[GitHub] eolivelli commented on issue #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation

eolivelli commented on issue #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1393#issuecomment-387687819 retest this please This is an automated message from

[GitHub] jvrao commented on issue #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation

jvrao commented on issue #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1393#issuecomment-387636727 Changes look fine to me, but somehow I think syncLedger makes more sense than forceLedger. @sijie ?

[GitHub] eolivelli commented on a change in pull request #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation

eolivelli commented on a change in pull request #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1393#discussion_r186944219 ## File path:

[GitHub] eolivelli commented on a change in pull request #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation

eolivelli commented on a change in pull request #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1393#discussion_r186944930 ## File path:

[GitHub] eolivelli commented on issue #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation

eolivelli commented on issue #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1393#issuecomment-387640856 @jvrao I have updated the patch with the assertions, let's wait for Sijie's (and eventually Ivan) final comments before

[GitHub] jvrao commented on a change in pull request #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation

jvrao commented on a change in pull request #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1393#discussion_r186943697 ## File path:

[GitHub] eolivelli commented on a change in pull request #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation

eolivelli commented on a change in pull request #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1393#discussion_r186946765 ## File path:

[GitHub] jvrao commented on a change in pull request #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation

jvrao commented on a change in pull request #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1393#discussion_r186944703 ## File path:

[GitHub] jvrao commented on a change in pull request #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation

jvrao commented on a change in pull request #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1393#discussion_r186941208 ## File path: bookkeeper-proto/src/main/proto/BookkeeperProtocol.proto ## @@ -63,6 +63,7

[GitHub] eolivelli commented on issue #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation

eolivelli commented on issue #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1393#issuecomment-387634874 @jvrao the name force superseded "sync" after a quite long discussion between JV,Sijie,Ivan and me and we agreed on

[GitHub] jvrao commented on issue #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation

jvrao commented on issue #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1393#issuecomment-387637465 > force superseded "sync" after a quite long discussion I am fine if it is decided with a nod from @ivankelly and

[GitHub] eolivelli commented on a change in pull request #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation

eolivelli commented on a change in pull request #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1393#discussion_r186944219 ## File path:

[GitHub] eolivelli commented on issue #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation

eolivelli commented on issue #1393: BP-14 forceLedger wire protocol server side implementation URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1393#issuecomment-387775537 retest this please This is an automated message from

Jenkins build became unstable: bookkeeper_release_branch_47_java8 #30

See

[GitHub] eolivelli commented on issue #1371: User isEmpty method instead of size check

eolivelli commented on issue #1371: User isEmpty method instead of size check URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1371#issuecomment-387779886 retest this please This is an automated message from the Apache Git

Build failed in Jenkins: bookkeeper_postcommit_master_java8 #127

See -- [...truncated 351.95 KB...] 2018-05-09T12:14:37.137 [INFO] Downloading: https://repo.maven.apache.org/maven2/antlr/antlr/2.7.7/antlr-2.7.7.jar

Build failed in Jenkins: bookkeeper_release_branch_47_java9 #30

See -- [...truncated 352.80 KB...] 2018-05-09T12:35:36.011 [INFO] Downloading:

Jenkins build became unstable: bookkeeper_codecoverage #77

See

Build failed in Jenkins: bookkeeper_postcommit_master_java9 #126

See -- [...truncated 352.40 KB...] 2018-05-09T12:52:51.905 [INFO] Downloading:

Jenkins build is back to normal : bookkeeper_release_branch_47_integrationtests #20

See

[GitHub] jvrao commented on issue #1380: addBookieAndCheckCovered in RRQuorumCoverageSet doesn't work correctly if AcqQuorumSize is greater than (WriteQuorumSize+1)/2

jvrao commented on issue #1380: addBookieAndCheckCovered in RRQuorumCoverageSet doesn't work correctly if AcqQuorumSize is greater than (WriteQuorumSize+1)/2 URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/1380#issuecomment-387819632 I think @reddycharan 's point is very simple. 1.

[GitHub] jvrao commented on issue #1380: addBookieAndCheckCovered in RRQuorumCoverageSet doesn't work correctly if AcqQuorumSize is greater than (WriteQuorumSize+1)/2

jvrao commented on issue #1380: addBookieAndCheckCovered in RRQuorumCoverageSet doesn't work correctly if AcqQuorumSize is greater than (WriteQuorumSize+1)/2 URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/1380#issuecomment-387819632 I think @reddycharan 's point is very simple. 1.

[GitHub] reddycharan commented on issue #1391: Issue #570: EntryLogManagerForEntryLogPerLedger implementation

reddycharan commented on issue #1391: Issue #570: EntryLogManagerForEntryLogPerLedger implementation URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1391#issuecomment-387831744 retest this please This is an automated message

[GitHub] reddycharan commented on issue #1397: Bookies should be from different racks in a Writequorum.

reddycharan commented on issue #1397: Bookies should be from different racks in a Writequorum. URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1397#issuecomment-387831644 retest this please This is an automated message

[GitHub] arunlakshman opened a new pull request #1398: ISSUE #1339: Cleanup the directories created by DbLedgerStorageTest

arunlakshman opened a new pull request #1398: ISSUE #1339: Cleanup the directories created by DbLedgerStorageTest URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/1398 Descriptions of the changes in this PR: Cleaned up the directories `dir1` and `dir2` left behind by the test