Hi Scott
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 6:20 AM, Scott Marlow smar...@redhat.com wrote:
I'm trying to understand more about whether it makes sense for a
DefaultConsistentHash to be created with a non-local owner specified in
the DefaultConsistentHash constructor segmentOwners parameter.
It
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Scott Marlow smar...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10/10/2012 06:47 AM, Dan Berindei wrote:
Hi Scott
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 6:20 AM, Scott Marlow smar...@redhat.com
mailto:smar...@redhat.com wrote:
I'm trying to understand more about whether it makes sense
Manik, how about adding a reference count to the lock entry? If there is a
waiter on the lock, the reverence count will be 0 and the owner won't
remove the key on unlock.
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 3:43 AM, Manik Surtani ma...@jboss.org wrote:
Hmm, that actually might just do the trick. Thanks!
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Jason Greene jgre...@redhat.com wrote:
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 16, 2012, at 10:39 AM, Jason Greene jason.gre...@redhat.com
wrote:
from _get_ to lock on an eventually created new instance.
Yes if you get the ordering right, it can certainly be done.
for each of
these steps: the V8 solution from Jason looks like far more efficient.
Sanne
On 16 October 2012 11:32, Manik Surtani ma...@jboss.org wrote:
On 16 Oct 2012, at 11:03, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote:
Manik, how about adding a reference count to the lock entry
and presenting a men leak.
On 17 Oct 2012, at 07:47, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Jason Greene jgre...@redhat.com wrote:
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 16, 2012, at 10:39 AM, Jason Greene jason.gre...@redhat.com
wrote:
from _get_ to lock
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 6:46 PM, Jason Greene jason.gre...@redhat.comwrote:
On Oct 17, 2012, at 8:18 AM, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Manik Surtani ma...@jboss.org wrote:
The problem is that I have 2 code paths:
1. Acquiring a lock
Hi Vladimir
We have noticed these failures as well, I suspect it's related to the fix
for ISPN-2081. Mircea's PR for ISPN-2291 (
https://github.com/infinispan/infinispan/pull/1396) fixes the failures for
me, but it has other problems for now and we're still discussing it.
Cheers
Dan
On Thu,
Galder, what JDK are you using? OpenJDK 1.7 uses
EmptyIterator.EMPTY_ITERATOR since 2007:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7/jdk/annotate/37a05a11f281/src/share/classes/java/util/Collections.java
I don't have JDK 1.6 sources on hand to check, but I don't think it's worth
optimizing for such an
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.com wrote:
On Oct 19, 2012, at 6:28 PM, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote:
Galder, what JDK are you using?
java version 1.6.0_35
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_35-b10-428-11M3811)
Java HotSpot(TM) 64
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Manik Surtani ma...@jboss.org wrote:
On 22 Oct 2012, at 09:13, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.comwrote:
On Oct 19, 2012, at 6:28 PM, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 11:42 PM, Emmanuel Bernard
emman...@hibernate.orgwrote:
On Tue 2012-10-23 22:42, Dan Berindei wrote:
I was probably overreacting, but I just wouldn't want us to end up with
rules like 'all method parameters must be final' ;-)
Well, that's good practice anyways, you
+1, it doesn't make sense to integrate a test that you know is failing.
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Vladimir Blagojevic vblag...@redhat.comwrote:
Hi,
I noticed that we recently have had many PR for unit tests integration
into master. Would it not make more sense to integrate unit tests
Ales, I think you're seeing https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-2408
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Ales Justin ales.jus...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm constantly seeing this CCE while running CapeDwarf cluster tests:
(running 5.2.Beta2 with my iterator offset patch)
17:43:10,175 ERROR
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Sanne Grinovero sa...@infinispan.orgwrote:
On 29 October 2012 08:59, Anna Manukyan amanu...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi Sanne,
sorry for my interfering in - I was lately working on CDI testsuite -
evaluating the coverage, etc. and actually on my local environment
I made the modifications mentioned in the tweet and I put the result here:
https://gist.github.com/3986728
Click on the 'raw' link to install (requires GreaseMonkey).
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.comwrote:
Hi,
This is an useful greasymonkey script for
+1 for updating the JIRA title/description, but to me it's even more
important to get the Git comment right (even if it doesn't match the JIRA
title) - once it's in upstream you can't go back and tweak it.
Cheers
Dan
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Sanne Grinovero sa...@infinispan.orgwrote:
I'm guessing the author's intention was to make them both asserts.
În data de 15.11.2012 07:35, Navin Surtani nsurt...@redhat.com a scris:
I noticed a couple of unused returns in the test class mentioned in the
subject. The specific code lines can be found here [1].
If there aren't any
There are a few more tests with this issue, I've created
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-2534 to change their names.
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Thomas Fromm t...@tfromm.com wrote:
On 22.11.2012 09:45, Thomas Fromm wrote:
So why this test class does not fail in CI?
Dan
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Mircea Markus mmar...@redhat.com wrote:
On 22 Nov 2012, at 10:16, Dan Berindei wrote:
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.comwrote:
On Nov 21, 2012, at 4:49 PM, Mircea Markus mmar...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi,
Part of fixing
I don't like the idea very much, as we'd need one of those tests in each
module.
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Manik Surtani ma...@jboss.org wrote:
Maybe we should have a test that detects tests not ending in *Test, and
fails accordingly?
___
Getting ready for rolling upgrades, read about it here: http://goo.gl/QkrPs
Cheers
Dan
___
infinispan-dev mailing list
infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/infinispan-dev
On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Mircea Markus mmar...@redhat.com wrote:
On 4 Dec 2012, at 09:22, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
[...]
I don't think the cache should ever be in an illegal state to be used
after being started. So Infinispan should not require tests to wait
for a cluster to be
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Sanne Grinovero sa...@infinispan.orgwrote:
On 5 December 2012 14:01, Bela Ban b...@redhat.com wrote:
On 12/5/12 1:23 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
On 5 December 2012 11:02, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.com wrote:
On Dec 4, 2012, at 10:22 AM, Sanne Grinovero
somewhere?
On 5 December 2012 15:42, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Sanne Grinovero sa...@infinispan.org
wrote:
On 5 December 2012 14:01, Bela Ban b...@redhat.com wrote:
On 12/5/12 1:23 PM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
On 5 December 2012 11:02
+1 to eliminate the value wrappers.
-1 to adding a dependency from core to server-core, if you feel creating
and maintaining a separate MigrationRemoteCacheStore is too much work I'd
rather we moved CacheValue to core.
If we move CacheValue to core, I think we can do the re-wrapping on the
It's probably the same thing we had before, with Maven/Surefire running the
tests in parallel even though we configure it to run tests on a single
thread.
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.com wrote:
Hey guys,
We've started seeing some funny issues with the CDI
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Bela Ban b...@redhat.com wrote:
Dan reduced those values to 200K, IIRC it was for UUPerfwhich behaved
best with 200K. Idon't know if this is still needed. Dan ?
I haven't run UUPerf in a while...
On 12/17/12 12:19 PM, Radim Vansa wrote:
Hi,
recently
- Original Message -
| From: Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com
| To: infinispan -Dev List infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
| Sent: Monday, December 17, 2012 12:43:37 PM
| Subject: Re: [infinispan-dev] MFC/UFC credits in default config
|
|
|
|
|
| On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Bela Ban
as the dots were inserted into console in constant
rate (lame ascii chart). See attachements.
Radim
- Original Message -
| From: Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com
| To: infinispan -Dev List infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
| Sent: Monday, December 24, 2012 8:01:26 AM
as the dots were inserted into console
| in constant rate (lame ascii chart). See attachements.
|
| Radim
|
| - Original Message -
| | From: Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com
| | To: infinispan -Dev List infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
| | Sent: Monday, December 24, 2012 8:01
Hi guys
We haven't managed to get all the blockers in, so we've moved the CR1
release date again: Tuesday, Jan 8th.
Cheers,
Dan
On Dec 18, 2012 8:31 PM, Mircea Markus mmar...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi,
Next Infinispan release(5.2.0.CR1) is scheduled for Friday 21 Dec.
We still have 19 issues
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Manik Surtani msurt...@redhat.com wrote:
Let me clarify a few things on this thread. THere seems to be a bit of
confusion here. :)
storeAsBinary in Infinispan was designed with the following purposes in
mind, in order of importance:
1) Performance.
