Igniters,
Here is the list of actual release BLOCKER issues: [1] Keep in mind unfinished discussion about internal classes IGNITE-12456 [2] Cluster Data Store grid gets Corrupted for Load test *[Unassigned]* OPEN IGNITE-12398 Apache Ignite Cluster(Amazon S3 Based Discovery) Nodes getting down [Emmanouil Gkatziouras] IN PROGRESS IGNITE-12580 NPE in GridMetricManager [Nikolay Izhikov] PATCH AVAILABLE IGNITE-12489 Error during purges by expiration: Unknown page type [Anton Kalashnikov] OPEN [1] http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Internal-classes-are-exposed-in-public-API-td45146.html [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12456 [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12398 [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12580 [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12489 On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 19:25, Maxim Muzafarov <mmu...@apache.org> wrote: > Andrey, > > I've looked through those changes [1] and now they look good to me. > Let's do the following: > > 1. Get a fresh TC.Bot visa > 2. Merge these changes to the master branch. > 3. After that and 3-day stabilization cherry-pick to 2.8 > > Should we wait for benchmarks? I think at this release stage any > additional benchmarks can eliminate our risks with extending scope. > We've already had one - [2] (2.7.6 compared to 2.8). > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12576 > [2] > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.8#ApacheIgnite2.8-Benchmarks > > On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 23:58, Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > Andrey. > > > > > My choice: correctness over performance > > > > I don’t think we should select performance OR correctness here. > > It seems we can got both. > > > > > May be we should rollback all metrics related changes because we don't > have benchmark results > > > > I perform benchmarking for initial refactoring of > TcpCommunicationMetricsListener. > > Initial refactoring of TcpCommunicationMetricsListener doesn’t bring any > performance drop according to the results of the tests I performed. > > > > I want to perform benchmarking just to be sure everything OK. > > Please, wait while I gather benchmark results for this PR. > > > > > 27 янв. 2020 г., в 22:33, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> написал(а): > > > > > >> We still can’t accept patches that badly affects the performance of > TcpCommuncationMetricsListener. > > >> So we should perform yardstick tests before the merge. > > > > > > Absolutely all metrics are on the hot path. They inevitably affect > > > performance and this case is the same. May be we should rollback all > > > metrics related changes because we don't have benchmark results& > > > > > >> I can help to run yardstick benchmarks if you don’t have free servers > to do it. > > > > > > I don't need help in benchmarking. Once again, еhe current behavior is > > > incorrect and should be fixed regardless of performance. > > > > > > Or... this functionality should be removed if performance is more > > > important. In case of incorrect behavior it is the best option. > > > > > > My choice: correctness over performance. > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 10:02 PM Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org> > wrote: > > >> > > >>> I think it could be fixed easily by adding metricsEnabled flag to > TcpCommunicationSpi. > > >> > > >> We still can’t accept patches that badly affects the performance of > TcpCommuncationMetricsListener. > > >> So we should perform yardstick tests before the merge. > > >> > > >> I can help to run yardstick benchmarks if you don’t have free servers > to do it. > > >> > > >> > > >>> 27 янв. 2020 г., в 21:47, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> написал(а): > > >>> > > >>>>> "If it doesn’t work, it doesn’t matter how fast it doesn’t work." > (c) > > >>>> Please, clarify, what do you mean by «doesn’t work»? > > >>>> Are there any unresolved bugs? > > >>> > > >>> Obviously some communication metrics can't be monitored or analyzed > > >>> retrospectively due to changing node ID during node restart. It's > bug. > > >>> > > >>>>> User can disable metrics if it will affect performance. > > >>>> Users can’t disable TcpCommunicationListener nor in any release nor > in current master so we should change this code carefully > > >>> > > >>> This is another bug. I think it could be fixed easily by adding > > >>> metricsEnabled flag to TcpCommunicationSpi. > > >>> > > >>> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 9:17 PM Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org> > wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> Andrey. > > >>>> > > >>>>> "If it doesn’t work, it doesn’t matter how fast it doesn’t work." > (c) > > >>>> > > >>>> Please, clarify, what do you mean by «doesn’t work»? > > >>>> Are there any unresolved bugs? > > >>>> > > >>>>> IGINTE-12576 affects it minimally > > >>>> > > >>>> All I asking for is to confirm this statement with the benchmark > results. > > >>>> > > >>>>> User can disable metrics if it will affect performance. > > >>>> > > >>>> Users can’t disable TcpCommunicationListener nor in any release nor > in current master so we should change this code carefully > > >>>> > > >>>> > https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/ignite-2.7.6/modules/core/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/spi/communication/tcp/TcpCommunicationSpi.java#L1178 > > >>>> > > >>>>> 27 янв. 2020 г., в 20:40, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> > написал(а): > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Nikolay, > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> But, we must gather yardstick benchmark results for PR(comparing > to current master) before merge to ensure there is no performance drop. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> "If it doesn’t work, it doesn’t matter how fast it doesn’t work." > (c) > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I believe that benchmarks ignite-2.7.6 vs ignite-2.8 will show > > >>>>> noticeable drop in performance for ignite-2.8. But it is cumulative > > >>>>> effect and IGINTE-12576 affects it minimally. > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> Note, that these metrics updated on each communication message. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Metrics are not free at all. User can disable metrics if it will > > >>>>> affect performance. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 8:23 PM Nikolay Izhikov < > nizhi...@apache.org> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Hello, Andrey. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I’m OK to include these changes to 2.8. > > >>>>>> I don’t review PR, but the ticket description makes sense to me. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> But, we must gather yardstick benchmark results for PR(comparing > to current master) before merge to ensure there is no performance drop. > > >>>>>> Note, that these metrics updated on each communication message. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> 27 янв. 2020 г., в 18:19, Andrey Gura <ag...@apache.org> > написал(а): > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Igniters, > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> I want to add one more issue to the Apache Ignite 2.8 release > scope [1]. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> The problem is impossibility of using communication metrics > gathered > > >>>>>>> for nodes in the cluster because node ID will changed in case of > > >>>>>>> restart. Obvious solution is using consistent ID instead of node > ID. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> PR is already implemented and ready for review. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12576 > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 4:06 PM Maxim Muzafarov < > mmu...@apache.org> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Folks, > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> I've cherry-picked these issues [1] [2] to the 2.8 release > branch. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12540 > > >>>>>>>> Update versions of vulnerable dependencies > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12486 > > >>>>>>>> Truncation of archived WAL segments doesn't work > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 11:08, Ivan Bessonov < > bessonov...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Hi igniters, > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> there's a potential data corruption fix that I'd like you to > include in the > > >>>>>>>>> next release: > > >>>>>>>>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12486https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12486 > > >>>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12486> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Can you please cherry-pick it? Thank you! > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> ср, 22 янв. 2020 г. в 17:45, Pavel Tupitsyn < > ptupit...@apache.org>: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Good idea about pre-release build of ignite-2.8 branch. > > >>>>>>>>>> However, I would not name it `rc`, since it is not really a > release > > >>>>>>>>>> candidate. Make it `pre0` or something like that. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> For Ignite.NET I've uploaded pre-release NuGet packages built > from current > > >>>>>>>>>> ignite-2.8 branch: > > >>>>>>>>>> > https://www.nuget.org/packages/Apache.Ignite/2.8.0-alpha20200122 > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 3:09 PM Ilya Kasnacheev < > ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Hello! > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> I have committed the bumping of essential dependencies' > versions: > > >>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12540 > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Would you mind including this change into the scope of 2.8? > No point of > > >>>>>>>>>>> shipping known problematic JARs in our deliverable. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Regards, > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>> Ilya Kasnacheev > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> ср, 22 янв. 2020 г. в 14:00, Maxim Muzafarov < > mmu...@apache.org>: > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Alexey, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Sure, I've just thought about it too a few days ago. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 at 12:09, Anton Vinogradov < > a...@apache.org> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Good Idea, this will also check that the release process > is alive. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 12:04 PM Alexey Goncharuk < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Folks, Maxim, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you mind if I build the current state of ignite-2.8 > branch and > > >>>>>>>>>>>> upload a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> maven staging as rc0 (step 4.3.2 of the release process)? > I want > > >>>>>>>>>> run > > >>>>>>>>>>>> some > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests for the fixes that are already included to the > branch. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> вт, 21 янв. 2020 г. в 14:28, Maxim Muzafarov < > mmu...@apache.org>: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Folks, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think both of these issues [1] [2] are critical to 2.8 > release > > >>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we must include them. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12547 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Excessive AtomicLong instantiations lead to GC pressure. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12530 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pages list caching can cause IgniteOOME when the > checkpoint is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> triggered by "too many dirty pages" reason. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 at 19:00, Alex Plehanov < > > >>>>>>>>>>> plehanov.a...@gmail.com > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Guys, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is an issue [1] caused by page list caching [2], > which > > >>>>>>>>>> also > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> affects > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.8 release. IgniteOutOfMemoryException can be thrown > in some > > >>>>>>>>>>> cases > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (data > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> region is small, a checkpoint is triggered by "too many > dirty > > >>>>>>>>>>>> pages" > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reason > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and pages list cache is rather big). > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The fix is ready and merged to master, I suggest to > include > > >>>>>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>>>>> fix to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2.8 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release. What do you think? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12530 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6930 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> пн, 20 янв. 2020 г. в 12:57, Alexey Goncharuk < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I took a quick look at IGNITE-12456 and I am not sure > it's > > >>>>>>>>>>> about > > >>>>>>>>>>>> data > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> corruption. In the attached logs blocked system > threads are > > >>>>>>>>>>>> reported, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> however, there is no enough information to investigate > the > > >>>>>>>>>>> issue > > >>>>>>>>>>>> (the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> full > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thread dump was not attached). I asked the ticket > creator to > > >>>>>>>>>>>> attach > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> missing > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pieces. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Should we consider moving this ticket to a next > release? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> пн, 20 янв. 2020 г. в 08:54, Zhenya Stanilovsky > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <arzamas...@mail.ru.invalid > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim, performance fix issue [1] already in master, > if no > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> objections, can > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> u merge it into 2.8 ? Thanks ! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12547 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Igniters, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here is the actual list of BLOCKER release issues: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGNITE-12456 Cluster Data Store grid gets Corrupted > for > > >>>>>>>>>> Load > > >>>>>>>>>>>> test > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *[Unassigned]* OPEN > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGNITE-12489 Error during purges by expiration: > Unknown > > >>>>>>>>>> page > > >>>>>>>>>>>> type* > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [Unassigned]* OPEN > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGNITE-8641 SpringDataExample should use > > >>>>>>>>>> example-ignite.xml > > >>>>>>>>>>>> config > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *[Unassigned]* OPEN > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGNITE-12398 Apache Ignite Cluster(Amazon S3 Based > > >>>>>>>>>>> Discovery) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nodes > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> getting > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> down [Emmanouil Gkatziouras] OPEN > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGNITE-9184 Cluster hangs during concurrent node > client > > >>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>> server > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nodes > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> restart [Dmitriy Sorokin] IN PROGRESS > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGNITE-12553 [IEP-35] public Java metric API > Improvement > > >>>>>>>>>>>> [Nikolay > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Izhikov] > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Blocker IN PROGRESS > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGNITE-12227 Default auto-adjust baseline enabled > flag > > >>>>>>>>>>>> calculated > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> incorrectly [Anton Kalashnikov] PATCH AVAILABLE > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGNITE-12470 Pme-free switch feature should be > > >>>>>>>>>> deactivatable > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [Sergei > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ryzhov] PATCH AVAILABLE > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IGNITE-12552 [IEP-35] Expose MetricRegistry to the > public > > >>>>>>>>>>> API > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Improvement > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [Nikolay Izhikov] PATCH AVAILABLE > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12456 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12489 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [3] > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-8641 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [8] > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12398 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [3] > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9184 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [6] > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12553 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [7] > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12227 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [9] > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12470 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [5] > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12552 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 at 19:11, Sergey Antonov < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> antonovserge...@gmail.com > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Conflicts in pr [1] are resolved. TC Run all is > started. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/7238 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> пт, 17 янв. 2020 г. в 16:04, Sergey Antonov < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> antonovserge...@gmail.com > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maxim, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will do that on monday (20/01). > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> пт, 17 янв. 2020 г. в 13:08, Maxim Muzafarov < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mmu...@apache.org > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sergey, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you, please, resolve the PR conflicts [1] [2]? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/7238 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] > > >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11256 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 16:59, Ilya Kasnacheev < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have bumped beanutils and re-ran Cassandra > Store > > >>>>>>>>>>>> tests. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> please > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> comment on the ticket? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that fixing ZooKeeper is too much effort > > >>>>>>>>>>>> (there's > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chaos > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jackson vs. jackson-asl), maybe it should be > split > > >>>>>>>>>> up > > >>>>>>>>>>>> as a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separate > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ticket > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be done later. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ilya Kasnacheev > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 15 янв. 2020 г. в 18:31, Vladimir Pligin < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vova199...@yandex.ru > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> : > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, Ilya. It would be really great to have > > >>>>>>>>>> your > > >>>>>>>>>>>> patch > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> included > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into 2.8 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> scope. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to give my two cent as well. For > example > > >>>>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>>>>>> have > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vulnerable > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dependencies here: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> modules/cassandra/store/pom.xml - > > >>>>>>>>>> commons-beanutils > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> modules/zookeeper/pom.xml - transitive Jackson > > >>>>>>>>>> from > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Curator > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd suggest to uprgrade > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> commons-beanutils:commons-beanutils > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.9.4 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> override > > >>>>>>>>>> com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind > > >>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> our > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> common > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jackson > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version from other modules. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BR, Sergey Antonov > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BR, Sergey Antonov > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>> Sincerely yours, > > >>>>>>>>> Ivan Bessonov > > >>>>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > >
