Timonin as a new committer

Big deal, congrats Maxim !   >Igniters, > >The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Ignite has invited Maxim >Timonin to become a committer and we are pleased to announce that he has >accepted. > >Maxim makes valuable contributions to the Apache Ignite code, helps >actively to

Re: [2.11.0]: 'B+Tree is corrupted' exception in GridCacheTtlManager.expire() and PartitionsEvictManager$PartitionEvictionTask.run() on node start

Sergey, not so easy to recognize the problem, also with logs, plz fill the ticket and append link to this message or duplicate all logs there.   thanks !   >From: "Sergey Korotkov" < serge.korot...@gmail.com > >To: u...@ignite.apache.org >Cc: >Subject: [2.11.0]: 'B+Tree is corrupted' exception

Re: [DISCUSSION] Remove VS project from C++

completely support !   >Igniters! > >Currently we have CMake build system, that works on Windows, Linux and >MacOs flawlessly > >1. CMake is supported natively in VS 2019 >2. CMake can generate VS projects for about 20 years flawlessly. >3. Sometimes even maintainers forget to add test sources

Re[2]: Deprecating LOCAL cache

Ok, we can use node filters in such a case, i understand )   >I just dream up ) If some one have cached web session layer over >ignite with sticky cookie [1] and cross cache transaction logic through >local and global caches how this schema will transform without local ? > >[1]

Re[2]: Deprecating LOCAL cache

I just dream up ) If some one have cached web session layer over ignite with sticky cookie [1] and cross cache transaction logic through local and global caches how this schema will transform without local ?   [1] 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.11.0 RC2

Thanks Maxim ! I tries to compare this ver with 2.10 (some performance tests with persistence and transactional\atomic payload) and seems all ok there. +1 from me.   > > >Dear Community, > > >The release candidate for the 2.11 version is ready. > > >I have uploaded a release candidate to:

Re: Ban Java Streams usage in Ignite 3 code

Pavel, thanks ! And what about stream usage not in a hot path ? I.e. create\drop table operation, may be such a cases will leave for committer\contributor  consideration ?   >Igniters, > >Java streams are known to be slower and cause more GC pressure than an >equivalent loop. >Below is a simple

Re: [VOTE] Allow or prohibit usages of the Guava library methods

Aleksandr, thanks for this activity. -1 from my side, all my decisions are in linked discussion.   >Dear Igniters, > >In this thread >< >https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r4120a03a2bf32098e54e21ae02e509b0d68f413bc7cc1f8f6d85c93d%40%3Cdev.ignite.apache.org%3E > > >we've been discussing the

Re[4]: Google Guava in Ignite 3

> >> > > > On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 7:37 PM Alexander Polovtcev >> > > > < alexpolovt...@gmail.com > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > Guys, >> > > > > >> > > > > Thanks again for your responses. I've created a

Re[2]: Google Guava in Ignite 3

to jar hell here?     >Zhenya, > >My intentions are the following: > >1. Remove some copy-pasted code (like the "bytecode" module or some utility >methods). Please see my original message for the links to the code. >2. Explicitly pin the Guava version to avoid conflicts in

Re: Google Guava in Ignite 3

alexpolovtcev please clarify what do you mean under : «possibility of using Guava in Ignite 3», using how  necessary dependency of calcite or using like «using in our code» ? If using in code, i -1 here. thanks.     >Hello, dear Igniters! > >I would like to discuss the possibility of using

Re[2]: Google Guava in Ignite 3

Andrey, seems we can use [1] it help us with point 1 in your comment, isn`t it ?   [1]  https://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-optional-and-excludes-dependencies.html   >-1 >It is sad to say -1, as Guava has very useful stuff and it looks easier to >add it as a dependency

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

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 t

[DISCUSS] Confuse default inspections.

