Re: [DISCUSSION] Remove VS project from C++

2021-09-15 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
ks. > > And don't forget about vcpkg [1]. Even microsoft goes towards cmake and > make even package manager for it. > And it works great, I've tried with Ignite C++. > > [1] -- https://github.com/microsoft/vcpkg > > ср, 15 сент. 2021 г. в 12:46, Pavel Tupitsyn : >

Re: [DISCUSSION] Remove VS project from C++

2021-09-15 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
ck if all of them are present in VS files > > First of all, BOOST_TEST is not NUnit :) Secondly, we can do that, but it > > is not so easy as it is in .NET. > > Yes, we can use boost libraries in tests, but why we should do it? Why we > > should invest our time in

Re: [DISCUSSION] Remove VS project from C++

2021-09-15 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
eferable tech stack. > > > > > > > On 15 Sep 2021, at 12:02, Ivan Pavlukhin wrote: > > > > > > +1 for removing VS project > > > > > > 2021-09-15 12:01 GMT+03:00, Nikolay Izhikov : > > >> +1 > > >> > > >>> 15 се

Re: [DISCUSSION] Remove VS project from C++

2021-09-15 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
-1 This may become an obstacle for some of the users and I'm not sure how it improves anything. > 3. Sometimes even maintainers forget to add test sources to VS projects [1] We can add an automatic check for this (in form of a test). On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 10:28 AM Zhenya Stanilovsky wrote: >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.11.0 RC2

2021-09-14 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
ectory. Why are we shipping > something which is not for publishing in our binary package? I've also not > heard of it before. > > Regards, > -- > Ilya Kasnacheev > > > вт, 14 сент. 2021 г. в 12:37, Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > Ilya, > > > > > When

Re: Deprecating LOCAL cache

2021-09-14 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
I agree with Ivan, let's return an error on any attempt to create or use a LOCAL cache from thin clients. On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 2:25 PM Ivan Daschinsky wrote: > I am not about creation per se, but creation from a thin client side. > > This feature simply doesn't work as expected, broken and im

Re: [VOTE] Release pyignite 0.5.2-rc0

2021-09-14 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
> +1 > Отправлено с iPhone Nikolay, did you test pyignite from your iPhone? Does it work? :) On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 12:22 PM Николай Ижиков wrote: > +1 > > Отправлено с iPhone > > > 14 сент. 2021 г., в 11:39, Pavel Tupitsyn > написал(а): > > > > +1 >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.11.0 RC2

2021-09-14 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
I see, both tickets are fixed in 2.10 and 2.11. > > > > > > вт, 14 сент. 2021 г. в 04:13, 18624049226<18624049...@163.com>: > > > > > >> Should the following two issue be merged into the ignite-2.11 branch? > > >> > > >> https

Re: [VOTE] Release pyignite 0.5.2-rc0

2021-09-14 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
+1 Checked on Ubuntu 20.04, ran a few examples. On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 11:12 AM Ivan Daschinsky wrote: > +1 from me > Checked on windows 10 x86_64 (visual studio 2017) and ubuntu 20.04 x86_64 > and on pythons 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9 (both win and linux): > 1. Installing from source -- passe > 2. Bu

Re: Ban Java Streams usage in Ignite 3 code

2021-09-13 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
To summarize: We don't ban streams but use them with caution, avoid on hot paths. The decision is up to the author and reviewer. Thanks for the discussion! On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 10:25 PM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > Konstantin, > > > The performance penalty ... is 25%, not 8 tim

Re: Ban Java Streams usage in Ignite 3 code

2021-09-13 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
only one. > > >> > > > >> > That said, I don't think that banning something is productive. At > the > > >> same > > >> > time, we should make sure we pay more attention to performance > during > > >> > reviews. May

Re: Tuple equality in Ignite 3.x

2021-09-13 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
ssues with comparison of binary objects in 2.x > > Best Regards, > Igor > > > On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 4:04 PM Pavel Tupitsyn > wrote: > > > Igniters, > > > > Tuple in Ignite 3.x is a replacement for BinaryObject in Ignite 2.x. > > Let's discuss equali

