Re: [DISCUSSION] Redis and memcached protocol support.
As for me, I believe that this should be removed. We have already proven binary protocol that is under heavy use. ср, 9 февр. 2022 г. в 15:11, Maxim Muzafarov : > Hello, > > From my point of view, it's better to reduce the scope of features to > be supported and focus on those ones that a really important for > production e.g. Calcite for Ignite 2.x. However, talking in terms of > open-source development it's better to find a volunteer who will fix > all the issues you describe. > > On Tue, 8 Feb 2022 at 14:27, Ivan Daschinsky wrote: > > > > Igniters, I'd like to discuss the future of this functionality in Apache > > Ignite > > > > Today this functionality seems to be unusable > > 1. It is limited (especially redis) > > 2. It doesn't support HA (redis sentinel or redis cluster) > > 3. Nobody maintains it and even nobody fixes bugs. (i.e. [1] is not > merged > > for years). > > > > If we want to support redis protocol, we should rewrite it and add HA > > features. > > Otherwise, I suppose that we should consider complete removal of this > code > > from codebase. > > > > WDYT? > > > > > > [1] -- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7153 > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
Re: Travis service is not working properly
Created the issue [1] to solve the problem of broken checks we already have because of non-guaranted checks by Travis. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-16508
Re: Apache Ignite 2.13 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]
Nikita, Thank you for starting this thread. +1 for these dates, but I think it's better to start the code freeze date when the Calcite engine will be actually merged to the master branch. On Tue, 8 Feb 2022 at 13:10, Nikita Amelchev wrote: > > Dear Ignite Community! > > I suggest starting Apache Ignite 2.13 release activities. > > There is a plan to merge the new Calcite SQL engine. [1] I think that > 2.13 is a good candidate for it. > > Moreover, we've accumulated a hundred resolved [2] issues with new > features and bug fixes which are waiting for their release date. For > example, > > BinaryArray introduced, > Read Repair strategies implemented, > CPP Thin: asynchronous network events handling, > NUMA-aware allocator for data regions > etc. > > I want to propose myself to be the release manager of the planning release. > > I propose the following timeline: > > Scope Freeze: February 21, 2022 > Code Freeze: March 7, 2022 > Voting Date: March 21, 2022 > Release Date: March 28, 2022 > > WDYT? > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15436 > [2] > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=(project%20%3D%20%27Ignite%27%20AND%20fixVersion%20is%20not%20empty%20AND%20fixVersion%20in%20(%272.13%27))%20AND%20(component%20is%20EMPTY%20OR%20component%20not%20in%20(documentation))%20and%20status%20in%20(%27CLOSED%27%2C%20%27RESOLVED%27)%20ORDER%20BY%20priority > > -- > Best wishes, > Amelchev Nikita
Re: [DISCUSSION] Redis and memcached protocol support.
Hello, >From my point of view, it's better to reduce the scope of features to be supported and focus on those ones that a really important for production e.g. Calcite for Ignite 2.x. However, talking in terms of open-source development it's better to find a volunteer who will fix all the issues you describe. On Tue, 8 Feb 2022 at 14:27, Ivan Daschinsky wrote: > > Igniters, I'd like to discuss the future of this functionality in Apache > Ignite > > Today this functionality seems to be unusable > 1. It is limited (especially redis) > 2. It doesn't support HA (redis sentinel or redis cluster) > 3. Nobody maintains it and even nobody fixes bugs. (i.e. [1] is not merged > for years). > > If we want to support redis protocol, we should rewrite it and add HA > features. > Otherwise, I suppose that we should consider complete removal of this code > from codebase. > > WDYT? > > > [1] -- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7153
