The removal of these methods will not impact anybody during migration to 2.9. Unless you use the Hadoop Accelerator or IGFS in your application. In the latter scenario, well, the integration has already been discontinued and you need to clean your application code before moving forward to 2.9. Anyway, it's highly unlikely that we have any users of the integrations, otherwise, they would show up throughout the year after learning that the integration is no longer supported and discontinued.
Pavel, do you still prefer us merging the changes in Ignite 3.0 or agree to do that in 2.9? - Denis On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 8:56 AM Anton Kalashnikov <kaa....@yandex.ru> wrote: > Hi, > > All of these methods are from IgniteConfiguration: > Hadoop configuration: > - HadoopConfiguration getHadoopConfiguration() > - IgniteConfiguration setHadoopConfiguration(HadoopConfiguration hadoopCfg) > > IGFS (Ignite In-Memory File System) configurations: > - FileSystemConfiguration[] getFileSystemConfiguration > - IgniteConfiguration > setFileSystemConfiguration(FileSystemConfiguration... igfsCfg) > > thread pool size that will be used to process outgoing IGFS messages: > - IgniteConfiguration setIgfsThreadPoolSize(int poolSize) > - int getIgfsThreadPoolSize() > > > Of course, I can leave these methods intact but they will be doing nothing > so API formally wouldn't be changed but, in fact, features would be > removed. Does it make sense? I don't think so and in my opinion, perhaps it > is ok to remove these methods right now if we are ready to remove these > features right now. (but again, if there are some concerns about it, I can > easily to leave these methods with empty implementation) > > -- > Best regards, > Anton Kalashnikov > > > > 22.07.2020, 17:47, "Denis Magda" <dma...@apache.org>: > > Hi Alex, > > > > It's been a year since we voted to discontinue this integration [1] and > it > > wasn't removed from the source code earlier only because of the internal > > dependencies with the ML component. Now all the dependencies are gone and > > Ignite 2.9 is the right version to finish the discontinuation process. It > > would make sense to wait for Ignite 3.0 only there are some breaking > > changes in the APIs that will stay in Ignite. > > > > @Anton Kalashnikov <akalashni...@gridgain.com>, you mentioned that you > > removed some methods from the configuration. Could you please list them > > here? Are they Hadoop-specific or generic? > > > > [1] > > > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-Complete-Discontinuation-of-IGFS-and-Hadoop-Accelerator-td42405.html > > > > - > > Denis > > > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 1:52 AM Alex Plehanov <plehanov.a...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Guys, > >> > >> Any updates here? Looks like we still don't have a consensus about > release > >> version for this patch (already mention it in the release thread). > >> Currently, the ticket is still targeted to 2.9. > >> > >> ср, 15 июл. 2020 г. в 00:40, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org>: > >> > >> > I don't think it's required to wait until Ignite 3.0 to make this > happen. > >> > If I'm not mistaken, we stopped releasing Hadoop binaries and > sources a > >> > long time ago (at least you can't longer find them on the downloads > >> page). > >> > Also, we removed all the mentioning from the documentation and > website. > >> > Nobody complained or requested for a maintenance release since that > time. > >> > Thus, I would remove the integration in 2.9. If anybody shows up > later > >> then > >> > they can use the sources in the 2.8 branch and do whatever they want. > >> > > >> > - > >> > Denis > >> > > >> > > >> > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 3:52 AM Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > We are breaking backwards compatibility, > >> > > so this can be only done for Ignite 3.0, am I right? > >> > > > >> > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 1:46 PM Anton Kalashnikov < > kaa....@yandex.ru> > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > Hi everyone, > >> > > > > >> > > > The task of removal IGFS and Hadoop accelerator is ready to > review.( > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11942) > >> > > > I've already asked some guys to take a look at it but if somebody > >> > > familiar > >> > > > with this part of code, feel free to take a look at the changes > >> > > > too(especially scripts changes). > >> > > > > >> > > > I also think it is good to decide which release it should be > planned > >> > on. > >> > > > This task planned for 2.9 right now but I should notice that > first of > >> > all > >> > > > there are a lot of changes and secondly there are some changes in > >> > public > >> > > > API(removed some methods from configuration). So maybe it makes > sense > >> > to > >> > > > move this ticket to the next release. What do you think? > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > Best regards, > >> > > > Anton Kalashnikov > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > 10.02.2020, 15:45, "Alexey Zinoviev" <zaleslaw....@gmail.com>: > >> > > > > Thank you so you much! Will wait:) > >> > > > > > >> > > > > пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 15:13, Alexey Goncharuk < > >> > > > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>: > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> Got it, then no need to rush, let's wait for the TF-IGFS > >> > decoupling. > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 13:15, Alexey Zinoviev < > >> > > zaleslaw....@gmail.com > >> > > > >: > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > Tensorflow integration uses IGFS, if you have any idea how > to > >> > store > >> > > > files > >> > > > >> > in memory by another way, please suggest something. > >> > > > >> > I hope to decouple Ignite-TF integration to the separate > >> > repository > >> > > > >> before > >> > > > >> > release 2.9 with its own file system over Ignite Caches > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 12:49, Ivan Pavlukhin < > >> > vololo...@gmail.com > >> > > >: > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > Is not it blocked by > >> > > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10292 as > stated > >> > in > >> > > > JIRA? > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > @Alex Zinoviev could you please shed some light on this? > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Best regards, > >> > > > >> > > Ivan Pavlukhin > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > пн, 10 февр. 2020 г. в 12:46, Anton Kalashnikov < > >> > > kaa....@yandex.ru > >> > > > >: > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > I found the correct ticket for such activity - > >> > > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11942 > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > >> > > > Best regards, > >> > > > >> > > > Anton Kalashnikov > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > 10.02.2020, 12:16, "Anton Kalashnikov" < > kaa....@yandex.ru > >> >: > >> > > > >> > > > > Hello. > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > I created a ticket for this activity - > >> > > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12647. And > if > >> we > >> > > are > >> > > > >> still > >> > > > >> > > in consensus I'll do it at the nearest time(I've already > had > >> > the > >> > > > >> prepared > >> > > > >> > > code). > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > -- > >> > > > >> > > > > Best regards, > >> > > > >> > > > > Anton Kalashnikov > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > 10.02.2020, 12:07, "Alexey Goncharuk" < > >> > > > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com > >> > > > >> >: > >> > > > >> > > > >> Folks, > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > > >> I think there is a consensus here, but we did not > remove > >> > > IGFS > >> > > > >> > > neither in > >> > > > >> > > > >> 2.7 nor in 2.8, did we? Should we schedule a > >> corresponding > >> > > > ticket > >> > > > >> > > for 2.9? > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > >