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.11.0 RC2

2021-09-13 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
+1 Downloaded binary packages, started a cluster with a few nodes, tested new .NET examples. On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 11:21 AM Zhenya Stanilovsky wrote: > > > Thanks Maxim ! > I tries to compare this ver with 2.10 (some performance tests with > persistence and transactional\atomic payload) and s

Re: Replace Map with List and Iterable in KeyValueView Ignite 3 APIs

2021-09-10 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
t said, I would not change this API in Java. In other > > > languages, however, we can consider this. > > > > > > -Val > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 8:01 AM Alexei Scherbakov < > > > alexey.scherbak...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >

Re: Replace Map with List and Iterable in KeyValueView Ignite 3 APIs

2021-09-09 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
ange this API in Java. In other > languages, however, we can consider this. > > -Val > > On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 8:01 AM Alexei Scherbakov < > alexey.scherbak...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Pavel, > > > > I think the current API looks more natural compared to your pr

Tuple equality in Ignite 3.x

2021-09-09 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Igniters, Tuple in Ignite 3.x is a replacement for BinaryObject in Ignite 2.x. Let's discuss equality and sorting. - We have multiple Tuple implementations, and our API allows custom, user-defined Tuples as well (which can be useful for performance when bridging Ignite with another system or impo

Replace Map with List and Iterable in KeyValueView Ignite 3 APIs

2021-09-09 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Igniters, I propose to replace Map with List in getAll and invokeAll, and Iterable in putAll APIs of Ignite 3.x KeyValueView. 1. Performance putAll simply iterates over the map, we can easily accept Iterable instead. Iterable can be implemented over anything, it can lazily read data from a file o

Re: Sync vs async APIs in Ignite 3

2021-09-09 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
wrote: > >> You can mix them easily. > This is far from easily (you have already mentioned continuation problem), > but for i.e. in python it is absolutely not. > For kotlin it is a little bit easier, but also not fluent and a little bit > ugly. > > чт, 9 сент. 2021

Re: Sync vs async APIs in Ignite 3

2021-09-09 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
> [1] -- > https://elizarov.medium.com/how-do-you-color-your-functions-a6bb423d936d > > ср, 8 сент. 2021 г. в 22:33, Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > To put it another way: > > - true sync operation completes by itself > > - sync-over-async operation requires another thread to

Re: Sync vs async APIs in Ignite 3

2021-09-08 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
To put it another way: - true sync operation completes by itself - sync-over-async operation requires another thread to complete On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 10:15 PM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > Val, > > That's exactly what I have in mind. > Yes, we block the user thread, but then we sho

Re: Sync vs async APIs in Ignite 3

2021-09-08 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
nding, it only blocks the user's thread. > > Am I wrong? Or you have a different implementation in mind? > > -Val > > On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 12:50 AM Pavel Tupitsyn > wrote: > > > Val, > > > > Agree with your points. > > > > > > >

Re: Ban Java Streams usage in Ignite 3 code

2021-09-08 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
gt; > Konstantin Orlov > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > On 8 Sep 2021, at 12:23, Ivan Bessonov > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Hello Igniters, > > > >> > > > > >

Re: Ban Java Streams usage in Ignite 3 code

2021-09-08 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
; Streams must be used cautiously, developers should know whether they > > write hot methods or not. And if methods are not hot, code simplicity > must > > be > > the first priority. I don't want Ignite 3 code to look like Ignite 2 > code, > > where > > people

Ban Java Streams usage in Ignite 3 code

2021-09-08 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Igniters, Java streams are known to be slower and cause more GC pressure than an equivalent loop. Below is a simple filter/map/reduce scenario (code [1]): * Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units * StreamVsLoopBenchmark.loopSum

Re: Sync vs async APIs in Ignite 3

2021-09-08 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Val, Agree with your points. > async API should be primary It should be noted that all our APIs are inherently async, because thin client is implemented asynchronously. > with the sync version build on top We should document somehow that sync APIs are based on async ones, because this may be

