We were seeing a C4530 Warning:
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/2axwkyt4.aspx
But I can't reproduce it. Trying a build without the /EHsc. Also, it seems
like this would be the default for unmanaged but I can't find docs on that.
On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 8:51 PM Michael Martell wrote:
>
I think some new Warnings as Errors shows up with the new (and likely stricter
compiler). I will forward to you as soon as I finish this episode of Ozark. Not
sure about using a different exception model between the managed and unmanaged
sides.
> On Nov 21, 2018, at 7:21 PM, Jacob Barrett
# [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/geode-native/pull/406?src=pr=h1)
Report
> Merging
> [#406](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/geode-native/pull/406?src=pr=desc)
> into
> [develop](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/geode-native/commit/f19b552c9c9ec68c3f2abeb227b8b0e1e90012ea?src=pr=desc)
> will
Can you explain why you are changing the exception handling mode? How is it
interacting with the .NET library since this exception mode is not supported
for /clr?
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ffkc918h.aspx
> The following compiler options are not supported with /clr:
>/EHsc and /EHs
Can you explain why you are changing the exception handling mode? How is it
interacting with the .NET library since this exception mode is not supported
for /clr?
> The following compiler options are not supported with /clr:
>/EHsc and /EHs (/clr implies /EHa (see /EH (Exception Handling
[ pull request closed by jinmeiliao ]
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2889 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
notifications@geode.apache.org
Will keep the ticket open
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2889 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
notifications@geode.apache.org
failure not related to this PR
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2889 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
notifications@geode.apache.org
upthewaterspout opened a new pull request #4: GEODE-6086: Looking for the
output files in the correct location
URL: https://github.com/apache/geode-benchmarks/pull/4
Yardstick creates a subdirectory, so find the files in that directory
Yardstick creates a subdirectory, so find the files in that directory
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode-benchmarks/pull/4 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
notifications@geode.apache.org
Thanks pivotal-jbarrett for a diligent review! All changes have been
implemented.
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode-native/pull/407 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
notifications@geode.apache.org
Moved this to root.
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode-native/pull/407 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
notifications@geode.apache.org
Since this is a public API it should have a javadoc
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2890 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
notifications@geode.apache.org
Having two methods in a public API with the same spelling & only casing
differences is a little odd. Also, this needs a javadoc.
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2890 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
notifications@geode.apache.org
+1 to an `await()` over this stopwatch implementation, unless I'm missing
something important that pushes us to this over the other. If there's the
compelling reason to not use `await()`, I'd put that in the updated javadoc.
I also prefer an alias in the `await("Locators must agree on the
Does this Javadoc need updating? I don't see any reference to the
`DEFAULT_TIMEOUT` that is claimed here, other than the actual `TIMEOUT` field
incidentally also being 300 seconds.
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2833 ]
This message was relayed via
instead of while loop; can it be done using awaitility for each of the locator
beans...and then compare them.
```
GeodeAwaitility.await().untilAsserted(() -> {
getFederatedGemfireBeansFrom(locator2);
finalL2Beans.clear();
instead of while loop; can it be done using awaitility for each of the locator
beans...and then compare them.
```
GeodeAwaitility.await().untilAsserted(() -> {
getFederatedGemfireBeansFrom(locator2);
finalL2Beans.clear();
[ pull request closed by jchen21 ]
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2870 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
notifications@geode.apache.org
I see - thanks, I'll fix that
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2885 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
notifications@geode.apache.org
smgoller commented on issue #3: Use a Java ssh server rather than docker for
tests
URL: https://github.com/apache/geode-benchmarks/pull/3#issuecomment-440809053
Oh sweet! That makes more sense. ;)
This is an automated
Oh sweet! That makes more sense. ;)
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode-benchmarks/pull/3 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
notifications@geode.apache.org
Because we run tests in parallel, and because they all seem to be writing to
the same suspect file, it may well be that either the DUnit run will timeout
with the added time of the `sync()`, and/or the call will throw an
`IOException` after timing out with frequency that makes this change
[ pull request closed by PurelyApplied ]
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2795 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
notifications@geode.apache.org
[ pull request closed by PurelyApplied ]
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2884 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
notifications@geode.apache.org
…trings.
Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache Geode.
In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
to ensure the following steps have been taken:
### For all changes:
- [ ] Is there a JIRA ticket associated with this PR? Is it referenced in the
commit message?
[ pull request closed by galen-pivotal ]
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2841 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
notifications@geode.apache.org
The question was about passing the cache instance to
SecureFunctionServiceImpl(); line#57 since its not changed in this pr, the gui
was displaying it in extreme left...
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2885 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
Works for me.
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2885 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
notifications@geode.apache.org
# [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/geode-native/pull/406?src=pr=h1)
Report
> Merging
> [#406](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/geode-native/pull/406?src=pr=desc)
> into
> [develop](https://codecov.io/gh/apache/geode-native/commit/f19b552c9c9ec68c3f2abeb227b8b0e1e90012ea?src=pr=desc)
> will
Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache Geode.
In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
to ensure the following steps have been taken:
### For all changes:
- [X] Is there a JIRA ticket associated with this PR? Is it referenced in the
commit message?
- [X] Has
I don't think we need to be using bounce to address the flakiness. We need to
see where the calculation is getting wrong; if its with initial memory (before
the test runs) or the memory usage/leak as the tests gets run and accordingly
calculate the eviction. If its memory leak, need to address
[ pull request closed by nabarunnag ]
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2886 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
notifications@geode.apache.org
To test the ssh infrastructure, use apache sshd in the test to run a ssh
server.
This makes the tests less dependent on specific infrastructure and build
magic. Users can now run the tests on their machines without having to
set up passwordless ssh (Although actual benchmark runs will still
upthewaterspout closed pull request #2: Cleaning up benchmark output
URL: https://github.com/apache/geode-benchmarks/pull/2
This is a PR merged from a forked repository.
As GitHub hides the original diff on merge, it is displayed below for
the sake of provenance:
As this is a foreign
[ pull request closed by upthewaterspout ]
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode-benchmarks/pull/2 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
notifications@geode.apache.org
Cleaning up the output of geode benchmarks by making sure that all directories
are cleaned after the run, and configuring the per node and final output
directory names.
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode-benchmarks/pull/2 ]
This message was relayed via
upthewaterspout opened a new pull request #2: Cleaning up benchmark output
URL: https://github.com/apache/geode-benchmarks/pull/2
Cleaning up the output of geode benchmarks by making sure that all
directories are cleaned after the run, and configuring the per node and final
output
* user does not have to provide credentials when creating the client cache in
multi-user mode. Credentials are needed only when creating the view.
* CacheProxy should have a reference to the JSONFormatter that is aware of the
user attributes
* clean up some tests and add more tests for coverage
Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache Geode.
In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
to ensure the following steps have been taken:
### For all changes:
- [ ] Is there a JIRA ticket associated with this PR? Is it referenced in the
commit message?
- [ ] Has
I'm sorry but I don't understand this comment. The SecureCacheImpl needs to
hold an InternalCacheForClientAccess, so this change seems necessary.
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2885 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
…hCommand
Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache Geode.
In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
to ensure the following steps have been taken:
### For all changes:
- [ ] Is there a JIRA ticket associated with this PR? Is it referenced in the
commit message?
Yeah, I was surprised by that too. My PR isn't related to making the driver
behave better. It's only about restricting access to internal regions.
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2885 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
[ pull request closed by jinmeiliao ]
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2863 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
notifications@geode.apache.org
That approach of using setInternalRegion(), unfortunately, does not create a
Region that is marked as an "internal region". I tried that and it doesn't
work.
I don't think it should be marked as PARTITIONED because PR admin regions
aren't partitioned.
[ Full content available at:
Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache Geode.
In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
to ensure the following steps have been taken:
### For all changes:
- [ ] Is there a JIRA ticket associated with this PR? Is it referenced in the
commit message?
- [ ] Has
[ pull request closed by pivotal-jbarrett ]
[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode-native/pull/406 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for
notifications@geode.apache.org
47 matches
Mail list logo