Igniters, i understand that this is very long and fundamental story. but …  still want to rise up this discussion, we have 2 very strange inspections: * «public» modifier in interface methods. * Illegal ‘{}’ for one line statement. — i found it harmful. I don`t want to link additional

Re[2]: Setting IGNITE_TO_STRING_INCLUDE_SENSITIVE=false prevents VM Arguments output

-1 for extra arg, +1 for Ivan`s upper proposal : @IgniteSystemProperty annotation. Look, someone will set some of IGNITE_* option and after possibly cluster problems will give this logs into analysis and engineer can`t reproduce such a case, cause no param is applied.   >An extra argument for

Re[2]: Setting IGNITE_TO_STRING_INCLUDE_SENSITIVE=false prevents VM Arguments output

+1 for reverting, can anybody (possibly ticket starter?) explain how jvm settings will rise some security problems ?   >I suppose, that we should revert this particular line. I don't understand >who ever considers vm options as sensitive info. > >ср, 30 июн. 2021 г., 22:52 Shishkov Ilya <

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

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

[DISCUSSION] Transactional cache could be in inconsistent state after node recovery.

Igniters, as previously was found [1] in some cases transactional cache can contain unexpected data after node crash and further recovery. Short explanation: it`s all due to ignite does not save transactional records into the WAL. The simplest example: 1 node cluster and transactional cache,

Re: [DISCUSS] Python thin client development approach.

Ivan, if Petr can`t help here, how can  we change it out own ? May be we need some help from pmc chair or someone else ?   >  >> >>Igniters. Almost half of a year passed since this thread begun. We >>released 0.4.0, we adopted travis-ci and use it as primary source for >>test results but nothing

IgniteCompute can lead to OOM in some cases.

Igniters, i found some problems with running p2p tasks concurrently. Description and patch available here, can someone review plz?   [1]  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14131      

Re: Ignite 2.10. Performance tests in Azure

hello, can you recheck with OPTIMISTIC SERILIZABLE tx`s ?   >Hello all, > >For our project we need a distributed database with transactional support, >and Ignite is one of the options we are testing. > >Scalability is one of our must have, so we created an Ignite Kubernetes >cluster in Azure to

Re: Ignite 2.10. Performance tests in Azure

hello, can you try OPTIMISTIC SERILIZABLE tx`s ?   >Hello all, > >For our project we need a distributed database with transactional support, >and Ignite is one of the options we are testing. > >Scalability is one of our must have, so we created an Ignite Kubernetes >cluster in Azure to test

Re[2]: [DISCUSSION] MaxLineLength checkstyle rule

Python is not so verbose as java ) +1 for 140   >Hi! >Personally, I suppose that 120 chars per line is OK. Moreover, many >codestyles suggests less chars per line. >For example PEP8 recommends 80 (but we use 120 in pyignite and flake8 >codestyle checks it). Google java codestyle insists on 100. >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Welcome Ivan Daschinsky as a new committer

Big deal ! Ivan, ignite it !)    >The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Ignite has invited >Ivan Daschinsky to become a committer and we are pleased to announce that >he has accepted. > >Ivan made a lot of contributions to Apache Ignite. >He helped a lot to improve our Python Thin

Re: Long transaction suspended

hi jjimeno, plz check your throughput once more by using  OPTIMISTIC, SERIALIZABLE options, hope it would be more faster than default.   > > >--- Forwarded message --- >From: jjimeno < jjim...@omp.com > >To: u...@ignite.apache.org >Cc: >Subject: Long transaction suspended >Date: Thu, 04

Re[2]: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.10.0 RC2

Build from sources, run .net tests, looks good. +1    >+1 (binding) > >Downloaded binary packages, started nodes, .NET examples, .NET nodes. >Downloaded source package, built Java and .NET parts. > >On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 4:24 AM Maxim Muzafarov < mmu...@apache.org > wrote: >  >> Dear

Re[2]: [DISCUSSION] Apache Ignite Release 2.10 (time, scope, manager)

I fill the ticket with drop problem, plz take a look [1]   [1]  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14205   >Ilya, > >Thanks! >I've added this step to the Release Process wiki page also [1]. > >[1]

Re[2]: Adding metrics of using WAL archive

Kirill, is it good practice to have a metrics for internal use? Don`t think so. +1 witk Nikolay size is more readable than abstract segments count.    >Hi, Nikolay! > >For internal use, leave the metric that I propose and also add the metric: >Count of bytes logged in WAL. Why not "written"

Re[4]: [DISCUSSION] Request for thread unsafe Compute functionality deprecation.

