Re: Rename "cache group" to "tablespace"?

I really like the idea. On Mon, Nov 19, 2018, 23:45 Vladimir Ozerov Igniters, > > We had several discussion about cache groups [1]. Our current consensus is > that this is not that good design decision - bad scan performance, no API. > A kind of shortcut to solve memory consumption problems. For

Re: Time to remove automated messages from the devlist?

I just have a filter for Jira emails and automatically go into a different folder for me. On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 6:40 AM Dmitriy Pavlov wrote: > Vova, I've also started such topic about GitBox messages ( > >

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

e IgniteTable could be correct. > > > > > > Agree with Denis that each table in the 3rd normal form is like > > > > key-value > > > > > > store. Key-value operations are only subset of rich SQL commands. > > > > > > > > > > > >

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 5:18 AM David Harvey wrote: > We had a terminology agreement early on where we agreed to call them > caches, but we still call them tables anyway. > > When I finally understood how you could have multiple tables in a single > cache, I tried to find example use cases, but

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 4:58 PM Denis Magda wrote: > I've been calling everything "tables" instead of "caches" for a while. The > main reason is the maturity of our SQL engine - seeing more SQL users and > deployments which talk "tables" language. > > I think "IgniteTable" only implies SQL, not

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

If dataset cannot be used, can we still consider "IgniteData"? D. On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 5:06 AM Ilya Lantukh wrote: > As I see, many people agree that the term *"cache"* is outdated, but > consider these changes too disruptive. > > For me, keeping terminology up-to-date is important part of

Re: SQL Engine

I do not understand - why are we copying values on-heap? If we must copy something, why not copy rows into some off-heap space and read what we have from there? At least this way we will not burden the JVM with extra GC pressure. D. On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 10:33 AM Igor Tanackovic wrote: >

[DISCUSS] Dropping hadoop-accelerator download

Igniters, I would like to suggest dropping the hadoop accelerator distribution of Apache Ignite. Note, that it does not mean dropping any features. We are still going to support IGFS, in-memory map reduce, spark integration, etc. However, the hadoop-accelerator downloadable is putting extra

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

“tablespace”. > > I have to say I never heard of JavaSpaces :) Don’t think many people will > recall that. > > Stan > > From: Dmitriy Setrakyan > Sent: 16 октября 2018 г. 20:21 > To: dev > Subject: Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite > > Although I a

Re: Applicability of term 'cache' to Apache Ignite

Although I agree that this change is disruptive, can we just entertain Ilya's idea for a bit? What if we were designing Ignite from scratch, what different name would we give to the IgniteCache abstraction? Ilya suggested "IgniteSpace", but I do not like it as it sounds too similar to JavaSpaces

Re: Apache Ignite 2.7. Last Mile

Vladimir Ozerov, Can you help with the unassigned MVCC tickets? D. On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 3:32 AM Nikolay Izhikov wrote: > Hello, Igniters. > > I list all contributors that assigned to the 2.7 tickets. > If you can help them to finish that tickets - please, do. > Assigners, if you need any

Re: Absence of unsigned integer read/write support in IBinaryRawReader/Writer

On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 9:55 PM Raymond Wilson wrote: > > I am curious that unsigned ints would not be a universally supported type > on all platforms. Is that really the case? > I am not aware of any unsigned ints in Java, at least yet. Here is a Stack Overflow thread on this:

Re: Absence of unsigned integer read/write support in IBinaryRawReader/Writer

This is not about what "Java" supports. This is about the protocol working seamlessly across Java, .NET, and C++ environments, so we had to remove the types that are not supported on some platforms. D. On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 7:57 AM Ilya Kasnacheev wrote: > Hello! > > I think this is because

Re: TDE. Phase-1 Merged to master

Congrats! Great effort by everyone involved. On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 9:18 AM Nikolay Izhikov wrote: > Hello, Igniters. > > I merged to master TDE.Phase 1 that has been actively discussed on > dev-list. > > I want to thank all guys that helped me with the implementation: > > 1. Dmitriy Ryabov -

Re: Should we make the interface ClusterNode to extend Serializable?

seeing a big problem for the project just want to point this > out and to resolve if needed. > On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 8:55 PM Dmitriy Setrakyan > wrote: > > > > I think I would be against it. Why would anyone serialize ClusterNode > > outside of Ignite? Did we get any

Re: Should we make the interface ClusterNode to extend Serializable?