Re: IEP-78 .NET Thin Client for Ignite 3.0

2021-09-07 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
/jira/browse/IGNITE-15430 [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15431 On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 10:02 PM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > Val, > > Would you like me to start the discussion about sync-over-async in Ignite > 3 Java APIs, or do you plan to do it yourself? > > On Fri,

Re: IEP-78 .NET Thin Client for Ignite 3.0

2021-09-06 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
've looked at the IEP and the public API - looks good to me. > > > > > > Quick question - do you plan to add sync methods to the interfaces, or > > > you're thinking to only leave async? If the latter, what are the > > arguments > > >

Re: IEP-78 .NET Thin Client for Ignite 3.0

2021-09-03 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
esting the same for Java as well (or at least having a discussion about > this). > > -Val > > On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 10:08 AM Pavel Tupitsyn > wrote: > > > Igniters, > > > > Please review the IEP [1] and the PoC [2] for .NET Thin Client in Ignite > > 3

IEP-78 .NET Thin Client for Ignite 3.0

2021-09-02 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Igniters, Please review the IEP [1] and the PoC [2] for .NET Thin Client in Ignite 3.0. [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-78+.NET+Thin+Client [2] https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/306

Re: Ignite 3 Java Thin Client configuration: HOCON and ignite-configuration module

2021-08-22 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
why someone will use it. For example, if I use micronaut or > spring, > > this dependency will make me angry > > > > сб, 21 авг. 2021 г., 16:13 Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > > > Ivan, the purpose is to be able to configure thin client with HOCON. > > > >

Re: Ignite 3 Java Thin Client configuration: HOCON and ignite-configuration module

2021-08-21 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
сб, 21 авг. 2021 г., 13:32 Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > Igniters, > > > > I'd like to discuss Java thin client configuration API in Ignite 3.0. > > > > On one hand, it would be nice to use codegen approach from > > ignite-configuration module, > &

Ignite 3 Java Thin Client configuration: HOCON and ignite-configuration module

2021-08-21 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Igniters, I'd like to discuss Java thin client configuration API in Ignite 3.0. On one hand, it would be nice to use codegen approach from ignite-configuration module, and have consistent config APIs across servers and thin clients. On the other hand, that API may seem a bit confusing, because f

Re: [DISCUSSION] Code style for Ignite 3

2021-08-20 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
+1, as long as 100% of the rules are checked automatically. On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 4:00 PM Andrey Gura wrote: > Looks good to me. But Idea configuration for style check is not > enough. It helps developers but does not automate style checking. > > Checkstyle project provides ready to use config

Re: Ignite 3 async continuation executor

2021-08-19 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
3.x On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 9:31 AM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > Alexander, > > > it is not expected that a user may want to specify their own custom > executor > > That would be nice, but I'm not sure if this fits into Ignite 3 > configuration approach. > I'd

Re: Ignite 3 async continuation executor

2021-08-19 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
://hypi.io > > > On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 5:08 PM Alexander Polovtcev < > alexpolovt...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Pavel, thanks for the response. Do I understand correctly that it is not > > expected that a user may want to specify their own custom executor? > &g

Re: Ignite 3 async continuation executor

2021-08-19 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
"asyncContinuationExecutor": "commonPool" }, "network": { ... } } On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 6:29 PM Alexander Polovtcev wrote: > Hi, Pavel! > > Can you please provide an example (e.g. HOCON snippet) of how this > configuration i

Ignite 3 async continuation executor

2021-08-19 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Igniters, I propose to add a configurable async continuation executor for public APIs to Ignite 3 like we have in Ignite 2.x [1] In short, currently, async APIs return a future to the user code. Continuations like "myCode" in "table.getAsync().thenApply(myCode)" will be executed by the same threa

Re: Storing Teamcity projects settings in Version Control

2021-08-17 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
client build depends > on ignite build also. > > > вт, 17 авг. 2021 г. в 18:08, Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > Ivan, > > > > > I'm sorry, but what about storing TC configs in separate repo? > > What are the pros of this approach? What do we gain? > > Sep

Re: Storing Teamcity projects settings in Version Control

2021-08-17 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
provide an example of an open-source project with this approach? On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 6:05 PM Ivan Daschinsky wrote: > I'm sorry, but what about storing TC configs in separate repo? > It is quite common approach. > > вт, 17 авг. 2021 г. в 17:33, Pavel Tupitsyn : > > >

