On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 10:20 AM, Christos Erotocritou < chris...@gridgain.com> wrote:
> We already have a basic FAQ page which I am populating: > http://apacheignite.gridgain.org/docs/faq < > http://apacheignite.gridgain.org/docs/faq> > > Please feel free to add to it. > Thanks Christos! Here is the correct link (your link is just an alias): https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/faq I think we should add a TOC up top as well, whenever you are done. > Not sure if we want to migrate this to the wiki? > I don’t think we need to. > > Christos > > > On 11 Mar 2016, at 17:35, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > +1 on FAQ > > > > Can we just create a page, and start populating it? > > > > D. > > > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 3:25 AM, Anton Vinogradov < > avinogra...@gridgain.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Yakov, > >> > >> I've answered. > >> Seems we have to have special FAQ section at Ignite wiki to publish same > >> things. > >> > >> On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Yakov Zhdanov <yzhda...@apache.org> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Vlad and all (esp Val and Anton V.), > >>> > >>> I reviewed the PR. My comments are in the ticket. > >>> > >>> Anton V. there is a question regarding optimized-classnames.properties. > >>> Can you please respond in ticket? > >>> > >>> > >>> --Yakov > >>> > >>> 2016-02-29 16:00 GMT+06:00 Yakov Zhdanov <yzhda...@apache.org>: > >>> > >>>> Vlad, that's great! I will take a look this week. Reassigning ticket > to > >>>> myself. > >>>> > >>>> --Yakov > >>>> > >>>> 2016-02-26 18:37 GMT+03:00 Vladisav Jelisavcic <vladis...@gmail.com>: > >>>> > >>>>> Hi, > >>>>> > >>>>> i recently implemented distributed ReentrantLock - IGNITE-642, > >>>>> i made a pull request, so hopefully this could be added to the next > >>>>> release. > >>>>> > >>>>> Best regards, > >>>>> Vladisav > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 10:49 AM, Alexey Goncharuk < > >>>>> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Folks, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The current implementation of IgniteCache.lock(key).lock() has the > >>>>> same > >>>>>> semantics as the transactional locks - cache topology cannot be > >>>>> changed > >>>>>> while there exists an ongoing transaction or an explicit lock is > >>>>> held. The > >>>>>> restriction for transactions is quite fundamental, the lock() issue > >>>>> can be > >>>>>> fixed if we re-implement locking the same way IgniteSemaphore > >>>>> currently > >>>>>> works. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> As for the "Failed to find semaphore with the given name" message, > my > >>>>> first > >>>>>> guess is that DataStructures were configured with 1 backups which > led > >>>>> to > >>>>>> the data loss when two nodes were stopped. Mario, can you please > >>>>> re-test > >>>>>> your semaphore scenario with 2 backups configured for data > structures? > >>>>>> From my side, I can also take a look at the semaphore issue when I'm > >>>>> done > >>>>>> with IGNITE-2610. > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >
