Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [4394336] needs to be handled
Thanks, igniters, will play with Bot сб, 27 июл. 2019 г. в 02:00, Dmitriy Pavlov : > Hi Nikolay, thank you for updating. > > AI Teamcity Bot ( GG's instance: https://mtcga.gridgain.com ) works for me > from home. > > So in most cases, RunAll may be triggered and validated there. TC itself > works. > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 21:27, nsvistov : > > > Hi all, > > Unfortunately ci.ignite.apache.org may be unavailable because > > We have problem with internet provider... > > > > > > > > -- > > Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/ > > >
Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [4394336] needs to be handled
Hi Nikolay, thank you for updating. AI Teamcity Bot ( GG's instance: https://mtcga.gridgain.com ) works for me from home. So in most cases, RunAll may be triggered and validated there. TC itself works. пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 21:27, nsvistov : > Hi all, > Unfortunately ci.ignite.apache.org may be unavailable because > We have problem with internet provider... > > > > -- > Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/ >
Re: [DISCUSSION] Mirroring Teamcity settings in a GitHub repository
Ivan, sorry, it seems PMCs forgot to add your account to Committer group. I've changed rights settings. чт, 20 июн. 2019 г. в 08:42, Павлухин Иван : > Dmitriy, > > It is a very important topic for Ignite CI. I think it would be great > if all significant changes in a build configuration goes with a > meaningful description (a commit message). As for me, DSL sounds > promising. > > BTW, a special rights are needed to view > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/admin/editBuild.html?id=buildType:Releases_ApacheIgniteMain_ReleaseBuild > (I do not have such). > > вт, 18 июн. 2019 г. в 14:30, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > > Hello, Dmitriy. > > > > Thanks, for starting this discussion. > > I think almost all of community members don't know the difference > between two options. > > > > I vote for the simplest solution with the human readable format. > > > > > > В Пн, 17/06/2019 в 21:07 +0300, Dmitriy Pavlov пишет: > > > Hi Igniters, > > > > > > During preparing of the release I've faced with lack of information > related > > > to required steps. This was one reason of too long release preparation. > > > This process was automated by several Ignite contributors (thank you, > BTW). > > > Now, these valued automation results are more or less stored using > TeamCity > > > settings at ci.ignite.apache.org. > > > > > > First of all, changes done in these steps before were not always > > > consistent. The TC's built-in audit wasn't useful, because there were > tons > > > of changes. So it is not clear who and why changed something. > > > > > > Secondly, Ignite release is performed outside of ASF infrastructure. > It is > > > not a problem itself (and we're grateful to GridGain to sponsoring > > > infrastructure). But I believe knowledge about release should be > backed up > > > somehow inside of ASF infra. > > > > > > The last issue related not to release, but to our test suites. It is > now > > > about 90 suites, which may have different settings. There is no easy > and > > > clear way to grep, check consistency, check possible options we've > used. > > > > > > So let's consider 2 possible options to solve these issues. > > > > > > Option A: store settings in VCS > > > > https://www.jetbrains.com/help/teamcity/2019.1/storing-project-settings-in-version-control.html > > > > > > > > > Option B: use DSL > > > > https://www.jetbrains.com/help/teamcity/2019.1/storing-project-settings-in-version-control.html > > > > > > > > > Please share your vision. > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > > > PS. to see how DSL can look like you can use > > > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/admin/editBuild.html?id=buildType:Releases_ApacheIgniteMain_ReleaseBuild > > > > > > and click view DSL. > > > > -- > Best regards, > Ivan Pavlukhin >
Re: [DISCUSSION] Mirroring Teamcity settings in a GitHub repository
One more blog I found today related to this topic https://blog.jetbrains.com/teamcity/2019/03/configuration-as-code-part-1-getting-started-with-kotlin-dsl/ If DSL may bring conditional steps, it may be used for various optimizations in suites. Moreover, it is a git-based change management opportunity. чт, 20 июн. 2019 г. в 08:46, Павлухин Иван : > For curious ones I copied a RunAll DSL configuration to gist [1]. > > [1] https://gist.github.com/pavlukhin/e788bbebafe69ce9d9a3c9e9871ab8c4 > > чт, 20 июн. 2019 г. в 08:42, Павлухин Иван : > > > > Dmitriy, > > > > It is a very important topic for Ignite CI. I think it would be great > > if all significant changes in a build configuration goes with a > > meaningful description (a commit message). As for me, DSL sounds > > promising. > > > > BTW, a special rights are needed to view > > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/admin/editBuild.html?id=buildType:Releases_ApacheIgniteMain_ReleaseBuild > > (I do not have such). > > > > вт, 18 июн. 2019 г. в 14:30, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > > > > Hello, Dmitriy. > > > > > > Thanks, for starting this discussion. > > > I think almost all of community members don't know the difference > between two options. > > > > > > I vote for the simplest solution with the human readable format. > > > > > > > > > В Пн, 17/06/2019 в 21:07 +0300, Dmitriy Pavlov пишет: > > > > Hi Igniters, > > > > > > > > During preparing of the release I've faced with lack of information > related > > > > to required steps. This was one reason of too long release > preparation. > > > > This process was automated by several Ignite contributors (thank > you, BTW). > > > > Now, these valued automation results are more or less stored using > TeamCity > > > > settings at ci.ignite.apache.org. > > > > > > > > First of all, changes done in these steps before were not always > > > > consistent. The TC's built-in audit wasn't useful, because there > were tons > > > > of changes. So it is not clear who and why changed something. > > > > > > > > Secondly, Ignite release is performed outside of ASF infrastructure. > It is > > > > not a problem itself (and we're grateful to GridGain to sponsoring > > > > infrastructure). But I believe knowledge about release should be > backed up > > > > somehow inside of ASF infra. > > > > > > > > The last issue related not to release, but to our test suites. It is > now > > > > about 90 suites, which may have different settings. There is no easy > and > > > > clear way to grep, check consistency, check possible options we've > used. > > > > > > > > So let's consider 2 possible options to solve these issues. > > > > > > > > Option A: store settings in VCS > > > > > https://www.jetbrains.com/help/teamcity/2019.1/storing-project-settings-in-version-control.html > > > > > > > > > > > > Option B: use DSL > > > > > https://www.jetbrains.com/help/teamcity/2019.1/storing-project-settings-in-version-control.html > > > > > > > > > > > > Please share your vision. > > > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > > > > > PS. to see how DSL can look like you can use > > > > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/admin/editBuild.html?id=buildType:Releases_ApacheIgniteMain_ReleaseBuild > > > > > > > > and click view DSL. > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Ivan Pavlukhin > > > > -- > Best regards, > Ivan Pavlukhin >
Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [4394336] needs to be handled
Hi all, Unfortunately ci.ignite.apache.org may be unavailable because We have problem with internet provider... -- Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [4394336] needs to be handled
Does not work from my home internet. =( пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 19:23, Alexey Zinoviev : > > Thank you so much! > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 21:15, Dmitriy Pavlov : > > > No, you and no one can not be banned because of this :). > > > > TC is accessible for me, but I'm not too far from its server now. I will > > double-check from home later. > > > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 18:58, Alexey Zinoviev : > > > > > Can somebody say me: could I be banned from TC after commit reverting. > > > The https://ci.ignite.apache.org/ became inaccessible in a few seconds > > > after Dmitry Pavlov reverting my commit. > > > > > > Maybe it's kind of paranoid mode, but... > > > > > > > > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 19:16, Alexey Zinoviev : > > > > > > > Absolutely, at this moment ML visa is not includes the new Checkstyle > > > > checker (but it includes licences and javadocs) I support that common > > > > things like checkstyle and licences should be separated from local visa > > > for > > > > different modules and should be run every time > > > > > > > > Thanks for reverting, Dmitry, I'll create new PR correctly and check it > > > > via common approach > > > > > > > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 19:11, Dmitriy Pavlov : > > > > > > > >> Hi Maxim, > > > >> > > > >> It may be reasonable, but probably we should start a separate topic. > > > IMO, > > > >> some Igniters (sad, but true) may have spam-filter for TC Bot messages > > > >> > > > >> Sincerely, > > > >> Dmitriy Pavlov > > > >> > > > >> пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 17:09, Maxim Muzafarov : > > > >> > > > >> > Folks, > > > >> > > > > >> > I've checked some build associated with PRs related to ML and it > > seems > > > >> > to me that the Run::ML suite [1] does not include the checkstyle > > > >> > suite in its workflow. It's a bit strange for me to add checkstyle, > > > >> > licenses headers etc. things to each aggregate suite configuration > > > >> > that we want to use. As its related to the code directly the general > > > >> > question here is - should we make our build procedure more intuitive > > > >> > and turn on checkstyle profile for the Apache Ignite Build suite? > > > >> > I think the answer is - yes. > > > >> > > > > >> > [1] > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4381029&buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_RunMl > > > >> > > > > >> > On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 at 16:54, Alexey Zinoviev < > > zaleslaw@gmail.com > > > > > > > >> > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Hi, Igniters, many thanks for the update on my PR, I didn't merge > > > for > > > >> a 3 > > > >> > > months and doesn't know that rules were changed > > > >> > > Please, revert my commit, I will update my PR according CheckStyle > > > job > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Please, tell me, is CheckStyle bot recommendations and changing of > > > PR > > > >> > name > > > >> > > (with ticket name addition) is enough to finish this issue? > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Thanks a lot for the clarification > > > >> > > > > > >> > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 18:28, Dmitriy Pavlov : > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > +1 to revert. Some day we should learn this process. Maybe this > > > day > > > >> is > > > >> > > > today. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 10:00, Nikolay Izhikov < > > nizhi...@apache.org > > > >: > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > >> +1 to revert. > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> В Пт, 26/07/2019 в 09:48 +0300, Павлухин Иван пишет: > > > >> > > >> > Alexey, > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > Actually the commit [1] is very suspicious: > > > >> > > >> > 1. Commit message "[ML] Hyper-parameter tuning via Genetic > > > >> Algorithm > > > >> > > >> > (#6713)" does not refer to a ticket. > > > >> > > >> > 2. Is there a ticket? Consequently it is not easy to > > understand > > > >> what > > > >> > > >> > was done and check ticket according to regular flow (review, > > TC > > > >> > run). > > > >> > > >> > 3. I skimmed through changes and found several code style > > > >> violations > > > >> > > >> quite soon. > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > Should we revert the commit [1] and apply the changes > > according > > > >> to > > > >> > our > > > >> > > >> > conventions [2]? > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > [1] > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/63fbcbf849640edf140047a5111a58f480c95294 > > > >> > > >> > [2] > > > >> > > >> > > > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 21:26, : > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > Hi Igniters, > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. > > You > > > >> are > > > >> > more > > > >> > > >> than welcomed to help. > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > If your changes can lead to this failure(s): We're > > grateful > > > >> that > > > >> > you > > > >> > > >> were a volunteer to make the contribution to this project, but > > > >> things > > > >> > > >> change and you may no longer
Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [4394336] needs to be handled
Thank you so much! пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 21:15, Dmitriy Pavlov : > No, you and no one can not be banned because of this :). > > TC is accessible for me, but I'm not too far from its server now. I will > double-check from home later. > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 18:58, Alexey Zinoviev : > > > Can somebody say me: could I be banned from TC after commit reverting. > > The https://ci.ignite.apache.org/ became inaccessible in a few seconds > > after Dmitry Pavlov reverting my commit. > > > > Maybe it's kind of paranoid mode, but... > > > > > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 19:16, Alexey Zinoviev : > > > > > Absolutely, at this moment ML visa is not includes the new Checkstyle > > > checker (but it includes licences and javadocs) I support that common > > > things like checkstyle and licences should be separated from local visa > > for > > > different modules and should be run every time > > > > > > Thanks for reverting, Dmitry, I'll create new PR correctly and check it > > > via common approach > > > > > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 19:11, Dmitriy Pavlov : > > > > > >> Hi Maxim, > > >> > > >> It may be reasonable, but probably we should start a separate topic. > > IMO, > > >> some Igniters (sad, but true) may have spam-filter for TC Bot messages > > >> > > >> Sincerely, > > >> Dmitriy Pavlov > > >> > > >> пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 17:09, Maxim Muzafarov : > > >> > > >> > Folks, > > >> > > > >> > I've checked some build associated with PRs related to ML and it > seems > > >> > to me that the Run::ML suite [1] does not include the checkstyle > > >> > suite in its workflow. It's a bit strange for me to add checkstyle, > > >> > licenses headers etc. things to each aggregate suite configuration > > >> > that we want to use. As its related to the code directly the general > > >> > question here is - should we make our build procedure more intuitive > > >> > and turn on checkstyle profile for the Apache Ignite Build suite? > > >> > I think the answer is - yes. > > >> > > > >> > [1] > > >> > > > >> > > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4381029&buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_RunMl > > >> > > > >> > On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 at 16:54, Alexey Zinoviev < > zaleslaw@gmail.com > > > > > >> > wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > Hi, Igniters, many thanks for the update on my PR, I didn't merge > > for > > >> a 3 > > >> > > months and doesn't know that rules were changed > > >> > > Please, revert my commit, I will update my PR according CheckStyle > > job > > >> > > > > >> > > Please, tell me, is CheckStyle bot recommendations and changing of > > PR > > >> > name > > >> > > (with ticket name addition) is enough to finish this issue? > > >> > > > > >> > > Thanks a lot for the clarification > > >> > > > > >> > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 18:28, Dmitriy Pavlov : > > >> > > > > >> > > > +1 to revert. Some day we should learn this process. Maybe this > > day > > >> is > > >> > > > today. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 10:00, Nikolay Izhikov < > nizhi...@apache.org > > >: > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> +1 to revert. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> В Пт, 26/07/2019 в 09:48 +0300, Павлухин Иван пишет: > > >> > > >> > Alexey, > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > Actually the commit [1] is very suspicious: > > >> > > >> > 1. Commit message "[ML] Hyper-parameter tuning via Genetic > > >> Algorithm > > >> > > >> > (#6713)" does not refer to a ticket. > > >> > > >> > 2. Is there a ticket? Consequently it is not easy to > understand > > >> what > > >> > > >> > was done and check ticket according to regular flow (review, > TC > > >> > run). > > >> > > >> > 3. I skimmed through changes and found several code style > > >> violations > > >> > > >> quite soon. > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > Should we revert the commit [1] and apply the changes > according > > >> to > > >> > our > > >> > > >> > conventions [2]? > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > [1] > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/63fbcbf849640edf140047a5111a58f480c95294 > > >> > > >> > [2] > > >> > > >> > > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 21:26, : > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > Hi Igniters, > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. > You > > >> are > > >> > more > > >> > > >> than welcomed to help. > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > If your changes can lead to this failure(s): We're > grateful > > >> that > > >> > you > > >> > > >> were a volunteer to make the contribution to this project, but > > >> things > > >> > > >> change and you may no longer be able to finalize your > > contribution. > > >> > > >> > > Could you respond to this email and indicate if you wish > to > > >> > continue > > >> > > >> and fix test failures or step down and some committer may > revert > > >> you > > >> > commit. > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > *New Trusted Suite failure in master [Check Code > Style] > > >> > > >> > > >>
Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [4394336] needs to be handled
No, you and no one can not be banned because of this :). TC is accessible for me, but I'm not too far from its server now. I will double-check from home later. пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 18:58, Alexey Zinoviev : > Can somebody say me: could I be banned from TC after commit reverting. > The https://ci.ignite.apache.org/ became inaccessible in a few seconds > after Dmitry Pavlov reverting my commit. > > Maybe it's kind of paranoid mode, but... > > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 19:16, Alexey Zinoviev : > > > Absolutely, at this moment ML visa is not includes the new Checkstyle > > checker (but it includes licences and javadocs) I support that common > > things like checkstyle and licences should be separated from local visa > for > > different modules and should be run every time > > > > Thanks for reverting, Dmitry, I'll create new PR correctly and check it > > via common approach > > > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 19:11, Dmitriy Pavlov : > > > >> Hi Maxim, > >> > >> It may be reasonable, but probably we should start a separate topic. > IMO, > >> some Igniters (sad, but true) may have spam-filter for TC Bot messages > >> > >> Sincerely, > >> Dmitriy Pavlov > >> > >> пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 17:09, Maxim Muzafarov : > >> > >> > Folks, > >> > > >> > I've checked some build associated with PRs related to ML and it seems > >> > to me that the Run::ML suite [1] does not include the checkstyle > >> > suite in its workflow. It's a bit strange for me to add checkstyle, > >> > licenses headers etc. things to each aggregate suite configuration > >> > that we want to use. As its related to the code directly the general > >> > question here is - should we make our build procedure more intuitive > >> > and turn on checkstyle profile for the Apache Ignite Build suite? > >> > I think the answer is - yes. > >> > > >> > [1] > >> > > >> > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4381029&buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_RunMl > >> > > >> > On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 at 16:54, Alexey Zinoviev > > >> > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > Hi, Igniters, many thanks for the update on my PR, I didn't merge > for > >> a 3 > >> > > months and doesn't know that rules were changed > >> > > Please, revert my commit, I will update my PR according CheckStyle > job > >> > > > >> > > Please, tell me, is CheckStyle bot recommendations and changing of > PR > >> > name > >> > > (with ticket name addition) is enough to finish this issue? > >> > > > >> > > Thanks a lot for the clarification > >> > > > >> > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 18:28, Dmitriy Pavlov : > >> > > > >> > > > +1 to revert. Some day we should learn this process. Maybe this > day > >> is > >> > > > today. > >> > > > > >> > > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 10:00, Nikolay Izhikov >: > >> > > > > >> > > >> +1 to revert. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> В Пт, 26/07/2019 в 09:48 +0300, Павлухин Иван пишет: > >> > > >> > Alexey, > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > Actually the commit [1] is very suspicious: > >> > > >> > 1. Commit message "[ML] Hyper-parameter tuning via Genetic > >> Algorithm > >> > > >> > (#6713)" does not refer to a ticket. > >> > > >> > 2. Is there a ticket? Consequently it is not easy to understand > >> what > >> > > >> > was done and check ticket according to regular flow (review, TC > >> > run). > >> > > >> > 3. I skimmed through changes and found several code style > >> violations > >> > > >> quite soon. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > Should we revert the commit [1] and apply the changes according > >> to > >> > our > >> > > >> > conventions [2]? > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > [1] > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/63fbcbf849640edf140047a5111a58f480c95294 > >> > > >> > [2] > >> > > >> > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 21:26, : > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > Hi Igniters, > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You > >> are > >> > more > >> > > >> than welcomed to help. > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > If your changes can lead to this failure(s): We're grateful > >> that > >> > you > >> > > >> were a volunteer to make the contribution to this project, but > >> things > >> > > >> change and you may no longer be able to finalize your > contribution. > >> > > >> > > Could you respond to this email and indicate if you wish to > >> > continue > >> > > >> and fix test failures or step down and some committer may revert > >> you > >> > commit. > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > *New Trusted Suite failure in master [Check Code Style] > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_CheckCodeStyle&branch=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv > >> > > >> > > Changes may lead to failure were done by > >> > > >> > > - zaleslaw@gmail.com > >> > > >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=888540 > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > - Here's a reminder of what contributors were ag
[MTCGA]: new failures in builds [4401869] needs to be handled
Hi Igniters, I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are more than welcomed to help. *New Critical Failure in master Platform C++ (Linux)* https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_PlatformCLinux&branch=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv No changes in the build - Here's a reminder of what contributors were agreed to do https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute - Should you have any questions please contact dev@ignite.apache.org Best Regards, Apache Ignite TeamCity Bot https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot Notification generated at 19:14:30 26-07-2019
Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [4394336] needs to be handled
Can somebody say me: could I be banned from TC after commit reverting. The https://ci.ignite.apache.org/ became inaccessible in a few seconds after Dmitry Pavlov reverting my commit. Maybe it's kind of paranoid mode, but... пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 19:16, Alexey Zinoviev : > Absolutely, at this moment ML visa is not includes the new Checkstyle > checker (but it includes licences and javadocs) I support that common > things like checkstyle and licences should be separated from local visa for > different modules and should be run every time > > Thanks for reverting, Dmitry, I'll create new PR correctly and check it > via common approach > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 19:11, Dmitriy Pavlov : > >> Hi Maxim, >> >> It may be reasonable, but probably we should start a separate topic. IMO, >> some Igniters (sad, but true) may have spam-filter for TC Bot messages >> >> Sincerely, >> Dmitriy Pavlov >> >> пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 17:09, Maxim Muzafarov : >> >> > Folks, >> > >> > I've checked some build associated with PRs related to ML and it seems >> > to me that the Run::ML suite [1] does not include the checkstyle >> > suite in its workflow. It's a bit strange for me to add checkstyle, >> > licenses headers etc. things to each aggregate suite configuration >> > that we want to use. As its related to the code directly the general >> > question here is - should we make our build procedure more intuitive >> > and turn on checkstyle profile for the Apache Ignite Build suite? >> > I think the answer is - yes. >> > >> > [1] >> > >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4381029&buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_RunMl >> > >> > On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 at 16:54, Alexey Zinoviev >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > Hi, Igniters, many thanks for the update on my PR, I didn't merge for >> a 3 >> > > months and doesn't know that rules were changed >> > > Please, revert my commit, I will update my PR according CheckStyle job >> > > >> > > Please, tell me, is CheckStyle bot recommendations and changing of PR >> > name >> > > (with ticket name addition) is enough to finish this issue? >> > > >> > > Thanks a lot for the clarification >> > > >> > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 18:28, Dmitriy Pavlov : >> > > >> > > > +1 to revert. Some day we should learn this process. Maybe this day >> is >> > > > today. >> > > > >> > > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 10:00, Nikolay Izhikov : >> > > > >> > > >> +1 to revert. >> > > >> >> > > >> В Пт, 26/07/2019 в 09:48 +0300, Павлухин Иван пишет: >> > > >> > Alexey, >> > > >> > >> > > >> > Actually the commit [1] is very suspicious: >> > > >> > 1. Commit message "[ML] Hyper-parameter tuning via Genetic >> Algorithm >> > > >> > (#6713)" does not refer to a ticket. >> > > >> > 2. Is there a ticket? Consequently it is not easy to understand >> what >> > > >> > was done and check ticket according to regular flow (review, TC >> > run). >> > > >> > 3. I skimmed through changes and found several code style >> violations >> > > >> quite soon. >> > > >> > >> > > >> > Should we revert the commit [1] and apply the changes according >> to >> > our >> > > >> > conventions [2]? >> > > >> > >> > > >> > [1] >> > > >> >> > >> https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/63fbcbf849640edf140047a5111a58f480c95294 >> > > >> > [2] >> > > >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute >> > > >> > >> > > >> > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 21:26, : >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Hi Igniters, >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You >> are >> > more >> > > >> than welcomed to help. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > If your changes can lead to this failure(s): We're grateful >> that >> > you >> > > >> were a volunteer to make the contribution to this project, but >> things >> > > >> change and you may no longer be able to finalize your contribution. >> > > >> > > Could you respond to this email and indicate if you wish to >> > continue >> > > >> and fix test failures or step down and some committer may revert >> you >> > commit. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > *New Trusted Suite failure in master [Check Code Style] >> > > >> >> > >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_CheckCodeStyle&branch=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv >> > > >> > > Changes may lead to failure were done by >> > > >> > > - zaleslaw@gmail.com >> > > >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=888540 >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > - Here's a reminder of what contributors were agreed >> to >> > do >> > > >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute >> > > >> > > - Should you have any questions please contact >> > > >> dev@ignite.apache.org >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Best Regards, >> > > >> > > Apache Ignite TeamCity Bot >> > > >> > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot >> > > >> > > Notification generated at 21:26:38 25-07-2019 >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> >> > > > >> > >> >
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-12021) Inserting date from Node.JS to a cache which has Java.SQL.Timestamp
Gaurav created IGNITE-12021: --- Summary: Inserting date from Node.JS to a cache which has Java.SQL.Timestamp Key: IGNITE-12021 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12021 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Bug Components: cache, thin client Affects Versions: 2.7 Environment: We are in DEV right now. can't proceed to higher environment with this show stopper Reporter: Gaurav I have cache which has one field with type java.sql.Timestamp From, Node.JS i am inserting it as new Date(). If the cache is empty the inserts are successful. Issue come when java inserted few records in this cache (Java inserts java.sql.Timestamp) . Now , if I run Node.JS program which tries to insert it gives me this error. Binary type has different field types [typeName=XYZCacheName, fieldName=updateTime, fieldTypeName1=Timestamp, fieldTypeName2=Date] Please help, its stopped my work totally! -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.14#76016)
Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [4394336] needs to be handled
Absolutely, at this moment ML visa is not includes the new Checkstyle checker (but it includes licences and javadocs) I support that common things like checkstyle and licences should be separated from local visa for different modules and should be run every time Thanks for reverting, Dmitry, I'll create new PR correctly and check it via common approach пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 19:11, Dmitriy Pavlov : > Hi Maxim, > > It may be reasonable, but probably we should start a separate topic. IMO, > some Igniters (sad, but true) may have spam-filter for TC Bot messages > > Sincerely, > Dmitriy Pavlov > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 17:09, Maxim Muzafarov : > > > Folks, > > > > I've checked some build associated with PRs related to ML and it seems > > to me that the Run::ML suite [1] does not include the checkstyle > > suite in its workflow. It's a bit strange for me to add checkstyle, > > licenses headers etc. things to each aggregate suite configuration > > that we want to use. As its related to the code directly the general > > question here is - should we make our build procedure more intuitive > > and turn on checkstyle profile for the Apache Ignite Build suite? > > I think the answer is - yes. > > > > [1] > > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4381029&buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_RunMl > > > > On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 at 16:54, Alexey Zinoviev > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, Igniters, many thanks for the update on my PR, I didn't merge for > a 3 > > > months and doesn't know that rules were changed > > > Please, revert my commit, I will update my PR according CheckStyle job > > > > > > Please, tell me, is CheckStyle bot recommendations and changing of PR > > name > > > (with ticket name addition) is enough to finish this issue? > > > > > > Thanks a lot for the clarification > > > > > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 18:28, Dmitriy Pavlov : > > > > > > > +1 to revert. Some day we should learn this process. Maybe this day > is > > > > today. > > > > > > > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 10:00, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > > > > > >> +1 to revert. > > > >> > > > >> В Пт, 26/07/2019 в 09:48 +0300, Павлухин Иван пишет: > > > >> > Alexey, > > > >> > > > > >> > Actually the commit [1] is very suspicious: > > > >> > 1. Commit message "[ML] Hyper-parameter tuning via Genetic > Algorithm > > > >> > (#6713)" does not refer to a ticket. > > > >> > 2. Is there a ticket? Consequently it is not easy to understand > what > > > >> > was done and check ticket according to regular flow (review, TC > > run). > > > >> > 3. I skimmed through changes and found several code style > violations > > > >> quite soon. > > > >> > > > > >> > Should we revert the commit [1] and apply the changes according to > > our > > > >> > conventions [2]? > > > >> > > > > >> > [1] > > > >> > > > https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/63fbcbf849640edf140047a5111a58f480c95294 > > > >> > [2] > > > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute > > > >> > > > > >> > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 21:26, : > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Hi Igniters, > > > >> > > > > > >> > > I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are > > more > > > >> than welcomed to help. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > If your changes can lead to this failure(s): We're grateful > that > > you > > > >> were a volunteer to make the contribution to this project, but > things > > > >> change and you may no longer be able to finalize your contribution. > > > >> > > Could you respond to this email and indicate if you wish to > > continue > > > >> and fix test failures or step down and some committer may revert you > > commit. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > *New Trusted Suite failure in master [Check Code Style] > > > >> > > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_CheckCodeStyle&branch=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv > > > >> > > Changes may lead to failure were done by > > > >> > > - zaleslaw@gmail.com > > > >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=888540 > > > >> > > > > > >> > > - Here's a reminder of what contributors were agreed to > > do > > > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute > > > >> > > - Should you have any questions please contact > > > >> dev@ignite.apache.org > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Best Regards, > > > >> > > Apache Ignite TeamCity Bot > > > >> > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot > > > >> > > Notification generated at 21:26:38 25-07-2019 > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >
Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [4394336] needs to be handled
Hi Maxim, It may be reasonable, but probably we should start a separate topic. IMO, some Igniters (sad, but true) may have spam-filter for TC Bot messages Sincerely, Dmitriy Pavlov пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 17:09, Maxim Muzafarov : > Folks, > > I've checked some build associated with PRs related to ML and it seems > to me that the Run::ML suite [1] does not include the checkstyle > suite in its workflow. It's a bit strange for me to add checkstyle, > licenses headers etc. things to each aggregate suite configuration > that we want to use. As its related to the code directly the general > question here is - should we make our build procedure more intuitive > and turn on checkstyle profile for the Apache Ignite Build suite? > I think the answer is - yes. > > [1] > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4381029&buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_RunMl > > On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 at 16:54, Alexey Zinoviev > wrote: > > > > Hi, Igniters, many thanks for the update on my PR, I didn't merge for a 3 > > months and doesn't know that rules were changed > > Please, revert my commit, I will update my PR according CheckStyle job > > > > Please, tell me, is CheckStyle bot recommendations and changing of PR > name > > (with ticket name addition) is enough to finish this issue? > > > > Thanks a lot for the clarification > > > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 18:28, Dmitriy Pavlov : > > > > > +1 to revert. Some day we should learn this process. Maybe this day is > > > today. > > > > > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 10:00, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > > > >> +1 to revert. > > >> > > >> В Пт, 26/07/2019 в 09:48 +0300, Павлухин Иван пишет: > > >> > Alexey, > > >> > > > >> > Actually the commit [1] is very suspicious: > > >> > 1. Commit message "[ML] Hyper-parameter tuning via Genetic Algorithm > > >> > (#6713)" does not refer to a ticket. > > >> > 2. Is there a ticket? Consequently it is not easy to understand what > > >> > was done and check ticket according to regular flow (review, TC > run). > > >> > 3. I skimmed through changes and found several code style violations > > >> quite soon. > > >> > > > >> > Should we revert the commit [1] and apply the changes according to > our > > >> > conventions [2]? > > >> > > > >> > [1] > > >> > https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/63fbcbf849640edf140047a5111a58f480c95294 > > >> > [2] > > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute > > >> > > > >> > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 21:26, : > > >> > > > > >> > > Hi Igniters, > > >> > > > > >> > > I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are > more > > >> than welcomed to help. > > >> > > > > >> > > If your changes can lead to this failure(s): We're grateful that > you > > >> were a volunteer to make the contribution to this project, but things > > >> change and you may no longer be able to finalize your contribution. > > >> > > Could you respond to this email and indicate if you wish to > continue > > >> and fix test failures or step down and some committer may revert you > commit. > > >> > > > > >> > > *New Trusted Suite failure in master [Check Code Style] > > >> > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_CheckCodeStyle&branch=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv > > >> > > Changes may lead to failure were done by > > >> > > - zaleslaw@gmail.com > > >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=888540 > > >> > > > > >> > > - Here's a reminder of what contributors were agreed to > do > > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute > > >> > > - Should you have any questions please contact > > >> dev@ignite.apache.org > > >> > > > > >> > > Best Regards, > > >> > > Apache Ignite TeamCity Bot > > >> > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot > > >> > > Notification generated at 21:26:38 25-07-2019 > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >
Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [4394336] needs to be handled
+1. Lets do it, already! пт, 26 июля 2019 г., 17:09 Maxim Muzafarov : > Folks, > > I've checked some build associated with PRs related to ML and it seems > to me that the Run::ML suite [1] does not include the checkstyle > suite in its workflow. It's a bit strange for me to add checkstyle, > licenses headers etc. things to each aggregate suite configuration > that we want to use. As its related to the code directly the general > question here is - should we make our build procedure more intuitive > and turn on checkstyle profile for the Apache Ignite Build suite? > I think the answer is - yes. > > [1] > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4381029&buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_RunMl > > On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 at 16:54, Alexey Zinoviev > wrote: > > > > Hi, Igniters, many thanks for the update on my PR, I didn't merge for a 3 > > months and doesn't know that rules were changed > > Please, revert my commit, I will update my PR according CheckStyle job > > > > Please, tell me, is CheckStyle bot recommendations and changing of PR > name > > (with ticket name addition) is enough to finish this issue? > > > > Thanks a lot for the clarification > > > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 18:28, Dmitriy Pavlov : > > > > > +1 to revert. Some day we should learn this process. Maybe this day is > > > today. > > > > > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 10:00, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > > > >> +1 to revert. > > >> > > >> В Пт, 26/07/2019 в 09:48 +0300, Павлухин Иван пишет: > > >> > Alexey, > > >> > > > >> > Actually the commit [1] is very suspicious: > > >> > 1. Commit message "[ML] Hyper-parameter tuning via Genetic Algorithm > > >> > (#6713)" does not refer to a ticket. > > >> > 2. Is there a ticket? Consequently it is not easy to understand what > > >> > was done and check ticket according to regular flow (review, TC > run). > > >> > 3. I skimmed through changes and found several code style violations > > >> quite soon. > > >> > > > >> > Should we revert the commit [1] and apply the changes according to > our > > >> > conventions [2]? > > >> > > > >> > [1] > > >> > https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/63fbcbf849640edf140047a5111a58f480c95294 > > >> > [2] > > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute > > >> > > > >> > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 21:26, : > > >> > > > > >> > > Hi Igniters, > > >> > > > > >> > > I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are > more > > >> than welcomed to help. > > >> > > > > >> > > If your changes can lead to this failure(s): We're grateful that > you > > >> were a volunteer to make the contribution to this project, but things > > >> change and you may no longer be able to finalize your contribution. > > >> > > Could you respond to this email and indicate if you wish to > continue > > >> and fix test failures or step down and some committer may revert you > commit. > > >> > > > > >> > > *New Trusted Suite failure in master [Check Code Style] > > >> > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_CheckCodeStyle&branch=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv > > >> > > Changes may lead to failure were done by > > >> > > - zaleslaw@gmail.com > > >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=888540 > > >> > > > > >> > > - Here's a reminder of what contributors were agreed to > do > > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute > > >> > > - Should you have any questions please contact > > >> dev@ignite.apache.org > > >> > > > > >> > > Best Regards, > > >> > > Apache Ignite TeamCity Bot > > >> > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot > > >> > > Notification generated at 21:26:38 25-07-2019 > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >
Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [4394336] needs to be handled
Folks, I've checked some build associated with PRs related to ML and it seems to me that the Run::ML suite [1] does not include the checkstyle suite in its workflow. It's a bit strange for me to add checkstyle, licenses headers etc. things to each aggregate suite configuration that we want to use. As its related to the code directly the general question here is - should we make our build procedure more intuitive and turn on checkstyle profile for the Apache Ignite Build suite? I think the answer is - yes. [1] https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=4381029&buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_RunMl On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 at 16:54, Alexey Zinoviev wrote: > > Hi, Igniters, many thanks for the update on my PR, I didn't merge for a 3 > months and doesn't know that rules were changed > Please, revert my commit, I will update my PR according CheckStyle job > > Please, tell me, is CheckStyle bot recommendations and changing of PR name > (with ticket name addition) is enough to finish this issue? > > Thanks a lot for the clarification > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 18:28, Dmitriy Pavlov : > > > +1 to revert. Some day we should learn this process. Maybe this day is > > today. > > > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 10:00, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > >> +1 to revert. > >> > >> В Пт, 26/07/2019 в 09:48 +0300, Павлухин Иван пишет: > >> > Alexey, > >> > > >> > Actually the commit [1] is very suspicious: > >> > 1. Commit message "[ML] Hyper-parameter tuning via Genetic Algorithm > >> > (#6713)" does not refer to a ticket. > >> > 2. Is there a ticket? Consequently it is not easy to understand what > >> > was done and check ticket according to regular flow (review, TC run). > >> > 3. I skimmed through changes and found several code style violations > >> quite soon. > >> > > >> > Should we revert the commit [1] and apply the changes according to our > >> > conventions [2]? > >> > > >> > [1] > >> https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/63fbcbf849640edf140047a5111a58f480c95294 > >> > [2] > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute > >> > > >> > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 21:26, : > >> > > > >> > > Hi Igniters, > >> > > > >> > > I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are more > >> than welcomed to help. > >> > > > >> > > If your changes can lead to this failure(s): We're grateful that you > >> were a volunteer to make the contribution to this project, but things > >> change and you may no longer be able to finalize your contribution. > >> > > Could you respond to this email and indicate if you wish to continue > >> and fix test failures or step down and some committer may revert you > >> commit. > >> > > > >> > > *New Trusted Suite failure in master [Check Code Style] > >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_CheckCodeStyle&branch=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv > >> > > Changes may lead to failure were done by > >> > > - zaleslaw@gmail.com > >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=888540 > >> > > > >> > > - Here's a reminder of what contributors were agreed to do > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute > >> > > - Should you have any questions please contact > >> dev@ignite.apache.org > >> > > > >> > > Best Regards, > >> > > Apache Ignite TeamCity Bot > >> > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot > >> > > Notification generated at 21:26:38 25-07-2019 > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >
Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [4394336] needs to be handled
https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/ef55e4df147ca12efeaa48090fb592849deacca2 пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 16:54, Alexey Zinoviev : > Hi, Igniters, many thanks for the update on my PR, I didn't merge for a 3 > months and doesn't know that rules were changed > Please, revert my commit, I will update my PR according CheckStyle job > > Please, tell me, is CheckStyle bot recommendations and changing of PR name > (with ticket name addition) is enough to finish this issue? > > Thanks a lot for the clarification > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 18:28, Dmitriy Pavlov : > > > +1 to revert. Some day we should learn this process. Maybe this day is > > today. > > > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 10:00, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > >> +1 to revert. > >> > >> В Пт, 26/07/2019 в 09:48 +0300, Павлухин Иван пишет: > >> > Alexey, > >> > > >> > Actually the commit [1] is very suspicious: > >> > 1. Commit message "[ML] Hyper-parameter tuning via Genetic Algorithm > >> > (#6713)" does not refer to a ticket. > >> > 2. Is there a ticket? Consequently it is not easy to understand what > >> > was done and check ticket according to regular flow (review, TC run). > >> > 3. I skimmed through changes and found several code style violations > >> quite soon. > >> > > >> > Should we revert the commit [1] and apply the changes according to our > >> > conventions [2]? > >> > > >> > [1] > >> > https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/63fbcbf849640edf140047a5111a58f480c95294 > >> > [2] > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute > >> > > >> > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 21:26, : > >> > > > >> > > Hi Igniters, > >> > > > >> > > I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are > more > >> than welcomed to help. > >> > > > >> > > If your changes can lead to this failure(s): We're grateful that > you > >> were a volunteer to make the contribution to this project, but things > >> change and you may no longer be able to finalize your contribution. > >> > > Could you respond to this email and indicate if you wish to > continue > >> and fix test failures or step down and some committer may revert you > commit. > >> > > > >> > > *New Trusted Suite failure in master [Check Code Style] > >> > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_CheckCodeStyle&branch=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv > >> > > Changes may lead to failure were done by > >> > > - zaleslaw@gmail.com > >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=888540 > >> > > > >> > > - Here's a reminder of what contributors were agreed to do > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute > >> > > - Should you have any questions please contact > >> dev@ignite.apache.org > >> > > > >> > > Best Regards, > >> > > Apache Ignite TeamCity Bot > >> > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot > >> > > Notification generated at 21:26:38 25-07-2019 > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >
Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [4394336] needs to be handled
Hi, Igniters, many thanks for the update on my PR, I didn't merge for a 3 months and doesn't know that rules were changed Please, revert my commit, I will update my PR according CheckStyle job Please, tell me, is CheckStyle bot recommendations and changing of PR name (with ticket name addition) is enough to finish this issue? Thanks a lot for the clarification пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 18:28, Dmitriy Pavlov : > +1 to revert. Some day we should learn this process. Maybe this day is > today. > > пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 10:00, Nikolay Izhikov : > >> +1 to revert. >> >> В Пт, 26/07/2019 в 09:48 +0300, Павлухин Иван пишет: >> > Alexey, >> > >> > Actually the commit [1] is very suspicious: >> > 1. Commit message "[ML] Hyper-parameter tuning via Genetic Algorithm >> > (#6713)" does not refer to a ticket. >> > 2. Is there a ticket? Consequently it is not easy to understand what >> > was done and check ticket according to regular flow (review, TC run). >> > 3. I skimmed through changes and found several code style violations >> quite soon. >> > >> > Should we revert the commit [1] and apply the changes according to our >> > conventions [2]? >> > >> > [1] >> https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/63fbcbf849640edf140047a5111a58f480c95294 >> > [2] >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute >> > >> > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 21:26, : >> > > >> > > Hi Igniters, >> > > >> > > I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are more >> than welcomed to help. >> > > >> > > If your changes can lead to this failure(s): We're grateful that you >> were a volunteer to make the contribution to this project, but things >> change and you may no longer be able to finalize your contribution. >> > > Could you respond to this email and indicate if you wish to continue >> and fix test failures or step down and some committer may revert you commit. >> > > >> > > *New Trusted Suite failure in master [Check Code Style] >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_CheckCodeStyle&branch=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv >> > > Changes may lead to failure were done by >> > > - zaleslaw@gmail.com >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=888540 >> > > >> > > - Here's a reminder of what contributors were agreed to do >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute >> > > - Should you have any questions please contact >> dev@ignite.apache.org >> > > >> > > Best Regards, >> > > Apache Ignite TeamCity Bot >> > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot >> > > Notification generated at 21:26:38 25-07-2019 >> > >> > >> > >> >
Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [4394336] needs to be handled
+1 to revert. Some day we should learn this process. Maybe this day is today. пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 10:00, Nikolay Izhikov : > +1 to revert. > > В Пт, 26/07/2019 в 09:48 +0300, Павлухин Иван пишет: > > Alexey, > > > > Actually the commit [1] is very suspicious: > > 1. Commit message "[ML] Hyper-parameter tuning via Genetic Algorithm > > (#6713)" does not refer to a ticket. > > 2. Is there a ticket? Consequently it is not easy to understand what > > was done and check ticket according to regular flow (review, TC run). > > 3. I skimmed through changes and found several code style violations > quite soon. > > > > Should we revert the commit [1] and apply the changes according to our > > conventions [2]? > > > > [1] > https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/63fbcbf849640edf140047a5111a58f480c95294 > > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute > > > > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 21:26, : > > > > > > Hi Igniters, > > > > > > I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are more > than welcomed to help. > > > > > > If your changes can lead to this failure(s): We're grateful that you > were a volunteer to make the contribution to this project, but things > change and you may no longer be able to finalize your contribution. > > > Could you respond to this email and indicate if you wish to continue > and fix test failures or step down and some committer may revert you commit. > > > > > > *New Trusted Suite failure in master [Check Code Style] > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_CheckCodeStyle&branch=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv > > > Changes may lead to failure were done by > > > - zaleslaw@gmail.com > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=888540 > > > > > > - Here's a reminder of what contributors were agreed to do > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute > > > - Should you have any questions please contact > dev@ignite.apache.org > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > Apache Ignite TeamCity Bot > > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot > > > Notification generated at 21:26:38 25-07-2019 > > > > > > >
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-12020) SQL: Metrics of using memory quotas.
Pavel Kuznetsov created IGNITE-12020: Summary: SQL: Metrics of using memory quotas. Key: IGNITE-12020 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12020 Project: Ignite Issue Type: New Feature Components: sql Reporter: Pavel Kuznetsov Assignee: Pavel Kuznetsov Only local (per node) metrics are in scope. Metrics to implement: 1) How many times memory quota have been requested on the node by all the queries in total. (org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.query.h2.QueryMemoryManager) 2) How much memory all the queries are allowed to reserve on this node in total. (Possibly constant value until node reboot) 3) How much memory currently available for the queries on this node. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.14#76016)
Re: Partition map exchange metrics
Nikolay, Looks like final resolution. +1. пт, 26 июл. 2019 г. в 12:08, Nikolay Izhikov : > Pavel. > > > I just want to add that currentPmeTime is also useful alerting systems, > not > > only for eye observing > > Fully agree. > > Let me make it as clear as I can. > In the end we should have 4 metrics: > > `CurrentPMEDuration` - existing metric, shows current PME duration. > `CurrentPMECacheOperationsBlockedDuration` - new long metric. show > blocking duration of PME. > > `PMEDuration` - histogram of full PME durations. > `PMECacheOperationsBlockedDuration` - histogram of blocking PME durations. > > В Чт, 25/07/2019 в 22:40 +0300, Pavel Kovalenko пишет: > > Nikolay, > > > > Okay, sounds reasonable. > > I just want to add that currentPmeTime is also useful alerting systems, > not > > only for eye observing. If the time become too long and exceeds some > > threshold appropriate alert firing can help to early determine a critical > > problem. > > > > On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 21.12, Nikolay Izhikov > wrote: > > > > > I think exact time should be obtained from logs, isnt it? > > > > > > > > > чт, 25 июля 2019 г., 20:00 Pavel Kovalenko : > > > > > > > Nikolay, > > > > > > > > Yes, I have a chance to see HistogramMetric and moreover reviewed > it) My > > > > question was mostly about what exactly we will track in Histogram. > > > > If we use histogram do you know how we can find exact time e.g. when > PME > > > > with time > 1s happened? > > > > > > > > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 19:24, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > > > > > > > Pavel > > > > > > > > > > Do you have a chance to see HistogramMetric source? > > > > > It in master now. > > > > > Look in source would be better then my explanation) > > > > > > > > > > We should count PME processes that blocks operations for some > amount of > > > > > time. For example [less then 50, less then 250, less then 1000, > more > > > > > > then > > > > > 1000] millis. > > > > > > > > > > чт, 25 июля 2019 г., 18:55 Pavel Kovalenko : > > > > > > > > > > > Nikolay, > > > > > > > > > > > > Could you please explain deeper what structure will be of PME > > > > > > > > histogram? > > > > > > > > > > > > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 11:56, Nikolay Izhikov < > nizhi...@apache.org>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, Nikita. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. The totalCacheOperationsBlockedDuration metric that will > > > > > > > > > > accumulate > > > > > > > > all blocking durations that happen after node starts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No, we don't need it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Blocking duration histogram. Based on the HistogramMetric > > > > > > class. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, we need it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > В Чт, 25/07/2019 в 11:50 +0300, Nikita Amelchev пишет: > > > > > > > > Igniters, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All want to see the сacheOperationsBlockedDuration metric > that > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > show current blocking duration or 0 if there is no blocking > right > > > > > > > > > > now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do we need the following metrics? It seems one of them will > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > superfluous. > > > > > > > > 1. The totalCacheOperationsBlockedDuration metric that will > > > > > > > > > > accumulate > > > > > > > > all blocking durations that happen after node starts. > > > > > > > > 2. Blocking duration histogram. Based on the HistogramMetric > > > > > > class. > > > > > > > > User will be able to configure bounds. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ср, 24 июл. 2019 г. в 18:26, Nikolay Izhikov < > > > > > > nizhi...@apache.org > > > > > : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guys. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we should go with the 2 metrics > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * current PME duration (resets on finish) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This metric required for alerting(or > automatic > > > > > > > > > > > > > > actions) on long PME. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * PME duration histogram (value added to metrics > on PME > > > > > > > > > > > > finish) > > > > > > > > > This metric required for an: > > > > > > > > > * Quick PME trend analysis > > > > > > > > > * Quick PME history analysis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > В Ср, 24/07/2019 в 15:01 +0300, Ivan Rakov пишет: > > > > > > > > > > Nikita and Maxim, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What if we just update current metric > getCurrentPmeDuration > > > > > > > > > > > > > > behaviour > > > > > > > > > > > to show durations only for blocking PMEs? > > > > > > > > > > > Remain it as a long value and rename it to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > getCacheOperationsBlockedDuration. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No other changes will require. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > WDYT? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree with these two metrics. I also think th
Re: Partition map exchange metrics
Pavel. > I just want to add that currentPmeTime is also useful alerting systems, not > only for eye observing Fully agree. Let me make it as clear as I can. In the end we should have 4 metrics: `CurrentPMEDuration` - existing metric, shows current PME duration. `CurrentPMECacheOperationsBlockedDuration` - new long metric. show blocking duration of PME. `PMEDuration` - histogram of full PME durations. `PMECacheOperationsBlockedDuration` - histogram of blocking PME durations. В Чт, 25/07/2019 в 22:40 +0300, Pavel Kovalenko пишет: > Nikolay, > > Okay, sounds reasonable. > I just want to add that currentPmeTime is also useful alerting systems, not > only for eye observing. If the time become too long and exceeds some > threshold appropriate alert firing can help to early determine a critical > problem. > > On Thu, 25 Jul 2019 at 21.12, Nikolay Izhikov wrote: > > > I think exact time should be obtained from logs, isnt it? > > > > > > чт, 25 июля 2019 г., 20:00 Pavel Kovalenko : > > > > > Nikolay, > > > > > > Yes, I have a chance to see HistogramMetric and moreover reviewed it) My > > > question was mostly about what exactly we will track in Histogram. > > > If we use histogram do you know how we can find exact time e.g. when PME > > > with time > 1s happened? > > > > > > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 19:24, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > > > > > Pavel > > > > > > > > Do you have a chance to see HistogramMetric source? > > > > It in master now. > > > > Look in source would be better then my explanation) > > > > > > > > We should count PME processes that blocks operations for some amount of > > > > time. For example [less then 50, less then 250, less then 1000, more > > > > then > > > > 1000] millis. > > > > > > > > чт, 25 июля 2019 г., 18:55 Pavel Kovalenko : > > > > > > > > > Nikolay, > > > > > > > > > > Could you please explain deeper what structure will be of PME > > > > > > histogram? > > > > > > > > > > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 11:56, Nikolay Izhikov : > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, Nikita. > > > > > > > > > > > > I think > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. The totalCacheOperationsBlockedDuration metric that will > > > > > > > > accumulate > > > > > > > all blocking durations that happen after node starts. > > > > > > > > > > > > No, we don't need it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Blocking duration histogram. Based on the HistogramMetric > > > > class. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, we need it. > > > > > > > > > > > > В Чт, 25/07/2019 в 11:50 +0300, Nikita Amelchev пишет: > > > > > > > Igniters, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All want to see the сacheOperationsBlockedDuration metric that > > > > will > > > > > > > show current blocking duration or 0 if there is no blocking right > > > > > > > > now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do we need the following metrics? It seems one of them will be > > > > > > > > > > > > superfluous. > > > > > > > 1. The totalCacheOperationsBlockedDuration metric that will > > > > > > > > accumulate > > > > > > > all blocking durations that happen after node starts. > > > > > > > 2. Blocking duration histogram. Based on the HistogramMetric > > > > class. > > > > > > > User will be able to configure bounds. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ср, 24 июл. 2019 г. в 18:26, Nikolay Izhikov < > > > > nizhi...@apache.org > > > > : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guys. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we should go with the 2 metrics > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * current PME duration (resets on finish) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This metric required for alerting(or automatic > > > > > > > > > > > > actions) on long PME. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * PME duration histogram (value added to metrics on PME > > > > > > > > > > finish) > > > > > > > > This metric required for an: > > > > > > > > * Quick PME trend analysis > > > > > > > > * Quick PME history analysis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > В Ср, 24/07/2019 в 15:01 +0300, Ivan Rakov пишет: > > > > > > > > > Nikita and Maxim, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What if we just update current metric getCurrentPmeDuration > > > > > > > > > > > > behaviour > > > > > > > > > > to show durations only for blocking PMEs? > > > > > > > > > > Remain it as a long value and rename it to > > > > > > > > > > > > getCacheOperationsBlockedDuration. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No other changes will require. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > WDYT? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree with these two metrics. I also think that current > > > > > > > > > getCurrentPmeDuration will become redundant. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anton, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It looks like we're trying to implement "extended debug" > > > > > > > > instead > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > "monitoring". > > > > > > > > > > It should not be interesting for real admin what phase of > >
Re: [MTCGA]: new failures in builds [4394336] needs to be handled
+1 to revert. В Пт, 26/07/2019 в 09:48 +0300, Павлухин Иван пишет: > Alexey, > > Actually the commit [1] is very suspicious: > 1. Commit message "[ML] Hyper-parameter tuning via Genetic Algorithm > (#6713)" does not refer to a ticket. > 2. Is there a ticket? Consequently it is not easy to understand what > was done and check ticket according to regular flow (review, TC run). > 3. I skimmed through changes and found several code style violations quite > soon. > > Should we revert the commit [1] and apply the changes according to our > conventions [2]? > > [1] > https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/63fbcbf849640edf140047a5111a58f480c95294 > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute > > чт, 25 июл. 2019 г. в 21:26, : > > > > Hi Igniters, > > > > I've detected some new issue on TeamCity to be handled. You are more than > > welcomed to help. > > > > If your changes can lead to this failure(s): We're grateful that you were > > a volunteer to make the contribution to this project, but things change and > > you may no longer be able to finalize your contribution. > > Could you respond to this email and indicate if you wish to continue and > > fix test failures or step down and some committer may revert you commit. > > > > *New Trusted Suite failure in master [Check Code Style] > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_CheckCodeStyle&branch=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv > > Changes may lead to failure were done by > > - zaleslaw@gmail.com > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=888540 > > > > - Here's a reminder of what contributors were agreed to do > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute > > - Should you have any questions please contact > > dev@ignite.apache.org > > > > Best Regards, > > Apache Ignite TeamCity Bot > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-teamcity-bot > > Notification generated at 21:26:38 25-07-2019 > > > signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
