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

Denis, I've checked the permissions now I can make changes. > I'm encouraging you to work with Kseniya's technical editors Thank you, we have already started working together. On Thu, 18 Mar 2021 at 03:00, Denis Magda wrote: > > Maxim, > > I had to grant you admin access in the blogging

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

Maxim, I had to grant you admin access in the blogging settings. No you should be able to create an article and invite other members (log in with your apache ID): https://blogs.apache.org/roller-ui/authoring/members!save.rol Like the blog. (if you haven't done this yet, I'm encouraging you to

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

Denis, I'm getting the following error while trying to create a new Weblog > Sorry, the blog administrator has disabled creation of new blogs. By the way, Nikita, Denis Can you review my blog post, please? https://github.com/Mmuzaf/mmuzaf.github.io/blob/main/_post/Release_Newsletter_210.md On

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

Maxim, Check one more time. The infra instruction that you shared says a contributor needs to be in the Admin group in JIRA to get write access to the blog. I've added you to the Admin group. - Denis On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 12:00 PM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > Denis, > > > I'd like to create a

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

Denis, I'd like to create a post on the blogs.apache.org news feed with the 2.10 release news. Do I need additional privileges to do this? According to the wiki page [1] after login with my credentials, I should see the `add post` button, however, I can't find it on the main page. Am I missing

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

Maxim, I've prepared a blog post about Ignite.NET changes [1], please link it in the main post. [1] https://ptupitsyn.github.io/Whats-New-In-Ignite-Net-2.10/ On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 5:15 PM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > Denis, > > > Thank you. I'll prepare a blog post notes for the major 2.10

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

Denis, Thank you. I'll prepare a blog post notes for the major 2.10 features. The release hasn't been announced yet, some artefacts still waiting to be published. Hope everything will be ready by the end of this week. > Btw, don't we want to arrange a meetup gathering for Virtual or >

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

Hi Maxim, Ideally, a blog post should be published together with the announcement email. So that the readers can learn more details from the article. Anyway, you can post it later for 2.10 as long as the release is already completed. Btw, don't we want to arrange a meetup gathering for Virtual

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

Folks, I've done almost all the release steps with publishing accepted changes. What should I do with an announcement blog post for blogs.apache.org? Should it also be prepared prior to an announcement message? On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 00:10, Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > > Pavel, > > Thank you! I'll

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

Pavel, Thank you! I'll prepare a new rc shortly. On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 at 23:20, Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > > Maxim, thanks! > I've cherry-picked IGNITE-14293. > > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:05 PM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > > > Pavel, > > > > Sorry, my bad. Entangled in my local branches during

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

Maxim, thanks! I've cherry-picked IGNITE-14293. On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:05 PM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > Pavel, > > Sorry, my bad. Entangled in my local branches during trying to > cherry-pick related commits. > I've reverted this change. > > > On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 at 21:58, Pavel Tupitsyn

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

Pavel, Sorry, my bad. Entangled in my local branches during trying to cherry-pick related commits. I've reverted this change. On Wed, 10 Mar 2021 at 21:58, Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > > Maxim, > > I see that you have already cherry-picked IGNITE-13979 - was that > intentional? > If we keep it,

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

Maxim, I see that you have already cherry-picked IGNITE-13979 - was that intentional? If we keep it, let's cherry-pick 14250 as well? On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 8:21 PM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > Pavel, > > > I think it is better and safe to cherry-pick the `IGNITE-14293 .NET: > AffinityKey does

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

Pavel, I think it is better and safe to cherry-pick the `IGNITE-14293 .NET: AffinityKey does not work` only. I will be very happy to accept your help with it. The IGNITE-13979 (.NET: Modernize examples) is very big and has some related issues too (most of them are fixed), so I think it is

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

Maxim, Sure, I can assist with cherry-picks. 13661 is fixed by 13979 , as indicated by the "fixed by" link in Jira and a comment. IGNITE-14293 .NET: AffinityKey does not work

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

Pavel, Can you assist a bit with the cherry-picking process of `.NET: AffinityKey does not work` IGNITE-14293? I'm not sure I can understand all the details of implementation and actually, I'm stuck a bit with the `.NET: Race condition in Events example` IGNITE-14250 [2] issue not sure what

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

Maxim, No objections to those cherry-picks, please also include https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14293 Thanks! On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:54 AM Ilya Kasnacheev wrote: > Hello! > > Unless we do extra checks for Windows environment, I suggest merging > IGNITE-14284

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

Hello! Unless we do extra checks for Windows environment, I suggest merging IGNITE-14284 Regards, -- Ilya Kasnacheev вт, 9 мар. 2021 г. в 20:26, Maxim Muzafarov : > Folks, > > > Sharing the release status: > > .NET: AffinityKey does not

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

Folks, Sharing the release status: .NET: AffinityKey does not work - In-Progress https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14293 sqlline: `Property "url" is required' - Patch Available https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14284 sqllline: `Bad history file syntax!' - Resolved

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

Igor, Many thanks for fixing the issue! I've cherry-picked it to the 2.10 branch. Folks, I'll finalize the latest changes for the documentation pages and prepare the rc build shortly. On Mon, 1 Mar 2021 at 21:08, Igor Sapego wrote: > > The following commit should be cherry-picked: >

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

The following commit should be cherry-picked: 0675e2a7e800730c9c8230332b82809754ddae5a Sorry for a delay. Best Regards, Igor On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 9:06 PM Igor Sapego wrote: > Maxim, > > The issue is fixed and is merged to master now. > > Best Regards, > Igor > > > On Sun, Feb 28, 2021 at

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

Maxim, The issue is fixed and is merged to master now. Best Regards, Igor On Sun, Feb 28, 2021 at 8:12 PM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > Hello Igor, > > > I believe I could fix the ticket [1] by the end of the next week. > Should we still wait a bit for t his fix or postpone it to 2.10.1? WDYT? >

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

Hello Igor, > I believe I could fix the ticket [1] by the end of the next week. Should we still wait a bit for t his fix or postpone it to 2.10.1? WDYT? [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14204 On Fri, 26 Feb 2021 at 11:20, Max Timonin wrote: > > Hi, Maxim! > > The bug

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

Hi, Maxim! The bug IGNITE-14206 [1] fixed. There are 2 commits to cherry-pick 1. https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/851f650ba03e0b6c081cfe23f411fd2bf6be0228 2. https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/93b74922bd04b164301d7bc5a2788b9693d4a8a4

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

Anton, Your improvement is very important, for sure, but it's almost 2 months have passed since the initiation of the release branch. I think we should prepare the changes as fast as possible for now and initiate with the next one release. In general, it would be nice to have a release plan for

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

Maxim, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13873 Is ready for review, is it possible to wait for it? On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 12:01 AM Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > Folks, > > > I'd like to cherry-pick to the release branch the following fixes: > > Fix security context for JDBC bulk-load

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

Folks, I'd like to cherry-pick to the release branch the following fixes: Fix security context for JDBC bulk-load operations https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13472 Fixed an issue that caused a deadlock when user cache was created in parallel with TTL worker was in progress.

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

Maxim, Igor, Thanks for sharing details. Let's wait for these fixes. [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14206 [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14204 On Thu, 18 Feb 2021 at 18:35, Igor Sapego wrote: > > Maxim, > > I believe I could fix the ticket [1] by the end of

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

Maxim, I believe I could fix the ticket [1] by the end of the next week. [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14204 Best Regards, Igor On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 6:30 PM Max Timonin wrote: > Hi! I've today found an issue [1], there is wrong handling of inlined POJO. > This bug

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

Hi! I've today found an issue [1], there is wrong handling of inlined POJO. This bug appeared in 2.9.0 and makes it impossible to work with multi-column indexes created on old AI versions that contain inlined POJO keys in the middle. I'm working on the fix and asked Konstantin Orlov to review it.

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

Folks, Do we have any estimations of how long does it take to fix the issue [1] in C++ thin client? The bug must be fixed for sure, however, I tend to continue with the release (if fixing the bug require a few weeks) and prepare a batch of fixes for the 2.10.1. [1]

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

Hello! There was a ticket filed about the new feature, transactions in C++ thin client, making this feature unusable if there's more than one connection endpoint: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14204 I don't think this is a genuine blocker for 2.10, since there is a workaround (use