> > >пт, 5 февр. 2021 г. в 16:00, Zhenya Stanilovsky < arzamas...@mail.ru >: >  >> >> Ilya, as previously agreed, ticket [1], examples of concurrent tests you >> can find here GridDifferentLocalDeploymentSelfTest and here >> IgniteExplicitImplicitDeploy

Re[4]: [DISCUSSION] Request for thread unsafe Compute functionality deprecation.

tests would be helpful.    thanks !   [1]  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14131 >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

Re[2]: [DISCUSSION] Request for thread unsafe Compute functionality deprecation.

Ilya, as previously agreed, ticket [1], examples of concurrent tests you can find here GridDifferentLocalDeploymentSelfTest and here IgniteExplicitImplicitDeploymentSelfTest , TC in progress.   thanks !   [1]  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14131     >Hello! > >Please publish

Re[4]: [DISCUSSION] Fail on non-colocated join

>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Review+Checklist > >It's checklist, 1b. > >Regards, >-- >Ilya Kasnacheev > > >ср, 3 февр. 2021 г. в 14:48, Zhenya Stanilovsky < arzamas...@mail.ru.invalid >>: > >> >> >> >> >> &

Re[2]: [DISCUSSION] Fail on non-colocated join

  >If it breaks existing working code it may not be done that way.   Who reads the logs ?  Is it violates apache way approach or some existing rules ?   thanks !     >Regards, >-- >Ilya Kasnacheev > > >ср, 3 февр. 2021 г. в 09:05, Zhenya Stanilovsky < ar

Re: [DISCUSSION] Fail on non-colocated join

Maxim it`s cool that it`s moved :) +1 for exception, but take into account such use case : T1 (country, city)  affinity_key=country  and T2 (country,city)  affinity_key=country join with «city» usage — will be correct here (i hope, need to recheck of course) thus seems you must give some

Re[2]: [DISCUSSION] Request for thread unsafe Compute functionality deprecation.

/master/modules/core/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/IgniteExplicitImplicitDeploymentSelfTest.java#L221   >  >>  >>>Hello! >>> >>>Do you have some kind of reproducer which demonstrates the issue? >>> >>>Regards, >>>-- &g

[DISCUSSION] Request for thread unsafe Compute functionality deprecation.

Hello Igniters ! In the process of Ignite usage i found that some part of Compute functionality  are thread unsafe and seems was designed with such limitations initially. Example : one (client, but it doesn`t matter at all) instance is shared between numerous of fabric, all of them calls

Re: Hard limit WAL archive size

Hello ! this is unclear for me, all you described near brings no info why node work improperly and why FH can possibly fail this node. Can you explain ?   >Hello, everyone! > >Currently, property DataStorageConfiguration#maxWalArchiveSize is not working >as expected by users. We can easily go

Re[2]: [DISCUSSION] Modules organization in Ignite 3

Hello Nikolay, if i find out introduced features structure in some project, i would prefer to choose different one )   >  >>  >>>Hello, Alexey. >>> >>>Think we can extend our @IgniteExperimental annotation. >>> >>>`@IgniteExperimental` - mark features that are truly experimental and can be

Re[2]: 2.9.1 release scope and dates

hello ! seems it [1] need to be included too, if it`s not too late, of course. May be you can bump reviewer somehow?)   [1]  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13765   >Ivan, it's added, thanks for pointing that out > >On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 5:44 PM Ivan Daschinsky <

Re[2]: [DISCUSS] Page replacement improvement

2. in this time performance of random queries should be lower >due to the page replacement. > >Is this scenario correct? > >> 23 нояб. 2020 г., в 09:12, Alex Plehanov < plehanov.a...@gmail.com > >> написал(а): >> >> Nikolay, Zhenya, >> >> B

Re[2]: [DISCUSS] Page replacement improvement

  >Zhenya, > >> Alexey, we already have changes that partially fixes this issue [1] >IGNITE-13086 it's a minor improvement. We still have major problems with >our page replacement algorithm (slow page selection and non-optimal >page-fault rate). I think changing fro

[DISCUSS] Page replacement improvement

Alexey, we already have changes that partially fixes this issue [1] Easy way: Looks like we already have converge in page replacement. If we change 5 times touch iterator from random lru algo into, for example — 7 we will obtain fast improvement from scratch.   » Batch page replacement This

Re[2]: IEP-58: Statistics

Andrey, thanks for firing this !  Sasha it`s unclear for me « These part consists of two processes: statistics collection process itself and acquiring statistics by the client. »: * I agree that in both cases local statistics are useless. May be we need more informative use cases for such

Re[2]: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.9.0 RC4

ok, thus +1 from me, rebuild from sources.   >Zhenya, >  >It's not ok, but I think it's not a release blocker.  >Sources can be compiled using instructions given in DEVNOTES.txt (there are no >requirements to enable checkstyle in our documentation).  >But we can fix buil

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.9.0 RC4

build with checkstyle from sources is failed: Starting audit... [ERROR] /home/zstan/Downloads/apache-ignite-2.9.0-src/modules/indexing/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/query/WrongQueryEntityFieldTypeTest.java:35:8: Unused import - org.apache.ignite.client.ClientException.

Re[2]: Apache Ignite 2.9.0 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

without [2] and [3] we obtain unexpected fields in index creation and as a consequence buggy sql execution and pla of course.   >Guys, > >I've found 3 more tickets which were targeted to 2.9 but merged only to the >master branch ([1], [2], [3]). >Do we need these tickets in 2.9? Are they

Re[2]: Broken test in master: BasicIndexTest

Of course, i still have no ticket filled. As was discussed in private i will fill other ticket that can lead to potential problems.     >Hi everyone, > >I believe I have a fix for this bug -  >https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13500, So Zhenya you can leave >thi

Re: Broken test in master: BasicIndexTest

Thanks Maxim, the test is correct no need for removal. I checked 2.9 too, but looks it all ok there. I will take a look. >Hi, Igniters! > >I was discovering how indexes work and found a failed test. >BasicIndexTest#testInlineSizeChange is broken in master and it's not a >flaky case [1]. But it

Re[6]: Thin Client ping operation?

I understand now, thanks Pavel, initial discussion didn`t touch kuber theme ...   >Вторник, 15 сентября 2020, 18:22 +03:00 от Pavel Tupitsyn >: >  >Zhenya, sure, let me explain. >  >Health checks are a common practice in modern deployments, quote [1]: >"Health probe

Re[4]: Thin Client ping operation?

Pavel, i read whole thread, show me the reason why this functionality need to be external ?   > > >Health checks are the primary use case. See linked user list thread. > >On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 12:26 PM Zhenya Stanilovsky >< arzamas...@mail.ru.invalid > wrote:

Re[2]: Thin Client ping operation?

Whats the usage of such API ? Igor can you clarify please ?   >Personally I believe that public API still can be helpful, as it gives user >an ability to check connection in the specific point in time, even if >automatic >ping is implemented (which is more complex and hard-to-maintain feature >by

Cpp thin client transactions support ready for review.

t;On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 8:33 AM Zhenya Stanilovsky >< arzamas...@mail.ru.invalid > wrote: > >> >> >> Thanks Ivan Daschinsky for review, does anyone more who could check it ? >> >> thanks ! >> >Igniters, seems i complete with transactions in thin c

[SQL] Correct index usage with primary key constraint.