Re: Storing Teamcity projects settings in Version Control

2021-08-17 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Anton, > This will kill repo history. > You'll see dozens of TC config updates vs a single Ignite fix Not really. I'm not suggesting something crazy, this is the modern way to do CI/CD - see GitHub actions, Azure pipelines, etc - you write a config and store it in Git. > Where are you going to a

Re: Storing Teamcity projects settings in Version Control

2021-08-17 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Dmitry, Petr, I think TC config should be stored in the same repo as the corresponding code (2.x config in 2.x repo, 3.x in 3.x, etc). Changes and updates to build scripts and project structure often come together with changes to TC configuration, it would be great to be able to test them by simp

Re: IGNITE-15256 request for review

2021-08-12 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Hi Ivan, Thank you for your contribution! Please see my comments in JIRA. On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 5:54 PM Mirza Aliev wrote: > Helo Ivan! Thank you for your effort! > > Here [1] you can find info about the process of contributing to Apache > Ignite. > As Krill said before, you need to get "gree

[ANNOUNCE] Welcome Alexander Shapkin as a new committer

2021-08-11 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
enables easier contribution to the project since there is no need to go via the patch submission process. This should enable better productivity. Please join me in welcoming Alexander, and congratulating him on the new role in the Apache Ignite Community! Best Regards, Pavel Tupitsyn

Re: [DISCUSSION] Send documentation feedback notifications to dev list

2021-08-09 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
I agree, let's keep the dev list clean. Automated notifications of any kind should not be sent to dev@i.a.o. PS Ivan, links 2 and 3 are the same. On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 8:54 AM Ivan Pavlukhin wrote: > Igniters, > > Recently documentation feedback notifications were set up. And > currently desti

Re: Secondary TeamCity instance: ci2.ignite.apache.org

2021-08-03 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Dmitry, This is awesome! > tc.i.a.o or ci2.i.a.o My vote for ci2.i.a.o On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 6:33 PM Dmitry Pavlov wrote: > Hi Igniters, > > I'm glad to announce that SberTech made an internal aggreement to sponsor > a computing power to provide backup TeamCity instance. This instance is > in

Re: Ignite 3.0 IgniteTables API Improvement Suggestion

2021-07-26 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Igniters, I've made the changes to the Tuple interface, please have a look: https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/245 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14342 On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 12:25 PM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > Val, agreed. > Let's add length(), value(index),

Re: [VOTE] Release pyignite 0.5.1-rc0

2021-07-26 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
+1 On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 11:36 AM Igor Sapego wrote: > +1 from me > > Best Regards, > Igor > > > On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 3:32 PM Ivan Daschinsky > wrote: > > > +1 From me > > 1. Checked binary packages, c module and examples on windows 10 amd64 for > > pythons 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9 > > 2. Checke

Re: IEP-76 Thin Client Protocol for Ignite 3.0

2021-07-21 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Igniters, The initial implementation is ready for review. To limit the PR size, I've only implemented insert and get operations. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14970 https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/191 On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 1:56 PM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: >

Re: [DISCUSS] Confuse default inspections.

2021-07-20 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Agree with for both points On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 3:14 PM Alexander Polovtcev wrote: > this is a very welcome change for me > > On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 10:13 AM Ivan Pavlukhin > wrote: > > > + for both points. > > > > 2021-07-20 9:56 GMT+03:00, Ivan Daschinsky : > > > Hi! > > > > > > Firstly,

Thin client data structures

2021-07-16 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Igniters, I was asked a few times about Data Structures [1] in thin clients. While there are plans to add them eventually, it is possible to implement them on top of the existing thin client cache API. I'd like to share a short blog post which demonstrates this [2]. [1] https://ignite.apache.org

Re: IEP-61 Transaction API desing for Ignite 3

2021-07-13 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
gration. > > Manual enlisting of tables is required, because I strive to avoid any > thread based control of transactions in Ignite 3. > > Actually, a single thread will be able to work with any amount of > transactions at the same time. > > I would keep it for convenience, b