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Manik Surtani msurt...@redhat.com wrote:
On 28 Jan 2013, at 12:35, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Manik Surtani msurt...@redhat.comwrote:
Let me clarify a few things on this thread. THere seems to be a bit
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Manik Surtani msurt...@redhat.com wrote:
On 28 Jan 2013, at 15:22, Vladimir Blagojevic vblag...@redhat.com wrote:
On 13-01-28 7:31 AM, Manik Surtani wrote:
If you're ok with changing the core, you could add a getValue() method
to CacheEntryCreatedEvent,
Manik, I think that JDK bug is pretty out-of-date, at least on Fedora.
I ran the micro-benchmark in the bug (with some modifications:
https://github.com/danberindei/infinispan/blob/t_time_sources_test/core/src/test/java/org/infinispan/TimeSourcesTest.java)
when we had the last round of
Hi guys
I hated the fact that I didn't have branch name completions for
remove_topic_branch in zsh, so I wrote an auto-completion script for it:
https://github.com/danberindei/scripts/blob/master/zsh/_remove_topic_branch
Just save it to any directory and then add the directory to fpath in your
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Mircea Markus mmar...@redhat.com wrote:
On 31 Jan 2013, at 12:37, Manik Surtani wrote:
I don't think that encouraging scala code is good purely for maintenance
reasons. If there's a choice, it should be java. Not saying that learning a
new language is not
Radim, do these problems happen with the HotRod server, or only with
memcached?
HotRod requests handled by non-owners should be very rare, instead the vast
majority should be handled by the primary owner directly. So if this
happens with HotRod, we should focus on fixing the HotRod routing
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Manik Surtani msurt...@redhat.com wrote:
On 1 Feb 2013, at 09:39, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote:
Radim, do these problems happen with the HotRod server, or only with
memcached?
HotRod requests handled by non-owners should be very rare
Yes, it's most likely because 5.2.x is identical to master at this point.
Cheers
Dan
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.com wrote:
Something's wrong here because whereas 5.1.x and previous branches appear
as unmerged, 5.2.x appears as merged branch
Maybe the
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Bela Ban b...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi Pedro,
this is almost exactly what I wanted to implement !
Question:
- In RequestCorrelator.handleRequest():
protected void handleRequest(Message req, Header hdr) {
Object retval;
boolean threwException = false;
I've created https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-2805
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Bela Ban b...@redhat.com wrote:
Connection reaping may lead to message loss in UNICAST{2}. Until I've
fixed [1], could you disable connection reaping ? Instructions are in [1].
[1]
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Bela Ban b...@redhat.com wrote:
On 2/7/13 11:09 AM, Dan Berindei wrote:
A few changes I have in mind (need to think about it more):
- I want to leave the existing RequestHandler interface in place, so
current implementation continue
Do we really need to expose the TransactionManager's UserTransaction
implementation?
Looking at the interface, it seems like a subset of TransactionManager, so
couldn't we return a custom UserTransaction that just delegates to the
TransactionManager?
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Manik
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Mircea Markus mmar...@redhat.com wrote:
On 1 Feb 2013, at 09:54, Dan Berindei wrote:
Yeah, I wouldn't call this a simple solution...
The distribution/replication interceptors are quite high in the
interceptor stack, so we'd have to save the state
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi all,
We've got a small class loading puzzle to solve in our JSR-107
implementation.
JSR-107 has a class called Caching which keeps a singleton enum reference
(AFAIK, has same semantics as static) to the systemt's
:17 PM, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote:
Do we really need to expose the TransactionManager's UserTransaction
implementation?
Looking at the interface, it seems like a subset of TransactionManager,
so couldn't we return a custom UserTransaction that just delegates
Dan,
On 2/12/13 3:12 PM, Dan Berindei wrote:
Hi Pedro
When I split off the RebalancePolicy I was thinking that when a
RebalancePolicy needs to collaborate with a ConsistentHashFactory, they
should do so via another cache manager-scoped component. But that doesn't
really work (yet
,
Pedro
On 2/12/13 3:39 PM, Dan Berindei wrote:
Sorry, I didn't read your code so I just assumed you're writing your own
RebalancePolicy.
I think you need to implement your own RebalancePolicy, because
ClusterTopologyManagerImpl by itself doesn't remember that a rebalance was
triggerred
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.com wrote:
On Feb 8, 2013, at 3:35 PM, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.com
wrote:
Hi all,
We've got a small class loading puzzle to solve
Sanne, what are the failing tests?
ISPN-2628 only mentions
MultiNodeReplicatedTest.testIndexingWorkDistribution, is there any other?
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Sanne Grinovero sa...@infinispan.orgwrote:
Thanks Anna, good to see it's logged.
All, this is not just a simple test having
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Mircea Markus mmar...@redhat.com wrote:
I always liked this idea of categories but never saw it at use. Are there
any projects that use this logging approach?
On 20 Feb 2013, at 09:57, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
+1 for using categories
We could even
Radim, just to be sure, you are testing embedded mode with RadarGun, right?
With HotRod most of the get operations should be initiated from the main
owner, so Manik's changes shouldn't make a big difference in the number of
active threads.
How about throughput, has it also improved compared to
incoming messages)
This actually should happen, as they're delivered by different threads !
so, if everybody agrees, if I move the OOB message to another thread,
everything should work fine...
On 02/26/2013 03:50 PM, Bela Ban wrote:
On 2/26/13 4:15 PM, Dan Berindei wrote:
On Tue, Feb 26
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Mircea Markus mmar...@redhat.com wrote:
On 27 Feb 2013, at 19:06, Pedro Ruivo wrote:
Hi all,
I'm working on ISPN-2808 and I want some feedback about it (code is here
[1])
I'm starting to implement this feature but I know that Asynchronous
Invocation API
Actually some of the commands you mentioned don't go through the
interceptor chain (CacheTopologyControlCommand, StateRequestCommand,
StateRequestCommand etc.) so you can't use an interceptor to move them to a
separate thread pool.
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Mircea Markus
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Bela Ban b...@redhat.com wrote:
Another node: in general, would it make sense to use shorter names ?
E.g. instead of
** New view: [jdg-perf-01-60164|9] [jdg-perf-01-60164,
| jdg-perf-01-24167, jdg-perf-01-53841, jdg-perf-01-39558,
| jdg-perf-01-8977,
I did a search a long time ago for wrong test names:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-2534
It seems I missed JdbcMixedCacheStoreTest2 / JdbcMixedCacheStoreVamTest2 in
the patch for some reason, although I did mention them in the JIRA
description :(
Searching again, I see some more tests that
...@lists.jboss.org
[mailto:infinispan-dev-boun...@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Bela Ban
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 1:50 AM
To: infinispan-dev@lists.jboss.org
Subject: Re: [infinispan-dev] [infinispan-internal] Unstable Cluster
On 3/4/13 6:35 PM, Dan Berindei wrote:
On Mon
I think the field was needed because InboundInvocationHandlerImpl was using
ComponentRegistry.getComponent(ResponseGenerator.class), and there wasn't
anyone actually creating the ResponseGenerator component.
Since https://issues.jboss.org/browse/ISPN-1793, ComponentRegistry creates
the
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mar 8, 2013, at 1:50 PM, Sanne Grinovero sa...@infinispan.org wrote:
Hi Galder,
I think using conditional operations is very useful even with
optimistic locking: the single conditional operation might not make
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Radim Vansa rva...@redhat.com wrote:
Blocking OOB threads is the thing we want to avoid, remember?
Well, you have to block somewhere...
I like Adrian's solution, because it's a lot better than CallerRunsPolicy:
it's blocking the OOB thread until any other
Hi Sanne
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Sanne Grinovero sa...@infinispan.orgwrote:
Mircea,
what I was most looking forward was to you comment on the interceptor
order generated for DIST+cachestores
- we don't think the ClusteredCacheLoader should be needed at all
Agree,
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Manik Surtani msurt...@redhat.com wrote:
On 19 Mar 2013, at 15:07, Sanne Grinovero sa...@redhat.com wrote:
- Original Message -
On 19 Mar 2013, at 12:21, Mircea Markus mmar...@redhat.com wrote:
On 19 Mar 2013, at 11:05, Sanne Grinovero
Implementation-wise, just changing the interceptor order is probably not
enough. If the key doesn't exist in the cache, the CacheLoaderInterceptor
will still try to load it from the cache store after the remote lookup, so
we'll need a marker in the invocation context to avoid the extra
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Pedro Ruivo pe...@infinispan.org wrote:
Hi all,
To solve ISPN-2808 (avoid blocking JGroups threads in order to allow to
deliver the request responses), I've created another thread pool to move
the possible blocking commands (i.e. the commands that may block
* Marshalling happens in the async thread (the same one that puts the
message on the wire) rather than in the caller's thread
my understanding is that there's no such additional thread, but caller's
thread goes to the network stack even for async calls. I think Bela can put
some light on
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:55 PM, Pedro Ruivo pe...@infinispan.org wrote:
On 03/19/2013 08:41 PM, Dan Berindei wrote:
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Pedro Ruivo pe...@infinispan.org
mailto:pe...@infinispan.org wrote:
Hi all,
To solve ISPN-2808 (avoid blocking JGroups
The problem is that we still leak threads in almost every module, and that
means we keep a copy of the core classes (and all their dependencies) for
every module. Of course, some modules' dependencies are already oversized,
so keeping only one copy is already too much...
I admit I don't run the
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 5:33 PM, Mircea Markus mmar...@redhat.com wrote:
On 20 Mar 2013, at 15:12, Dan Berindei wrote:
The problem is that we still leak threads in almost every module, and
that means we keep a copy of the core classes (and all their dependencies)
for every module
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Pedro Ruivo pe...@infinispan.org wrote:
On 03/20/2013 07:53 AM, Dan Berindei wrote:
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 11:55 PM, Pedro Ruivo pe...@infinispan.org
mailto:pe...@infinispan.org wrote:
On 03/19/2013 08:41 PM, Dan Berindei wrote
is not the root cause of this issue, but is odd anyway :).
Yes, very odd. Do you also see 19 instances of a
GlobalComponentRegistry?
On 03/20/2013 05:12 PM, Dan Berindei wrote:
The problem is that we still leak threads in almost every module, and
that
means we keep a copy
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.com wrote:
On Mar 20, 2013, at 11:52 AM, Manik Surtani msurt...@redhat.com wrote:
On 18 Mar 2013, at 12:21, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.com wrote:
This is why, I've created a new CHM, based on the CHMv8, called
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.com wrote:
On Apr 8, 2013, at 12:35 PM, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.com wrote:
On Apr 8, 2013, at 11:17 AM, Manik Surtani msurt...@redhat.com wrote:
All sounds very good. One important thing to consider is that the
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.com wrote:
On Apr 8, 2013, at 1:11 PM, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Apr 8, 2013, at 12:35 PM, Galder Zamarreño gal
Hi Ales
I managed to start the app with 3 nodes on my laptop, and it inserted a
flight in about 26.7 seconds with TRACE enabled for org.infinispan.
However, when I counted the number of cache commands being executed and I
got 55000 (8700 of which went remote), which seems way too much for a
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Manik Surtani msurt...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10 Apr 2013, at 20:57, Sanne Grinovero sa...@infinispan.org wrote:
Right, let's keep this to collecting requirements:
+1. Ok, so it seems we're all pretty much in agreement that metadata
extraction and indexing
Have you tried with different JDK versions on Windows as well?
Did you have AggresiveOpts enabled?
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Sanne Grinovero sa...@infinispan.orgwrote:
I could never replicate this, and now I suspect I know why: I just
figured that all failing reports where coming from
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 3:02 AM, Sanne Grinovero sa...@hibernate.orgwrote:
that's right, as suggested by Emmanuel I plan to separate the JGroups
Sync/Async options from the worker.execution property so you can play
with the two independently.
I think the JGroups option's default could depend
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Sanne Grinovero sa...@infinispan.orgwrote:
On 13 April 2013 11:20, Bela Ban b...@redhat.com wrote:
On 4/13/13 2:02 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
@All, the performance problem seemed to be caused by a problem in
JGroups, which I've logged here:
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Sanne Grinovero sa...@infinispan.orgwrote:
I've attached the logs the the JIRA.
Some replies inline:
On 15 April 2013 11:04, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Sanne Grinovero sa...@infinispan.org
wrote
Sorry for missing your message, Ales!
Anyway, good news, we found out why the test was taking so long: the
Message instance passed to dispatcher.cast() already had a destination
address set, and JGroups only sent the message to that address, even though
the dispatcher was waiting for a reply from
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Bela Ban b...@redhat.com wrote:
Well, first of all, we won't *have* any conflicting topology IDs, as the
minority partitions don't change them after becoming minority.
We don't have the notion of conflicting topology IDs with the current
algorithm, either.
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Manik Surtani msurt...@redhat.com wrote:
On 17 Apr 2013, at 08:23, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote:
I like the idea of always clearing the state in members of the minority
partition(s), but one problem with that is that there may be some keys
+1 to make CHMv8 the default on JDK6 and JDK7
But I'm not convinced we should make it the default for JDK8 - even though
we don't know exactly what we're getting with the JDK's implementation.
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 5:39 AM, David M. Lloyd david.ll...@redhat.comwrote:
On 04/18/2013 09:35 PM,
by a
non concurrent structure using copy-on-wrtite.
Sanne
On 19 Apr 2013 08:48, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote:
+1 to make CHMv8 the default on JDK6 and JDK7
But I'm not convinced we should make it the default for JDK8 - even
though we don't know exactly what we're getting
Do you really need to set the classloader in all the cache configurations?
I thought it was enough to set it in the global configuration.
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 7:02 PM, Sanne Grinovero sa...@infinispan.orgwrote:
It turns out this resource loading issue is biting also community users;
I had
...@redhat.comwrote:
On 04/19/2013 08:22 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
On 19 April 2013 13:52, David M. Lloyd david.ll...@redhat.com wrote:
On 04/19/2013 05:17 AM, Sanne Grinovero wrote:
On 19 April 2013 11:10, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Sanne Grinovero
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Mircea Markus mmar...@redhat.com wrote:
On 3 May 2013, at 16:54, Pedro Ruivo wrote:
On 05/03/2013 04:49 PM, Manik Surtani wrote:
On 2 May 2013, at 19:01, Pedro Ruivo pe...@infinispan.org wrote:
preciseTime() {return (cached = System.nanoTime());}
Because of the component registry, every component is a (non-public)
extension point by itself. So I don't see the need to do anything special,
if we're only going to use it in the test suite.
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Sanne Grinovero sa...@infinispan.orgwrote:
For testing purposes it
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.com wrote:
Here's what I replied in a separate email last. Since then the issue has
been sorted:
The reason I designed a byte[] specific Equivalence class is to avoid
doing instanceof on the type passed. This would slow things
:53, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Galder Zamarreño gal...@redhat.comwrote:
Here's what I replied in a separate email last. Since then the issue has
been sorted:
The reason I designed a byte[] specific Equivalence class is to avoid
doing
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Mircea Markus mmar...@redhat.com wrote:
On 9 May 2013, at 08:02, Dan Berindei wrote:
Why would TestNG run an @AfterMethod method if the test didn't run?
if you set alwaysRun=true on that method it will run it disregarding if
the test was run or not.
What
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Mircea Markus mmar...@redhat.com wrote:
On 8 May 2013, at 10:40, Pedro Ruivo wrote:
On 05/08/2013 10:36 AM, Manik Surtani wrote:
On 8 May 2013, at 10:34, Pedro Ruivo pe...@infinispan.org wrote:
Hi guys,
In order to use the TimeService inside the
On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Mircea Markus mmar...@redhat.com wrote:
On 9 May 2013, at 20:56, Dan Berindei wrote:
Another alternative that come to my mind was to add a new method in
AdvancedCache that returns the TimeService (and this I can mock it in
the test suite)
+1
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Mircea Markus mmar...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10 May 2013, at 10:06, Manik Surtani wrote:
There seems to be a bit of confusion on this thread. The things I hope
to achieve here are:
1. De-coupled release cycle.
Most of our releases include new versions
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Manik Surtani msurt...@redhat.com wrote:
On 9 May 2013, at 20:56, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote:
Couldn't you change CacheLoaderManager to call
ComponentRegistry.wireDependencies(cacheStore)?
That way, each cache store could have a separate
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Manik Surtani msurt...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10 May 2013, at 11:14, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Manik Surtani msurt...@redhat.comwrote:
On 9 May 2013, at 20:56, Dan Berindei dan.berin...@gmail.com wrote
, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Sanne Grinovero sa...@infinispan.orgwrote:
AdvancedCache is the API we use the most. I'd rather say I don't care for
Cache: all I use it for us to get an AdvancedCache.
On 13 May 2013 10:12, Manik Surtani msurt...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10 May 2013, at 12:32, Dan Berindei
201 - 300 of 666 matches
Mail list logo
