[ANNOUNCE] Apache Roadshow Chicago, Call for Presentations

2019-01-15 Thread Trevor Grant
Hello Devs! You're receiving this email because you are subscribed to one or more Apache developer email lists. I’m writing to let you know about an exciting event coming to the Chicago area: The Apache Roadshow Chicago. It will be held May 13th and 14th at three bars in the Logan Square

Re: Loner changes its membership port when starting an acceptor

2019-01-15 Thread Bruce Schuchardt
Actually the formatting code would go in InternalDistributedMember.  The JMX code already has a special method for handling that class.  I was thrown off by the reference to a non-existant getName() method in LonerDistributionManager. On 1/15/19 7:34 AM, Bruce Schuchardt wrote: I think we

Re: [Proposal] Adding Micrometer to Apache Geode

2019-01-15 Thread Galen O'Sullivan
The plan is to use tagged metrics, so for example, you could slice metrics on puts by region, or server, or both. On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 10:06 AM Udo Kohlmeyer wrote: > I agree with Jacob here. Great to see such great strides forward > > +1 deprecating old Stats APIs > > It would be good to

Re: [Proposal] Adding Micrometer to Apache Geode

2019-01-15 Thread Jacob Barrett
I am good with this proposal as long as it includes the deprecation of all the current stats APIs and VSD such that Micrometer is the only go forward stats definition and collection API in 2.0. > On Jan 15, 2019, at 9:37 AM, Mark Hanson wrote: > > Hello All, > > I would like to propose that

Re: [Proposal] Adding Micrometer to Apache Geode

2019-01-15 Thread Udo Kohlmeyer
I agree with Jacob here. Great to see such great strides forward +1 deprecating old Stats APIs It would be good to see the new Micrometer stats have a logical grouping, that makes it easier for users to search for metrics. Does this mean that Geode will now support fully tagged/dimension

Re: [Proposal] adding a new type of PdxInstance

2019-01-15 Thread Udo Kohlmeyer
Darrel, thank you for this. I would like to propose a counter-proposal. Instead of introducing another PDXInstance type, why don't we improve the serialization framework itself? I know my proposal is most likely going to take a little more effort than adding a new type, but I believe it is

Re: Loner changes its membership port when starting an acceptor

2019-01-15 Thread Bruce Schuchardt
Yeah, let's fix this, but let's not require the toString() of an object to never change.  Let's add another method that returns a Bean identifier and is documented to never change. On 1/15/19 9:45 AM, Kirk Lund wrote: Sorry about the confusion. I meant that the change of membership port

[Proposal] adding a new type of PdxInstance

2019-01-15 Thread Darrel Schneider
As part of GEODE-6272 we realized we need a way to use a PdxInstance as key for a Region entry. The problem with the current PdxInstance behavior is that in some members the key may be seen as a PdxInstance and in others seen as an instance of a domain class. This inconsistency can lead to

Re: [Proposal] adding a new type of PdxInstance

2019-01-15 Thread Darrel Schneider
I like the idea of adding support to the region configuration that lets users control how it stores the data. But even if we did that, and you are correct that it would be much more work, I don't think it would address this issue or remove the value of a PdxInstance that always deserializes to a

Re: [Proposal] Adding Micrometer to Apache Geode

2019-01-15 Thread Mark Hanson
Yes, deprecating stats and VSD would be the direction we are heading… > On Jan 15, 2019, at 9:43 AM, Jacob Barrett wrote: > > I am good with this proposal as long as it includes the deprecation of all > the current stats APIs and VSD such that Micrometer is the only go forward > stats

Re: [Proposal] Adding Micrometer to Apache Geode

2019-01-15 Thread Mark Hanson
Yes, we will be working towards tagged dimensions and JMX parity as well. > On Jan 15, 2019, at 10:06 AM, Udo Kohlmeyer wrote: > > I agree with Jacob here. Great to see such great strides forward > > +1 deprecating old Stats APIs > > It would be good to see the new Micrometer stats have a

Preventing new build warnings

2019-01-15 Thread Peter Tran
Hello! I've noticed that there is no mechanism in which we prevent new PRs from introduce new build warnings. In our PR template we ask people to self report that they have a "clean build" but nothing more to ensure we're not adding new warnings. Has there been an initiative to address this in

[Proposal] Adding Micrometer to Apache Geode

2019-01-15 Thread Mark Hanson
Hello All, I would like to propose that we incorporate Micrometer into Geode to allow us to collect statistics and make them more easily available to external services should someone chose to implement support for that. In some basic testing, it does not appear to have a significant impact on

Re: Loner changes its membership port when starting an acceptor

2019-01-15 Thread Kirk Lund
Sorry about the confusion. I meant that the change of membership port results in DistributedMember returning a different string from its getName() method. We discovered this because the JMX layer has some error handling that results in suppressing this failure, so the failure was being hidden. We

Re: [Proposal] adding a new type of PdxInstance

2019-01-15 Thread Galen O'Sullivan
I suspect Udo is remembering something we both had to deal with, which is that the lack of values to get/put PDXInstances on Regions make some patterns difficult. In internal code, we have to set some thread-locals to get serialized values out, and in general, I think that setting

Re: [Proposal] Adding Micrometer to Apache Geode

2019-01-15 Thread Dale Emery
Hi Udo and all, > On Jan 15, 2019, at 10:06 AM, Udo Kohlmeyer wrote: > > It would be good to see the new Micrometer stats have a logical grouping, > that makes it easier for users to search for metrics. Do you know of any useful guidelines or conventions for creating a hierarchy of metrics,

Re: [Proposal] adding a new type of PdxInstance

2019-01-15 Thread Darrel Schneider
Dan, we still want a "class name" but it no longer has to be an actual name of a java class. It can now be just a logical "type name". For two PdxInstances to be equal they need to have the same class name. So we really do just want a flag that says: never deserialize this PdxInstance. Anil

Re: Preventing new build warnings

2019-01-15 Thread Galen O'Sullivan
I'm for failing CI on warnings. It would be nice to reduce or eliminate our existing build warnings as well. Thanks, Galen On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 12:33 PM Peter Tran wrote: > Hello! > > I've noticed that there is no mechanism in which we prevent new PRs from > introduce new build warnings.

Re: [Proposal] adding a new type of PdxInstance

2019-01-15 Thread Darrel Schneider
Even before the JSON pdx support we had internal support for a PdxInstance that deserializes as a PdxInstance. This is just adding an external api for that already existing internal feature. So it is pretty simple to do if we can figure out how to name it. On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 11:18 AM Galen

Re: [Proposal] Adding Micrometer to Apache Geode

2019-01-15 Thread Dan Smith
+1 Micrometer looks awesome. I'd love to see more details on how this will work. How will you hook micrometer in? Will all of the stats that are currently exposed in VSD be exposed in micrometer, or just some subset? How does a user configure which monitoring system(s) micrometer is sending data

Re: Preventing new build warnings

2019-01-15 Thread Dan Smith
Sounds good. +1 to failing the build if new warnings are introduced. -Dan On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 12:59 PM Galen O'Sullivan wrote: > I'm for failing CI on warnings. It would be nice to reduce or eliminate our > existing build warnings as well. > > Thanks, > Galen > > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at

Re: [Proposal] adding a new type of PdxInstance

2019-01-15 Thread Udo Kohlmeyer
Darrel to better understand what you are asking for: I understand that you want the following: byte[] -> PdxInstance and not byte[] -> PdxInstance -> Pojo The `read-serialized=true` flag is a single flag that "rules them all" which does not make sense anymore and something that is seemingly

Re: Preventing new build warnings

2019-01-15 Thread Udo Kohlmeyer
So, to reduce the number of new warnings, are we then going to standardize on JDK versions? i.e, we only build with JDK 8 build 192 and JDK11 build 03, because changes in JDK can introduce warnings. I'm all for reducing warnings, but they are warnings. Don't think we need to error, or break

Re: [Proposal] adding a new type of PdxInstance

2019-01-15 Thread Dan Smith
If I understand this right, you are talking about a way to create a PdxInstance that has no corresponding java class. How about just a RegionService.createPdxInstanceFactory() method that doesn't take a classname, and therefore has no corresponding java class? It seems a PdxInstances without a

Re: [Proposal] Adding Micrometer to Apache Geode

2019-01-15 Thread Udo Kohlmeyer
So... imo, what is a dimension and what is a metric. well to me a metric is a value that we want to measure on across all the different permutations of that metric. The metric has to be generic in the sense that it exposes no detail about the value it is measuring. Metrics are like dry oats.

Re: [Proposal] adding a new type of PdxInstance

2019-01-15 Thread Bruce Schuchardt
While I like the idea of a non-static & more flexible serialization service I don't think it's reasonable to foist that onto Darrel because it's a great deal of work. On 1/15/19 2:29 PM, Darrel Schneider wrote: Dan, we still want a "class name" but it no longer has to be an actual name of a

Re: [Proposal] adding a new type of PdxInstance

2019-01-15 Thread Udo Kohlmeyer
Bruce, this was not aimed at Darrel to do. I was just counter-proposing that I prefer a different approach to solving the problem. And yes, all new features are starting to become big changes. I still think that the proposal that Darrel has made, could be a byproduct of a "Serialization

Re: Loner changes its membership port when starting an acceptor

2019-01-15 Thread Bruce Schuchardt
I think we could solve this by either moving the ID formatting code to the DistributionManager implementations & having LonerDistributionManager omit the port number or modify the client/server handshake to not install a port number when connecting to a remote GatewayReceiver.  I guess the