Re: IEP-61 Transaction API desing for Ignite 3

2021-07-13 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Alexei, The API looks good to me, except "runInTransaction", which I find confusing. It looks like every operation performed by the passed Consumer will be automatically enlisted in a transaction, but, looking at tests, "withTx" call is still required inside the Consumer. I don't think we need t

Re: Ignite 3.0 Ignition API, node startup, and thin client startup

2021-07-12 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
uding Ignition in ignite-client means that ignite-client depends on > ignite-runner, which we cannot have. > > -Val > > On Sat, Jul 10, 2021 at 4:17 AM Pavel Tupitsyn > wrote: > > > Val, > > > > My suggestion is to have Ignition class in ignite-clie

Re: Ignite 3.0 Ignition API, node startup, and thin client startup

2021-07-11 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
> > вс, 11 июл. 2021 г., 17:48 Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > Serialization is just one example, and it does not have to be XML. > > JSON, YAML, HOCON configs are widely used. > > > > Anyway, I see no reason for it NOT to be a POJO. > > POJOs are ergonomic and work e

Re: Ignite 3.0 Ignition API, node startup, and thin client startup

2021-07-11 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
a POJO - a class with setters and getters, > nothing else. > Why it should? Why ClientConfiguration should be serializable? Who needs > that? Xml configuration even in spring are not widely used for years :) > > вс, 11 июл. 2021 г., 00:57 Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > Ivan D, &

Re: Ignite 3.0 Ignition API, node startup, and thin client startup

2021-07-10 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Daschinsky wrote: > Pavel, I and Ivan P. have already get examples of lettuce.io > > Another example is spring 5 reactive WebClient > https://www.baeldung.com/spring-5-webclient > > сб, 10 июл. 2021 г., 19:50 Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > Ivan D., > > > > > si

Re: Ignite 3.0 Ignition API, node startup, and thin client startup

2021-07-10 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
nderstand how it name connects to bootstraping > ignite's client. > > сб, 10 июл. 2021 г., 14:17 Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > Val, > > > > My suggestion is to have Ignition class in ignite-client module. > > > > On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 11:01 PM

Re: Ignite 3.0 Ignition API, node startup, and thin client startup

2021-07-10 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Let's think it over and > see if there are any suggestions. > > -Val > > On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 6:31 AM Pavel Tupitsyn > wrote: > > > > why thin client should be in core module > > > > It will be in a separate module (ignite-client). > > I was

Re: Ignite 3.0 Ignition API, node startup, and thin client startup

2021-07-09 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
h Kotlin, it works with CompletableFuture. > Users don't want to code by theyselves, they want to use ready and complete > clients. Please, don't underestimate kotlin, kotlin coroutines and reactive > streams. They are all the first class citizens in spring 5 for 3 years &g

Re: Ignite 3.0 Ignition API, node startup, and thin client startup

2021-07-09 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
and reactive is not enough, it is good idea to support > kotlin coroutines also :) > > пт, 9 июл. 2021 г., 13:26 Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > Ivan D., > > > > > container of properties > > > > What is a container of properties? > > As a user, I want a s

Re: Ignite 3.0 Ignition API, node startup, and thin client startup

2021-07-09 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
great to have separate facades for sync, async and > reactive api. Mixing all of them in one interface is a documentation > nightmare. > > пт, 9 июл. 2021 г., 11:55 Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > Ivan P., Ivan D., > > > > I don't think it makes sense to separate IgniteCon

Re: Ignite 3.0 Ignition API, node startup, and thin client startup

2021-07-09 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
> > > >> > -Val > >> > > >> > On Thu, Jul 8, 2021 at 12:53 PM Ivan Daschinsky > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > I'm sorry, but why we didn't consider to separate creation of Client > >> and &

Re: Ignite 3.0 Ignition API, node startup, and thin client startup

2021-07-07 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
unified > > > access point. Ignition seems to be a good candidate for this. > > > > > > Ignition#start should eventually be removed from the public API. It is > > > currently there only because we don't have the thin client yet. > > > > > &g

Ignite 3.0 Ignition API, node startup, and thin client startup

2021-07-07 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Igniters, I have a few questions regarding server node startup and thin clients. State of things: - Server nodes will be started with 'ignite run' from CLI [1] - ignite-api module represents our public API - ignite-api has Ignition interface to start server nodes Questions: - What's the idea beh

Re: IEP-76 Thin Client Protocol for Ignite 3.0

2021-07-07 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
schinsky > wrote: > > > I suppose, that general idea is great. Some details are missing, but I > > suppose during implementation of clients we will add more details and > > redefine some parts. > > > > вт, 6 июл. 2021 г., 09:59 Pavel Tupitsyn : > > >

Re: Ignite 3.0 Tuple API: how to check if value is null?

2021-07-06 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
t;weight", out var weight)) doSomething(weight) or Option weight = tuple.floatValue("weight") and so on. On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 9:58 AM Ivan Daschinsky wrote: > Sorry, but what is wrong with simple method isNull() > > вт, 6 июл. 2021 г., 09:55 Pavel Tupitsyn : > >

Re: IEP-76 Thin Client Protocol for Ignite 3.0

2021-07-05 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Ivan, Val, and others - are there any open objections or questions? Can we accept the proposal? On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 1:28 PM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > Igniters, > > I've updated the IEP to support "Live Schema" [1] from IEP-54. > Some operations now have schemaless

Re: Ignite 3.0 Tuple API: how to check if value is null?

2021-07-05 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
va. > > There should be a way to check if a field is nullable or not though. Schema > already provides this information, doesn't it? > > -Val > > On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 11:03 AM Pavel Tupitsyn > wrote: > > > Igniters, > > > > Looks like Tuple API has no e

Ignite 3.0 Tuple API: how to check if value is null?

2021-07-05 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Igniters, Looks like Tuple API has no efficient way to tell if a value for a nullable column of primitive type is null. - Tuple#intValue() will return 0 when the actual value is null => not clear if 0 is 0 or null. - Tuple#value() works, but is more expensive due to boxing and type lookup. Any i

Re: IEP-76 Thin Client Protocol for Ignite 3.0

2021-07-05 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
t; > > > Actually, this will add a row (1, "abc") > > > > > > > > > > > > Your suggestion related to missed fields will not work this way > as > > it > > > > is > > > > > > impossible to distinct > &g

Re: IEP-76 Thin Client Protocol for Ignite 3.0

2021-07-01 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
ughout all wire protocols, > as tarantool does. > > чт, 1 июл. 2021 г., 16:15 Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > Ivan, > > > > > that there is not neccesary to write schema versions in each row > > > in collectionof tuples > > > > This is described in

Re: IEP-76 Thin Client Protocol for Ignite 3.0

2021-07-01 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
t; str8). It is much easier use it and write field name as is. > > чт, 1 июл. 2021 г., 14:56 Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > Ivan, tuple serialization section added to the IEP, let me know if it is > > clear enough. > > > > Thanks! > > > > On Thu, Jul 1,

Re: IEP-76 Thin Client Protocol for Ignite 3.0

2021-07-01 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Ivan, tuple serialization section added to the IEP, let me know if it is clear enough. Thanks! On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 2:06 PM Ivan Daschinsky wrote: > I can't find any description of tuple serialization in IEP, only in code > > чт, 1 июл. 2021 г., 13:59 Pavel Tupitsyn : > &g

Re: IEP-76 Thin Client Protocol for Ignite 3.0

2021-07-01 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
on. And there > isn't > > a clear consensus about it. > > 2. There is not any information about schrma serialization format. And > > AFAIK, there isn't a clear consensus also. > > > > чт, 1 июл. 2021 г., 13:26 Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > >> Igni

IEP-76 Thin Client Protocol for Ignite 3.0

2021-07-01 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Igniters, Please review the IEP for thin client protocol in 3.0 [1]. PoC is in progress [2] [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-76+Thin+Client+Protocol+for+Ignite+3.0 [2] https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/191