Folks, want to pay your attention that after [1] was merged into master, primary key index usage became predictable and correct and as a consequence old behavior was broken.   for example table creation: CREATE TABLE PUBLIC.T1 (F1 VARCHAR, F2 VARCHAR, F3 VARCHAR, CONSTRAINT PK PRIMARY KEY (F2,

Re[2]: Exception handling in thin client: should we pass stack traces to the client?

Thanks ! now its clear for me, ones more want to repeat my position — sending exceptions to the client side looks like bad design, because exceptions its about unhealthy system recognition from administrator side, not from client of course, but looks like for now it`s more informative than

Cpp thin client transactions support ready for review.

Thanks Ivan Daschinsky for review, does anyone more who could check it ?    thanks ! >Igniters, seems i complete with transactions in thin cpp client >implementation [1], part of iep-34 [2]. >Can anyone review my decision ? >Failed test seems not mine, looks like after fresh master rebase it

Re: [DISCUSSION] Output IgniteSystemProperties via ignite.sh

Good catch, as for me, do you plan some autogeneration here?   >  >>  >>>Hello, Igniters. >>> >>>For now, we have dozens of the `IgniteSystemProperties` [1] that can tweak >>>Ignite behaviour in the very wide limits. >>>But, the issue, for the administrator is the following >>> >>>-

Exception handling in thin client: should we pass stack traces to the client?

administrator side, in one case i agree here — this is not pretty a bit. If no quorum would be here — ok, i fill a ticket for optionally enable such behavior, as was discussed earlier, and leave the current one as it is. thanks ! >Hi, > >I agree with Zhenya, that a stack from server side will be abl

Exception handling in thin client: should we pass stack traces to the client?

I want to resurrect this discussion, i don`t understand what sensitive information you are talking about ? Can you show some examples or something else ? I never listen that thread dumps belong to sensitive info. I believe that one linear error can`t help user to recognize problem and logs

Re[2]: Update of the default inline size for variable types

Earlier I remember we panned to replace inline value to hash code in the >> > case where size of value more than inline size. >> > It will help to comparison of "==", "!=", but will not grow size of >> > storage. >> > >> > I think optimi

Re: Update of the default inline size for variable types

>Hi guys,   Evgeniy, hola! > >Currently if a varlength type (such as String or byte[]) is encountered in >the composite index inline size just defaults to 10, which is almost always >not enough. I am going to change this and implement following changes: > >1) For a column of the variable length

Cpp thin client transactions support ready for review.

  Igniters, seems i complete with transactions in thin cpp client implementation [1], part of iep-34 [2]. Can anyone review my decision ? Failed test seems not mine, looks like after fresh master rebase it will gone.   [1]  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13308 [2] 

Re[2]: new connection event

may be jmx would be enough here ?   >Hello! > >Why not the Failure Handler then? > >(I'm only half-joking). > >Regards, > >-- >Ilya Kasnacheev > > >ср, 12 авг. 2020 г. в 09:54, Oleg Ostanin < oleg.alex.osta...@gmail.com >: >  >> Thank you for the response. Yes, we have a simple warning in log,

Re[2]: Please grant me privileges to edit ignite wiki pages.

Ilya, thanks !  full name : evgeny stanilovsky , short : zstan   >  >>  >>>Hello! >>> >>>Do you have a Wiki account? What's its username? >>> >>>Thanks, >>>-- >>>Ilya Kasnacheev >>> >>> >>>чт

Please grant me privileges to edit ignite wiki pages.

I`m currently working on cpp thin client transactions support [1] and need to edit, for example this page [2]. Can someone grant me this privileges ? thanks !   [1]  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13308 [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Thin+clients+features    

Re: [DISCUSSION] Cache warmup

Looks like we need additional func for static caches, for example:  warmup(List cconf) it would be helpful for spring too.   > >--- Forwarded message --- >From: "Вячеслав Коптилин" < slava.kopti...@gmail.com > >To: dev@ignite.apache.org >Cc: >Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Cache warmup >Date:

Re[2]: Apache Ignite 2.9.0 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

  Alex, i also suggest to merge this  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13229 too, GridClient leakage and further TC OOM preventing.   >Ivan, > >It was already in release scope as discussed in this thread. > >вт, 14 июл. 2020 г. в 14:31, Ivan Rakov < ivan.glu...@gmail.com >: >  >>

Re[2]: Request for contributors permissions

now its all ok, i rerun your pr here :  https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_RunAll_IgniteTests24Java8=pull%2F7906%2Fhead=buildTypeStatusDiv   >Hi Ivan, > >let me first apologize for the question, sure they are stupid and I am >missing something obvious but

Re[2]: IGNITE-6499 Compact NULL fields

request it, check for example [1]   also you need to run [2] tests.   [1]  http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Phani-Introduction-td47788.html [2] https://mtcga.gridgain.com  >Hello, > >Look at the ticket and the only comment I can see is creating a branch on >git in the main

Re: IGNITE-6499 Compact NULL fields

Steve i place some comments in ticket, still have no response.   > > >--- Forwarded message --- >From: " steve.hostett...@gmail.com " < steve.hostett...@gmail.com > >To: dev@ignite.apache.org >Cc: >Subject: Re: Re[4]: IGNITE-6499 Compact NULL fields >Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 16:15:37

Re[2]: [DISCUSS] Extra test coverage for ACTIVE_READ_ONLY cluster state

Sergey, changes looks good to me.   >Четверг, 4 июня 2020, 12:39 +03:00 от Sergey Antonov >: >  >Igniters, I faced several problems during write tests for the read-only >mode: > >   1. You can create/destroy cache on the read-only cluster. Fixed in [1]. >   2. The read-only mode doesn't affect

Re: [DISCUSSION] Add autocompletion for commands in control.sh

good catch ! it`s a little bit pain for now to working with it.   >Hi, Igniters! > >At the moment to work with the control.sh we need to know exactly what the >name of the command and its options are and so the user can often make >mistakes when using it. So I think it would be useful to do

Re[2]: [DISCUSSION] Ignite.C++ and CMake

tests? I found one flag that must be >> supplied to boost.tests. >> This flag should fix JVM crash of C++ suites on Linux. >> >> Zhenya Stanilovsky and me have checked, that without this flag tests failed >> with SIGSEGV early (boost catch this signal from jvm, but it is

Re[4]: Proposal: set default transaction timeout to 5 minutes

Of course, i just thinking about huge persistent installation and guys who not  carefully reads Release Notes ) In case of long tx timeouts by design, they can easily fix default timeout with just one jmx call.    >Zhenya, > >Can you please elaborate? >Why we need to change defaul

Re: [DISCUSSION] Ignite.C++ and CMake

Ivan huge +1 with your proposal. I had some problems with odbc tests building too, looks like cmake will make it more easy. >Hello Igniters. > >I’d like to discuss porting build process of Ignite.C++. I think that there is >time to change it. > >*Motivation* >Currently, it is hard to build

Re[2]: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.8.1 RC1

Nikolay, performance boost is always good news for all customers at all and for me too ) Can you give more info (looks like in different mail thread) ? What kind of benchmarks have been done, is it about persistence or both ? thanks ! >+1 (binding). > >We made some internal benchmarking and

Re[4]: IGNITE-6499 Compact NULL fields

Compress of whole binary inside ignite.   >Sorry I do not actual get what are you opposing? the compress of the binary >or the null compaction or both? >And can you ellaborate on why you are opposing it? > > > >-- >Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/        

  1   2   >