Re: [PROPOSAL] Backport GEODE-8432 to 1.13
Thanks for your contribution, Gester On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 12:37 PM Joris Melchior wrote: > +1 > > On 2020-08-20, 12:08 PM, "Xiaojian Zhou" wrote: > > It's using region path instead of getting the region. It should be no > risk. > > On 8/19/20, 10:25 AM, "Xiaojian Zhou" wrote: > > This problem also exists in 1.13. > > >
Re: [PROPOSAL] Backport GEODE-8432 to 1.13
+1 On 2020-08-20, 12:08 PM, "Xiaojian Zhou" wrote: It's using region path instead of getting the region. It should be no risk. On 8/19/20, 10:25 AM, "Xiaojian Zhou" wrote: This problem also exists in 1.13.
Re: [PROPOSAL] Backport GEODE-8432 to 1.13
Looks like it passes all test in the pipeline and overnight. Sounds like a good change, +1 On 8/20/20, 9:09 AM, "Xiaojian Zhou" wrote: It's using region path instead of getting the region. It should be no risk. On 8/19/20, 10:25 AM, "Xiaojian Zhou" wrote: This problem also exists in 1.13.
Re: [PROPOSAL] Backport GEODE-8432 to 1.13
It's using region path instead of getting the region. It should be no risk. On 8/19/20, 10:25 AM, "Xiaojian Zhou" wrote: This problem also exists in 1.13.
Re: [PROPOSAL] Backport GEODE-8432 to 1.13
Hi @Xiaojian, it will be great to have this fix on 1.13. As we are hopefully getting very close on 1.13, can you please mention what (if any) risks this change might bring? On 8/19/20, 2:10 PM, "Eric Shu" wrote: +1 From: Jinmei Liao Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 2:09 PM To: dev@geode.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Backport GEODE-8432 to 1.13 +1 On 8/19/20, 10:25 AM, "Xiaojian Zhou" wrote: This problem also exists in 1.13.
Re: [PROPOSAL] Backport GEODE-8432 to 1.13
+1 From: Jinmei Liao Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 2:09 PM To: dev@geode.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Backport GEODE-8432 to 1.13 +1 On 8/19/20, 10:25 AM, "Xiaojian Zhou" wrote: This problem also exists in 1.13.
Re: [PROPOSAL] Backport GEODE-8432 to 1.13
+1 On 8/19/20, 10:25 AM, "Xiaojian Zhou" wrote: This problem also exists in 1.13.
[PROPOSAL] Backport GEODE-8432 to 1.13
This problem also exists in 1.13.