Re: Ignite 3.0 IgniteTables API Improvement Suggestion

2021-07-01 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
other languages, we can use other abstractions, of course. > Every platform has its own specifics and practices, so APIs don't have to > be identical. > > -Val > > On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 7:44 AM Pavel Tupitsyn > wrote: > > > Hi Andrey, > > > > > This w

Re: Ignite 3.0 IgniteTables API Improvement Suggestion

2021-06-30 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
ic API terms > and it may be impossible for some data. > > We already have a ticket [1] to support accessing a column by an index and > exposing some metadata. > Will 'idx -> column' mapping only be enough for your purposes? > > > int Tuple.columnIndex(String) &

Re: Ignite 3.0 IgniteTables API Improvement Suggestion

2021-06-29 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
rm blocking wait on some futures. [1] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.data.idatareader?view=net-5.0 On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 4:51 AM Valentin Kulichenko < valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Pavel, > > Please see my comments below. > > -Val

Ignite 3.0 IgniteTables API Improvement Suggestion

2021-06-29 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Igniters, While working on "IEP-76 Thin Client Protocol for Ignite 3.0" [1] (to be discussed separately), the following suggestions for the Table API came up: 1. Expose table IDs: sending table name with every operation (e.g. GET) is inefficient, string serialization is expensive by itself and na

Re: Contributor Permission

2021-06-29 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Hi Saurabh, I've added you to the Contributors role in JIRA. Welcome to the Apache Ignite community! On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 10:34 AM saurabh chhajed wrote: > Hi Team, > > I wanted to contribute to some ML based inference code for Ignite, and > Requesting to be added as contributor permission i

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 3.0.0-alpha2 RC1

2021-06-28 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
+1 (binding) On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 8:23 PM Вячеслав Коптилин wrote: > +1 > > Thanks, > S. > > пн, 28 июн. 2021 г. в 18:09, Igor Sapego : > > > +1 > > > > Best Regards, > > Igor > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 26, 2021 at 1:41 AM Nikita Ivanov > wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > -- > > > Nikita Ivanov >

Re: IEP-75 Thin Client MsgPack Serialization for 3.0

2021-06-23 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
rk. > > ср, 23 июн. 2021 г. в 14:07, Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > Igniters, > > > > Looks like there are no objections and we can accept the proposal. > > I will close it tomorrow and move on to the thin client protocol itself. > > > > On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 12

Re: IEP-75 Thin Client MsgPack Serialization for 3.0

2021-06-23 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
nd bullet proof. > > [1] -- https://github.com/igorcoding/asynctnt > [2] -- https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool-python/ > [3] -- https://github.com/tarantool/go-tarantool > [4] -- https://github.com/rtsisyk/msgpuck > > пт, 18 июн. 2021 г. в 11:44, Pavel Tupitsyn : > > &

Re: IEP-75 Thin Client MsgPack Serialization for 3.0

2021-06-18 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Ivan, > why do you use PooledMessageBufferOutput in benchmarks? To make it fair. Ignite uses thread-local reusable buffers, see [1]. > why packer from msgpack-core show better performance than > BinaryWriter. And I suppose that benchmark is not quite fair. MsgPack writes and reads less bytes,

Re: IEP-75 Thin Client MsgPack Serialization for 3.0

2021-06-17 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
reat, but I suppose that we should benchmark > > formats thoroughly. And not only for Java. > > > > чт, 17 июн. 2021 г. в 15:29, Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > >> Igniters, > >> > >> I have drafted an IEP on thin client serialization format [1], > >> ple

IEP-75 Thin Client MsgPack Serialization for 3.0

2021-06-17 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Igniters, I have drafted an IEP on thin client serialization format [1], please review and let me know what you think. [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-75+Thin+Client+Serialization

Re: [VOTE] Release pyignite 0.5.0-rc1

2021-06-17 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
+1 Checked pip install from tar.gz on Python 3.8 on Ubuntu 20.04, ran some of the examples. On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 2:32 PM Igor Sapego wrote: > +1 from me > > Best Regards, > Igor > > > On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 12:10 PM Ivan Daschinsky > wrote: > > > +1 From me > > Checked on Ubuntu 20.04 and