I think I would be against it. Why would anyone serialize ClusterNode outside of Ignite? Did we get any complaints from users? D. On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 3:55 AM Vyacheslav Daradur wrote: > Hi Igniters! > > I've noticed that interface 'ClusterNode' doesn't extend > 'Serializable', but at the

Re: Apache Ignite 2.7 release

> despite big absolute number, most of these tickets are grouped around > > several big areas, and overall progress over this week should be very > good. > > > > On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 9:50 PM Dmitriy Setrakyan > > wrote: > > > > > If this filter is fo

Re: Published articles on Data streaming in Dzone and Tech@Target

Thanks, Saikat, great blog! On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 7:13 AM Saikat Maitra wrote: > Hi, > > We have published an article on Data streaming at Dzone. Thank you Prachi > for help for publishing the article > > > https://dzone.com/articles/data-streaming-using-apache-flink-and-apache-ignit > > Also

Re: Apache Ignite 2.7 release

at rush. Rush > > during > > > > > > > design, development, review, testing. Result is known - bad > > features, > > > > > > > > > > > > which > > > > > > > makes damage to the pro

Re: Apache Ignite 2.7 release

ov пишет: > > > > Hi Dmitriy, > > > > > > > > The design is aligned totally. The thread you mention was not named > > > > properly. > > > > > > > > It seems to me some community members are trying to take over the > &

Re: Apache Ignite 2.7 release

; > Sincerely, > Dmitriy Pavlov > > пт, 28 сент. 2018 г. в 12:20, Dmitriy Setrakyan : > > > If services is not ready, which it is not, then we should include them > into > > the next release. There is no need to force them into 2.7. I suggest we > > move according

Re: [Discussion] revert of commit MVCC, ignite-9320

> > > > > Sincerely, > > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > > > пт, 28 сент. 2018 г. в 8:16, Vladimir Ozerov : > > > > > > > Test is going to be fixed in the scope of AI 2.7 [1]. This is not > > > > one-minute fix as there are multiple place

Re: Apache Ignite 2.7 release

If services is not ready, which it is not, then we should include them into the next release. There is no need to force them into 2.7. I suggest we move according to the schedule we all agreed on. D. On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 1:22 AM Dmitriy Pavlov wrote: > Yes, so correct statement is

Re: [Discussion] revert of commit MVCC, ignite-9320

Let's not revert any commits yet. Can we find out who did the commit and why he/she is not fixing the test? D. On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 4:21 PM Vyacheslav Daradur wrote: > Hi, > > Are you talking about > 'IgniteConfigurationParityTest#TestIgniteConfiguration'? > > Seems it's not hard to fix

Ignite and Spark on Yarn

Can anyone familiar with the subject respond here? https://stackoverflow.com/questions/52488073/ignite-yarn-and-hortonworks D.

Re: [ML] New features and improvement of ML module for 2.7 release

Great stuff! Would be nice to see a series of blogs outlining Ignite ML capabilities.This would give us a better momentum. D. On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 10:31 AM Юрий Бабак wrote: > Hello Igniters, > > I want to make up some overview of all features and major improvement of ML > module for this

Re: [ML] TensorFlow intergration module release

Distributed TensorFlow, awesome! On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 12:53 PM Юрий Бабак wrote: > Hello, Igniters. > > For release 2.7 we will introduce integration between TensorFlow and Apache > Ignite. This integration contains changes on Apache Ignite side and on > TensorFlow side. > > Apache Ignite

Re: [DISCUSSION] Add reviewer field to Apache Ignite JIRA project

I like the idea. On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 8:25 AM Dmitriy Pavlov wrote: > Hi Ignite Enthusiasts, > > During the planning of release 2.7, I've faced with the situation when it > is completely not clear who is going to review ticket. > > Usually, we do not reassign tickets to a reviewer, but info

Re: The future of Affinity / Topology concepts and possible PME optimizations.

Ilya, I would suggest that you discuss everything here on the dev@ list, including suggestions how to split the work. D. On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 6:34 PM Ilya Lantukh wrote: > Thanks for the feedback! > > I agree that we should start with the simplest optimizations, but it seems > that

Re: Cache scan efficiency

On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 1:58 PM Alexei Scherbakov < alexey.scherbak...@gmail.com> wrote: > Summing up, I suggest adding new public > method IgniteCache.preloadPartition(partId). > > I will start preparing PR for IGNITE-8873 > if no more

Re: Apache Ignite 2.7 release

If it is an Ignite release, then it has to pass through the vote. If not, then you can do the test without publishing or uploading the release. D. On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 1:18 PM Petr Ivanov wrote: > Ok. > > In case of TC questions — ask me. > > > > > On 18 Sep 2018, at 13:16, Nikolay Izhikov

Re: Cache scan efficiency

I would rather fix the scan than hack the scan. Is there any technical reason for hacking it now instead of fixing it properly? Can some of the experts in this thread provide an estimate of complexity and difference in work that would be required for each approach? D. On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at

Re: Using materialised views for queries with joins

Hi Sven, I will let others comment on the materialized view suggestion, but I have another question. *As we all know, joins are a nightmare in a distributed system* Have you considered collocation or replication? If a table is replicated, then it will be present on all the nodes and all joins

Re: Cache scan efficiency

Alexey, this is a great feature. Can you explain what you meant by "warm-up" when iterating through pages? Do you have this feature already implemented? D. On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 6:44 PM Alexei Scherbakov < alexey.scherbak...@gmail.com> wrote: > Igniters, > > My use case involves scenario

Re: The future of Affinity / Topology concepts and possible PME optimizations.

Ilya, Thanks for the detailed explanation. Everything you suggested makes sense. Needless to say, PME effect on the grid should be minimized. Let's start with the simpler and less risky changes first. D. On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 5:58 AM Ilya Lantukh wrote: > Igniters, > > As most of you know,

Re: Compression prototype

ve that on a > large data set, compression ratio is around 0.4 (2.5x) with a dictionary of > 1024 bytes. The rest is black box. > > Regards, > -- > Ilya Kasnacheev > > > вт, 4 сент. 2018 г. в 17:16, Dmitriy Setrakyan : > > > On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 2:55 AM, Ilya Ka

Re: Python thin client

uried under the further cryptic output of old setuptools, but it is > better than nothing. > > > On 9/5/18 2:21 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: > >> Dmitriy, >> >> setuptools sounds like an installation step. Does it make sense to add a >> check during startup of a c

Re: Hi... trying to write a test case for a pacth ... need help....

Hi Paul, what Jira ticket are you working on? On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 7:02 AM, Paul Anderson wrote: > ... The code is done ready to go, but the test suite looks huge, I know the > two test classes I have to augment... but I am unsure of a couple of > things. > > 1) how do I run a specific test

Re: Python thin client

Dmitriy, setuptools sounds like an installation step. Does it make sense to add a check during startup of a client? D. On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 7:25 AM, Dmitry Melnichuk < dmitry.melnic...@nobitlost.com> wrote: > Nikolay, > > There is indeed a feature in `setuptools` I just learned about, which

Re: Compression prototype

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 2:55 AM, Ilya Kasnacheev wrote: > Hello! > > Each node has a local dictionary (per node currently, per cache planned). > Dictionary is never shared between nodes. As data patterns shift, > dictionary rotation is also planned. > > With Zstd, the best dictionary size seems

Re: Compression prototype

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 1:16 AM, Ilya Kasnacheev wrote: > Hello! > > The compression is per-binary-object, but dictionary is external, shared > between multiple (millions of) entries and stored alongside compressed > data. > I was under a different impression. If the dictionary is for the whole

Re: Compression prototype

Hi Ilya, This is very useful. Is the compression going to be per-page, in which case the dictionary is going to be kept inside of a page? Or do you have some other design in mind? D. On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 10:36 AM, Ilya Kasnacheev wrote: > Hello again! > > I've been running various

Re: Service Grid new design overview

mined*, that means the function will return the same results for > the same arguments at any node. > > We all agreed with this change because it allows us to reduce messages > for handling each request and making the solution more flexible. > > On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:26 AM Dmitr

Re: MVCC and transactional SQL is merged to master

Very nice! Looking forward to seeing this functionality in 2.7 release. On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 5:22 AM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote: > Great news, Vladimir! Congratulations! > > --Yakov > > 2018-08-30 15:15 GMT+03:00 Vladimir Ozerov : > > > Igniters, > > > > I am glad to announce that we finally

Re: Bots on dev list

Is anyone in the community using or was using Nabble for the dev list communication? Personally, I am subscribed to the dev list and use filters in my email client. D. On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 3:40 AM, Denis Mekhanikov wrote: > Guys, > > Yep, I use filters on my mail account. But the portal is

Re: New committer: Dmitriy Govorukhin

Dmitriy, congrats! Looking forward to many contributions to come. On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 12:35 PM, Denis Magda wrote: > The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Ignite > has invited Dmitriy Govorukhin to become a committer and we are pleased > to announce that he has accepted. > >

Re: Apache Ignite 2.7 release

also hope Igniters, especially Services experts, will join the > discussion > > in the separate topic. Now after a couple of days there is no reaction. > > > > сб, 25 авг. 2018 г. в 0:53, Dmitriy Setrakyan : > > > > > On Fri, Aug 2

Re: Service Grid new design overview

Agree with Val. I think all users would expect that a service is restarted upon a node or cluster restart. Let's make sure we preserve this behavior. D. On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 4:17 PM, Valentin Kulichenko < valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > Guys, > > I believe we should preserve the

Re: Apache Ignite 2.7 release

On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 2:50 PM, Dmitriy Pavlov wrote: > Hi Dmitriy, I suppose it highly depends on how fast community will come to > a consensus about design. So it is up to us to make this happen > I am confused then. If we are still discussing design, then we are miles away. Do you know if

Re: Apache Ignite 2.7 release

Python [1], PHP [2], and Node.js [3] thin clients will get into the > > > > > > release. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > p. > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7782 > &

Re: Binary Client Protocol client hangs in case of OOM on server

Hi, do you have query timeout configured? D. On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 9:09 AM, dmitrievanthony wrote: > When I'm sending Scan Query request via Binary Client Protocol with very > big > page size I get OOM on the server node: > java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space at >

Re: Apache Ignite 2.7 release

le in 2.7 > > В Пн, 20/08/2018 в 13:20 -0700, Dmitriy Setrakyan пишет: > > Hi Nikolay, > > > > Thanks for being the release manager! > > > > I am getting a bit lost in all these tickets. Can we specify some > > high-level tickets, that are not plain bug fixes

Re: ignite PureJavaCrc32 vs java.util.zip.CRC32 bench.

or upgrade AI 2.x to > 3.0? > > On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 11:46 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan > > wrote: > > > I commented in the ticket: https://issues.apache.org/ > > jira/browse/IGNITE-9272 > > > > It if can integrate it correctly, according to my comment, in 2.

Re: ignite PureJavaCrc32 vs java.util.zip.CRC32 bench.

I commented in the ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9272 It if can integrate it correctly, according to my comment, in 2.7 release, it would be great. Otherwise, let's plan this change for 3.0 release. D. On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 3:50 AM, Eduard Shangareev <

Re: Apache Ignite 2.7 release

Hi Nikolay, Thanks for being the release manager! I am getting a bit lost in all these tickets. Can we specify some high-level tickets, that are not plain bug fixes, which will be interesting for the community to notice? For example, here are some significant tasks that the community is either

Re: Continuous queries and MVCC

On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 3:18 AM, Vladimir Ozerov wrote: > Folks, > > As you know we are developing multi-version concurrency control for Ignite > caches, which is essentially new mode for transactional cache with snapshot > semantics. One of the most important applications of this mode would be

Re: QueryDetailMetrics for cache-less SQL queries

Ignite we execute queries via cache: > > ignite.cache("Some cache").sqlFieldsQuery("select ... from ..") > > In current Ignite we can execute query directly without using cache as > "gateway". > > And if we execute query directly, metrics not

Re: Wrong off-heap size is reported for a node

Is there a blocker ticket for 2.7? On Thu, Aug 16, 2018, 19:59 Denis Magda wrote: > Igniters, > > Was troubleshooting an Ignite deployment today and couldn't find out from > the logs what was the actual off-heap space used. > > Those were the given memory resoures (Ignite 2.6): > > [2018-08-16

Re: Spark SQL Table Name Resolution

Stuart, can you please move the ticket into PATCH_AVAILABLE state? You need to click "Submit Patch" button in Jira. D. On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 10:22 AM, Stuart Macdonald wrote: > Here's the initial pull request for this issue, please review and let me > know your feedback. I had to combine the

Re: QueryDetailMetrics for cache-less SQL queries

Evgeny, what is a "cache-less" SQL query? D. On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 6:36 AM, Evgenii Zhuravlev wrote: > Hi Igniters, > > I've started to work on adding QueryDetailMetrics for cache-less SQL > queries(issue https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6677) and found > that it's required to

Re: This morning I added ssl support to...

On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 8:39 AM, Paul Anderson wrote: > Wonderful... I also have Netdata integration... (producing netdata charts > straight from ignite) if you are interested... > > http://my-netdata.io Yes, we are interested very much.

Re: Peer review: Victory over Patch Available debt

Great idea! Review is not only meant for the committers, but for everyone in the community. Committers are only responsible for final reviews and merges. D. On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 7:29 AM, Dmitriy Pavlov wrote: > Hi Igniters, > > For a long time review queue in the community is quite long.

Re: Page replacement policy improvements (when persistent is enabled)

On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 2:27 AM, Vladimir Ozerov wrote: > Dima, > > None database I know use separate regions for index pages due to the reason > I expressed above. Instead, they split all pages into two groups - hot and > cold. With certain rules on how to move pages inside and between these >

Re: Page replacement policy improvements (when persistent is enabled)

On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 2:01 AM, Vladimir Ozerov wrote: > Hi Dima, > > Putting index pages in separate region is wrong approach, because data > pages may be equally important on certain workloads, especially in > heap-organized databases, such as Ignite Never seen a use case where the data

Re: IEP-22: Direct Data Load proposal

On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 1:24 AM, Vladimir Ozerov wrote: > Hi Denis, > > This IEP is mostly about how we work with our own indexes and pages. So 3rd > party DB is out of question. > Why? I think 3rd party DB will be supported automatically with CacheStore. However, do we need to do something

Re: StandaloneWalRecordsIterator: support iteration from custom pointer

Agree, this should be a great performance boost. On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 10:17 AM, Dmitriy Pavlov wrote: > Hi Ivan, > > I agree that providing WAL pointer is the better option. Initially, > Standalone WAL iterator was developed for debugging utility, so a set of > files was perfectly OK. > >

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [1657700] needs to be handled

Pavel, has a blocker for 2.7 been filed? On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 6:19 AM, Dmitriy Pavlov wrote: > Hi Igniters, > > I think it is newly introduced failure. There are at least 3 series of > failures in recent runs. Could you please take a look? > > Please respond if you're already investigating

Re: ignite PureJavaCrc32 vs java.util.zip.CRC32 bench.

Has anyone else run the benchmark and reproduced the performance difference? On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 8:16 AM, Dmitriy Pavlov wrote: > It depends. > > CRC is a CPU-intensive operation, while WAL logging and page store write > are mostly about IO speed. > > In the same time, it can make the huge

Re: Breaking change to spatial indexes to migrate to latest H2 version

change package names. > > > > If there are no concerns, I will merge it to master branch in the nearest > > time. > > > > [1] https://apacheignite-sql.readme.io/docs/geospatial-support > > > > On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 4:00 AM Dmitriy Setrakyan > > wrote: >

Re: Service grid redesign

On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 6:10 AM, Nikita Amelchev wrote: > Hello, Igniters. > > I am working on task [1] that would replace serialized service's instance > by service's class name and properties map in {ServiceConfiguration}. > > The task describes that we should use > {String className} + {Map

Re: Does Ignite support java.sql.Array?

On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 3:34 AM, Vladimir Ozerov wrote: > Hi, > > No, we do not support ARRAY data type at the moment. Let's remove it from > docs. > Vladimir, what is the reason for not supporting it? ARRAY is a basic SQL type and not supporting it presents a serious limitation. D.

Re: MVCC and IgniteDataStreamer

On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 4:30 AM, Vladimir Ozerov wrote: > Bypassing WAL will make the whole cache data vulnerable to complete loss in > case of node failure. I would not do this automatically. > Well, in this case I would expect a log message suggesting that there is an option to turn off WAL

Re: Service grid redesign

to 0.1% of users. > And only when you sure it works then replace all v1 with v2. > > So, I vote for versions. > Let's do this in maven way (exact version, range, RELEASE or LATEST) > > чт, 9 авг. 2018 г. в 17:55, Dmitriy Setrakyan : > > > Vyacheslav, > > > > For the c

Re: ConcurrentLinkedHashMap works incorrectly after clear()

On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 8:16 AM, Alexey Goncharuk wrote: > Guys, I think we can definitely change current implementation of CLHM with > a more stable one, but as a temporal solution I see nothing wrong with > throwing an UnsupportedOperationException from clear() method. Ilya already > provided a

Re: DataFrame integration does not support ARRAY type

On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 8:19 AM, Nikolay Izhikov wrote: > Dmitriy, I will take care of this ticket in a few days. > Great!

Re: Data regions on client nodes

Pavlov : > > > I used to think that OS allocates pages not immediately after call to > > allocate(), but only during first touch of each page. > > > > I'm not sure every OS provides guaranee that 'allocated' memory will > never > > cause OOME. Please correct me i

Re: Service grid redesign

m. > > > [1] https://www.thbs.com/thbs-insights/soa-service- > versioning-best-practices > [2] https://www.ibm.com/blogs/bluemix/2017/08/rapidly- > developing-applications-part-6-exposing-and-versioning-apis/ > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6069 > On Th

Re: Service grid redesign

; On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 4:41 PM Denis Mekhanikov > > wrote: > > > > > > I don't think, that we really need this feature. > > > It seems to me, that if you want to use a different implementation of a > > > service, you can assign a different name to it. > >

Re: Service grid redesign

On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 4:41 AM, Vyacheslav Daradur wrote: > Hi, Igniters! > > I found a ticket about a service’s versioning [1]. > > It’s out of scope IEP-17, but if we are going to implement this > feature we should build a base in the first iteration of IEP-17 > because of change messages

Re: DataFrame integration does not support ARRAY type

Would be nice if someone in the community would pick this ticket up. On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 1:19 AM, Nikolay Izhikov wrote: > Hello, Valentin. > > Yes, this is a bug. > > Ticket created - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9229 > > В Вт, 31/07/2018 в 16:01 -0700, Valentin Kulichenko

Re: Metrics for MVCC caches

I think we should be updating the IEP with metrics specifications in parallel. D. On Wed, Aug 8, 2018, 05:32 Roman Kondakov wrote: > Hi Ivan! > > In my opinion we need to preserve the essence of the metrics: if we > didn't consider dirty writes as updates before MVCC implementation, we > also

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [1570331] needs to be handled

y agree. IMO, JIRA priorities do not have much > effect on community members, do it? > > Sincerely, > Dmitriy Pavlov > > вт, 7 авг. 2018 г. в 14:00, Dmitriy Setrakyan : > > > Maxim, if it is a new failure, why is it filed as Minor and is not > assigned > > to any release

Re: Data regions on client nodes

gt; and it calculates as: > > > > > > > > > > > > Math.max((maxSize - startSize) / (SEG_CNT - 1), 256L * 1024 * > 1024) > > > > > > > > > > > > But, I'm agree with Val. It's better to allocate memory only when > > >

Re: Metrics for MVCC caches

Ivan, To your 2nd question, can you suggest a few MVCC metrics to get the discussion started? D. On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 9:17 AM, Павлухин Иван wrote: > Hi Igniters, > > I am working on cache metrics support for caches with enabled MVCC. As you > may know, during MVCC transaction execution

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [1570331] needs to be handled

Maxim, if it is a new failure, why is it filed as Minor and is not assigned to any release? I would suggest that any new failure should be filed as a Blocker and assigned to the next release. D. On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 12:55 AM, Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > Igniters, > > Seems this is a new

Re: Page replacement policy improvements (when persistent is enabled)

Vladimir, Are we only counting timestamp of the last access? In that case, it would create a problem. We should also count number of times a page has been touched within a certain time frame, e.g. last hour or so. In this case, index pages would not be evicted as they get touched the most. I

Re: Ignite as distributed file storage

give user possibility to adjust his own marshallers (like Jackson, Jaxb, > etc.) to marshal/unmarshal his blob classes from/to byte[] arrays. > No major changes in public API are required, it can be pluggable component. > > > 2018-08-03 0:25 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan

Re: Code inspection

On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 7:49 AM, Dmitriy Pavlov wrote: > > I understand it is not so Apache-way from my side to ask volunteers to do > some things (instead of contributing it by myself). Dmitriy, I am not sure why you feel this is not the Apache way. No one can do everything themselves. You

Re: Removing "fabric" from Ignite binary package name

erations > > with no rush > > > > > > > > > On 3 Aug 2018, at 09:50, Vladimir Ozerov wrote: > > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > Can you please explain the problem with TC and artifacts? Can we just > > > rename final artifa

Re: Removing "fabric" from Ignite binary package name

> > So, proposal is to stop this discussion and start refactoring. > > I do not see any pitfalls and ready to assist if necessary. > > чт, 2 авг. 2018 г. в 5:14, Dmitriy Setrakyan : > > > I vote to remove the fabric from the build in the easiest way possible. > Can &

Re: Ignite as distributed file storage

On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 1:08 AM, Pavel Kovalenko wrote: > Dmitriy, > > I still don't understand why do you think that it will be file system? > In all my previous messages I emphasized that this storage shouldn't be > considered as a file system. It's just a large data storage, whose entities >

Re: Upgrading Ignite to JCache 1.1

t; > > > > > > > чт, 14 июн. 2018 г. в 12:48, Александр Меньшиков < > > > > > sharple...@gmail.com > > > > > > >: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Igniters, > > > > >

Re: Ignite as distributed file storage

ed is almost precisely what IGFS does. It has > a > > > >> cache > > > >> > for > > > >> > > metadata, split binary data in chunks with intelligent affinity > > > >> routing. > > > >> > In > > > &g

Re: Removing "fabric" from Ignite binary package name

> And this matter should be jugged by the community: currently we have (if > our voices are equal) 1:1 with Anton about it. > > > > > > On 1 Aug 2018, at 22:28, Dmitriy Setrakyan > wrote: > > > > Let's focus on what is important here. Our users do not care about ou

Re: Removing "fabric" from Ignite binary package name

e) is required due to heavy hardcode of > “fabric” in such systems. > > > > On 1 Aug 2018, at 21:55, Dmitriy Setrakyan > wrote: > > > > OK, so what is the plan? How do we get rid of the fabric name? > > > > D. > > > > On Wed, Aug 1, 2018

Re: Removing "fabric" from Ignite binary package name

m code. > > > > > > > > > ср, 1 авг. 2018 г. в 9:39, Peter Ivanov : > > > > > >> The task was ready long ago, but community failed to review and merge > it > > >> ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ > > >> Not being a committer, my capabilities of introducing s

Re: Removing "fabric" from Ignite binary package name

>>>>>>>>> The “fabric” word is being removed from all over the > places > > > and > > > > >>>> needs > > > > >>>>>>>> to > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> be removed from the e

Re: Apache Ignite tickets with empty description & dev list references

Completely agree. When filing a ticket, we must all understand that we are asking the community to work on it. Without a clear description nobody will be able to pick up the ticket. D. On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 7:02 AM, Dmitriy Pavlov wrote: > Hi Igniters, > > I would like to ask everyone in the

Re: Assign JIRA tickets to someone else

Dmitriy, I would agree with everything you are saying. There are some tickets, however, that cannot be done by just anyone and preferably have to be looked at by certain domain experts. In those cases only it would be OK to assign a ticket explicitly in my view. For all other cases we should

Re: Thin Client lib: Python

e user with some basic > connection generators instead of what is done in my current connection > failover example. > > > On 07/27/2018 07:41 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: > >> Dmitriy, >> >> I would stop using the word "hashcode" in this conte

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >