@liyuj Congratulations on finding a Geode doc bug. To get the problem on the official "to do" list, you are hereby encouraged to open a JIRA ticket in the Geode project, citing the 'docs' component. Your original email with Jared's response would serve well as the bug description.
If you'd like to, you can then edit the doc source and submit the fix as a pull request. If not, just filing the JIRA ticket is a good start toward getting the problem fixed. On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 9:29 AM Jared Stewart <stewart.ja...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes, I believe the docs there are out of date and need to be updated. This > change in the naming of deployed jars was introduced in Geode 1.2 by > https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/429. > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 7:27 AM liyuj <18624049...@163.com> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > > https://geode.apache.org/docs/guide/19/configuring/cluster_config/deploying_application_jars.html > > > > This document has such a paragraph: > > > > > > Versioning of JAR Files > > > > When you deploy JAR files to a cluster or member group, the JAR file is > > modified to indicate version information in its name. Each JAR filename > > is prefixed with|vf.gf#|and <http://vf.gf#%7Cand> <http://vf.gf#%7Cand> > contains a version > > number at the end of the > > filename. For example, if you deploy|MyClasses.jar|five times, the > > filename is displayed as|vf.gf#MyClasses.jar#5|when > <http://vf.gf#MyClasses.jar%235%7Cwhen> > > <http://vf.gf#MyClasses.jar%235%7Cwhen> you list all > > deployed jars. > > > > but,in my environment, it is shown as follows: > > > > gfsh>list deployed > > Member | JAR | JAR Location > > ------- | -------------- | > > --------------------------------------------------- > > server1 | ra.jar | /media/liyujue/data/geode/server1/ra.v1.jar > > server1 | mx4j-3.0.2.jar | > > /media/liyujue/data/geode/server1/mx4j-3.0.2.v1.jar > > server2 | ra.jar | /media/liyujue/data/geode/server2/ra.v1.jar > > server2 | mx4j-3.0.2.jar | > > /media/liyujue/data/geode/server2/mx4j-3.0.2.v1.jar > > > > Is the documentation wrong here? > > > > >
