Re: [infinispan-dev] The need for a 5.1.1

2012-01-30 Thread Manik Surtani
On 30 Jan 2012, at 14:30, Paul Ferraro wrote: On Sun, 2012-01-29 at 04:49 -0500, Manik Surtani wrote: Also, Paul, what are your thoughts around timing for a 5.1.1.CR1 and .FINAL? AS7.1 is due to be released Feb 8th. 5.1.1 would need to happen extremely quickly (i.e. this week). You need

Re: [infinispan-dev] The need for a 5.1.1

2012-01-29 Thread Manik Surtani
Also, Paul, what are your thoughts around timing for a 5.1.1.CR1 and .FINAL? Sent from my mobile phone On 28 Jan 2012, at 23:20, Manik Surtani ma...@jboss.org wrote: On 28 Jan 2012, at 19:33, Paul Ferraro wrote: It would be nice to see those few minor issues that I raised post-FINAL,

Re: [infinispan-dev] The need for a 5.1.1

2012-01-28 Thread Galder Zamarreño
On Jan 27, 2012, at 4:12 AM, Manik Surtani wrote: I really didn't want to do this, but it looks like a 5.1.1 will be necessary. The biggest (critical, IMO, for 5.1.1) issues I see are: 1. https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-1786 - I presume this has to do with a bug Mircea spotted that

Re: [infinispan-dev] The need for a 5.1.1

2012-01-28 Thread Paul Ferraro
On Thu, 2012-01-26 at 22:42 +, Manik Surtani wrote: I really didn't want to do this, but it looks like a 5.1.1 will be necessary. The biggest (critical, IMO, for 5.1.1) issues I see are: 1. https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-1786 - I presume this has to do with a bug Mircea spotted

Re: [infinispan-dev] The need for a 5.1.1

2012-01-28 Thread Manik Surtani
On 28 Jan 2012, at 19:33, Paul Ferraro wrote: It would be nice to see those few minor issues that I raised post-FINAL, specifically the xsd update and removing some of those startup WARNings. Yes, that is definitely on the cards for 5.1.1. I'm also chasing down a issue that we're seeing

Re: [infinispan-dev] The need for a 5.1.1

2012-01-27 Thread Manik Surtani
ISPN-1786 is related to a potential bug in the config parser that didn't pick up numVirtualNodes settings. As well as a proposal for a different default value for numVirtualNodes - which really should be a separate JIRA. On 27 Jan 2012, at 07:03, Bela Ban wrote: Regarding ISPN-1786, I'd like

Re: [infinispan-dev] The need for a 5.1.1

2012-01-27 Thread Mircea Markus
On 26 Jan 2012, at 22:42, Manik Surtani wrote: I really didn't want to do this, but it looks like a 5.1.1 will be necessary. The biggest (critical, IMO, for 5.1.1) issues I see are: 1. https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-1786 - I presume this has to do with a bug Mircea spotted that

Re: [infinispan-dev] The need for a 5.1.1

2012-01-27 Thread Bela Ban
The branch is JGRP-1417 and the config for UNICAST2 is: UNICAST2 max_bytes=20M xmit_table_num_rows=20 xmit_table_msgs_per_row=1 xmit_table_max_compaction_time=1 max_msg_batch_size=100/ I've attached the config I've

Re: [infinispan-dev] The need for a 5.1.1

2012-01-27 Thread Manik Surtani
On 27 Jan 2012, at 14:09, Mircea Markus wrote: On 26 Jan 2012, at 22:42, Manik Surtani wrote: I really didn't want to do this, but it looks like a 5.1.1 will be necessary. The biggest (critical, IMO, for 5.1.1) issues I see are: 1. https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-1786 - I presume

Re: [infinispan-dev] The need for a 5.1.1

2012-01-27 Thread Mircea Markus
There's an initialisation error indicating a dependency on a test class[1]. Seems like jgroups is not jar-less anymore :-) [1] at org.infinispan.util.ReflectionUtil.invokeAccessibly(ReflectionUtil.java:236) at

Re: [infinispan-dev] The need for a 5.1.1

2012-01-27 Thread Mircea Markus
On 27 Jan 2012, at 15:08, Bela Ban wrote: Build the JGroups JAR with ./build.sh jar, *not* via maven ! I attached the JAR for you. Thanks! JGroups *is* and *will remain* JAR less ! :-) Sorry for loosing the faith :) Might make sense to have the mvn install work as well though, I think

Re: [infinispan-dev] The need for a 5.1.1

2012-01-27 Thread Bela Ban
On 1/27/12 4:26 PM, Mircea Markus wrote: On 27 Jan 2012, at 15:08, Bela Ban wrote: Build the JGroups JAR with ./build.sh jar, *not* via maven ! I attached the JAR for you. Thanks! JGroups *is* and *will remain* JAR less ! :-) Sorry for loosing the faith :) Might make sense to have the

Re: [infinispan-dev] The need for a 5.1.1

2012-01-27 Thread Manik Surtani
Branch created. https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/tree/5.1.x Of the JIRAs I mentioned below, if they have been committed to master I'll cherry pick them onto 5.1.x as well. If they haven't been completed, I'll change their target accordingly, please make sure you create pull reqs for

Re: [infinispan-dev] The need for a 5.1.1

2012-01-27 Thread Dan Berindei
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Bela Ban b...@redhat.com wrote: On 1/27/12 4:26 PM, Mircea Markus wrote: On 27 Jan 2012, at 15:08, Bela Ban wrote: Build the JGroups JAR with ./build.sh jar, *not* via maven ! I attached the JAR for you. Thanks! JGroups *is* and *will remain* JAR less !

[infinispan-dev] The need for a 5.1.1

2012-01-26 Thread Manik Surtani
I really didn't want to do this, but it looks like a 5.1.1 will be necessary. The biggest (critical, IMO, for 5.1.1) issues I see are: 1. https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-1786 - I presume this has to do with a bug Mircea spotted that virtual nodes were not being enabled by the config

Re: [infinispan-dev] The need for a 5.1.1

2012-01-26 Thread Bela Ban
Regarding ISPN-1786, I'd like to work with Sanne/Mircea on trying out the new UNICAST2. In my local tests, I got a 15% speedup, but this is JGroups only, so I'm not sure how big the impact would be on Infinispan. If we see a big speedup, UNICAST2 and NAKACK2 could then be backported to a