Re: New committer: Vladimir Ermakov

2021-06-07 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Hi Vladimir, Welcome to the Apache Ignite community! I've added you to the Contributors role in JIRA. Note: "Committer" is a community member with direct commit access [1]. [1] https://apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#Committer On Mon, Jun 7, 2021 at 4:27 PM Владимир Ермаков wrote: > Hello

Re: [DISCUSSION] Code style. Variable abbrevations

2021-06-04 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
In my opinion, we should remove this rule. Looks like a waste of time. freq or frequency, cnt or count, it is fine either way. On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 7:39 PM Nikolay Izhikov wrote: > Hello, Igniters. > > Right now, we have the rule to use some predefined list of abbrevation for > variable names

Re: Unable to edit fixVersion in jira tickets

2021-06-04 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
able to edit tickets. One more question - how can I > create new version to move some tickets to 2.12? > > On 2021/06/04 11:37:55, Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > > Added you to the Contributors role, now you should be able to edit > tickets. > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 4, 2021

Re: Unable to edit fixVersion in jira tickets

2021-06-04 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Added you to the Contributors role, now you should be able to edit tickets. On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 2:16 PM Alexey Gidaspov wrote: > Hi, Pavel. > > My JIRA login is agidaspov > > On 2021/06/04 11:14:02, Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > > Hi Alexey, > > > > What's y

Re: Unable to edit fixVersion in jira tickets

2021-06-04 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Hi Alexey, What's your JIRA username? On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 1:50 PM Alexey Gidaspov wrote: > Hi, All! > > What should I do to be able to edit fixVersion in jira tickets? >

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [6024739] needs to be handled

2021-05-31 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Fixed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14804 On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 5:07 PM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > Ivan, yes, I'll deal with this next week. > > On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 12:28 PM Ivan Daschinsky > wrote: > >> Hi, Pavel, could you please look at this [1

Re: IEP-68: Thin Client Data Streamer

2021-05-31 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
e a stateful approach working but that would make this feature > too complex and error-prone, IMO. It makes sense to file an improvement > ticket with benchmark results and maybe code draft if we decide to move > this way in future though. > > Best Regards, > Igor > > > On Tue,

Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [6024739] needs to be handled

2021-05-28 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Ivan, yes, I'll deal with this next week. On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 12:28 PM Ivan Daschinsky wrote: > Hi, Pavel, could you please look at this [1]? It seems after updating > TC, few new inspections arrived. > > > ]1] -- > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_PlatformN

Re: AggregateUnionTransposeRule fails when some inputs have unique grouping key

2021-05-19 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Hi Vladimir, Looks like this message is for d...@calcite.apache.org, not dev@ignite.apache.org, or am I mistaken? On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 2:25 PM Vladimir Ozerov wrote: > Hi, > > The AggregateUnionTransposeRule attempts to push the Aggregate below the > Union. > > Before: > Aggregate[group=$0,

Re: IEP-68: Thin Client Data Streamer

2021-05-18 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
proper way: once a client request completes, the data is guaranteed to be in the cache, and failed requests (connection loss, node failure) can be retried. This simplifies both client and server implementations. Thoughts? On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 6:32 PM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > Alex, > &

Re: Thin Clients: enable partition awareness by default

2021-05-14 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Oops, here it is: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14719 On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 2:35 PM Ivan Daschinsky wrote: > Pavel, sorry, but where is the link to ticket? > > пт, 14 мая 2021 г. в 14:13, Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > > Ticket created [1], I'll make the cha

Re: Thin Clients: enable partition awareness by default

2021-05-14 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
> > > On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 5:18 PM Ivan Daschinsky > wrote: > > > > > Huge +1 from me. PA should be enabled by default. > > > > > > ср, 12 мая 2021 г. в 13:33, Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > > > > > > Igniters, > > > > &g

Thin Clients: enable partition awareness by default

2021-05-12 Thread Pavel Tupitsyn
Igniters, Partition Awareness (PA) is implemented in 5 out of 6 thin clients [1]. However, this feature is disabled by default in most clients for compatibility reasons: initially we only used one connection to the cluster, but with PA enabled we establish connections to every server node, which

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >