Thank you! Many thanks to Dmitry for his attitude and dedication!
On 24.07.2017 16:47, Semyon Boikov wrote:
Evgeniy and Dmitry, thanks for the fix! Merged into master.
Thanks!
On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi Evgeniy,
From my point of view there are no problems with this fix. My testing
didn't show any issues with fix.
Igniters,
Are there any additional comments on this issue? Can we proceed?
Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov
чт, 20 июл. 2017 г. в 20:04, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com>:
Hi Evgeniy,
Thank you for such a careful research of the issue.
If don’t mind, I would like to do additional tests with this PR changes.
I will come back with result in couple of days
Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov
чт, 20 июл. 2017 г. в 19:18, Evgeniy Ignatiev <
yevgeniy.ignat...@gmail.com
:
onIgniteStart was called in Ignite 1.X in
GridPluginComponent#onKernalStart as one of the calls to the component
callbacks, probably the order in which components were called, ensured
that contract of PluginProvider#onIgniteStart was not violated. But in
2.0 the GridPluginComponent instances are explicitly skipped from this
cycle (lines 1019-1020 in Ignite 2.0 release source) and PluginProviders
are notified before the internal component callbacks.
As far as I can see the change, that moved PluginProvider#onIgniteStart
notification before component callbacks, was introduced by this commit -
https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/6b7bf97158c097b80bcf5c2150e67a
5210269e6d
- but I have no clue what was the reason.
On 7/20/2017 7:51 PM, Dmitry Pavlov wrote:
Hi Nick,
Thank you for your comment. Was onIgniteStart called after
onKernalStart in
1.9? Or caches were available, but other of initialization was the
same?
Sincerely.
Dmitriy Pavlov
ср, 19 июл. 2017 г. в 17:06, Nick Pordash <nickpord...@gmail.com>:
Hi Dmitriy,
The ticket was a regression from 1.9 to 2.0. I don't think anyone
would be
expecting the behavior in 2.0 as it doesn't align with the javadoc
and
has
only been broken since the 2.0 release.
-Nick
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017, 6:55 AM Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi Evgeniy,
Thank you. Ignite Basic is one suite from approximately 80 suites
that
covers Ignite by automated tests. Which is why I suggested to use
RunAll
chain in ignite 2.0 group. Yes, several tests may fail, especially
if
it
is
flaky tests or failure is related to the specific JIRA issue.
About change itself: This change seems to be very impact. There is
possiblity that many of existing plugins relies on existing order of
initialization. This change may break plugin initialization in
unexpected
manner.
Could we
- fix javadoc according to existing order in code
- find out new solution?
Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov
ср, 19 июл. 2017 г. в 16:40, Evgeniy Ignatiev <
yevgeniy.ignat...@gmail.com
:
http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=720722&;
tab=buildResultsDiv&buildTypeId=IgniteTests_IgniteBasic
- this one - there seem to be no new failed platform tests, other
failed
tests seem to fail in several other reviews too and are unrelated
to
my
changes.
On 19.07.2017 17:35, Dmitry Pavlov wrote:
Hi Evgeniy,
I was not able to find Teamcity run for this change.
Could you please run http://ci.ignite.apache.org test for example
on
branch
pull/2285/head using 'Ignite 2.0 Tests' target 'Run All'.
Or could you please share link to previous run on this changes?
Sincerely,
Dmitriy Pavlov
ср, 19 июл. 2017 г. в 15:26, Anton Vinogradov <a...@apache.org>:
Igniters,
Could somebody review the fix today?
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Evgeniy Ignatiev <
yevgeniy.ignat...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello, Igniters.
Could anyone review my request - https://issues.apache.org/jira
/browse/IGNITE-5123? - My previous pings seems to got lost.
Best regards,
Yevgeniy
