Re: contribution permissions

[Denis Magda]

Oleg, welcome to the community! I've added you to the contributors' list in
JIRA.

Look forward to seeing your first contribution completed shortly. Let us
know if you have any questions.

-
Denis


On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 6:22 AM Oleg Ostanin 
wrote:

> Hello Ignite Community!
>
> My name is Oleg. I want to contribute to Apache Ignite and want to
> start with this issue - IGNITE-12832, my JIRA username oleg-a-ostanin.
> Any help on this will be appreciated.
>
> Thanks!
>

In-Memory Computing Essentials Webinar, March 25th - New Edition

[Denis Magda]

Hi Igniters,

I thought that some of you could benefit from joining a webinar about
in-memory computing essentials [1] on March 25th, where Ignite is used as a
reference platform for explanation/demonstration of the main topics. Some
of you might have watched the original version, that had bee recorded
almost 3 years ago [2], and the list of the top watched Ignite videos on
YouTube.

A lot has changed since the time of the recording.  The content/demos have
been revisited and rebuilt from scratch for the upcoming session. I will be
pleased to see you joining me next Wednesday; you can find the agenda by
following the link [1].

[1] https://bit.ly/3acCtEY
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G22L2KW9gEQ

-
Denis

Re: [DISCUSSION] Changes in Ignite release process related to documentation

[Denis Magda]

Hi Maxim,

Those JIRA labels support the current process that assumes the creation of
a documentation ticket before a development ticket is closed. If a
contributor believes there is no need to update the docs (like in the case
of bug fixes) then "Documentation required" will stay disabled. Otherwise,
we need to work on the docs and "Documentation required" needs to be on,
and a docs ticket has to be created. That's the current process... that
should be revisited and changed. I've recorded that item of us in this
discussion:
http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSSION-Major-changes-in-Ignite-in-2020-td46579.html

Generally, I like the idea shared by Andrey Gura that documentation and
APIs need to be updated and prepared before a primary development ticket is
closed. As a side effect, we'll get rid off "Documentation required" label.

-
Denis


On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 7:03 AM Maxim Muzafarov  wrote:

> Denis,
>
> From my recent practice with the release check-boxes "Release notes
> required" and "Documentation required" also was not so helpful as
> expected. Can we remove them from JIRA issues?
>
> There is no magic pill to not forget to document improvements, but I
> think a wide discussion of each major improvement on the dev-list can
> help much to keep documentation up to date.
>
> On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 at 23:18, Alexey Zinoviev 
> wrote:
> >
> > The Best way to require draft documentation with the proposed PR:) as a
> > part of TC check
> >
> > чт, 19 мар. 2020 г., 21:06 Denis Magda :
> >
> > > Igniters,
> > >
> > > I've modified our release process introducing this step that ensures
> > > documentation readiness before a vote can be started:
> > >
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-4.1EnsureDocumentationReadinessandAccouncementBlogPostActivity
> > >
> > > Thanks to everyone who joined this conversation.
> > >
> > > -
> > > Denis
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 2:17 AM Artem Budnikov <
> > > a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Denis,
> > > >
> > > > Both yours and Andrey's proposal are important. You should start to
> vote
> > > > after the documentation is ready, just like you start to vote after
> all
> > > > features are ready, and documentation is just another feature.
> However,
> > > the
> > > > documentation can't be prepared if there is no information on the
> > > features.
> > > > Implementing the feature and working on the docs should go in
> tandem. As
> > > > Andrey pointed out it brings some benefits, and makes you more
> > > > conscious about the "user" aspect of the feature, which is generally
> a
> > > good
> > > > thing.
> > > >
> > > > -Artem
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 11:59 PM Denis Magda 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Pavel,
> > > > >
> > > > > We're thinking about the same in regards to the future of Ignite
> > > > > documentation :) Artem and I had some kitchen talks recently and
> we'll
> > > > > restart that activity. Ignite definitely deserves and requires
> next-gen
> > > > > docs. Artem promised to share his thoughts soon.
> > > > >
> > > > > Btw, check out How to write effective documentation for your
> > > open-source
> > > > > projec <https://opensource.com/article/20/3/documentation>t
> article
> > > > that I
> > > > > found in one of my newsletters today. It feels like it can be used
> as a
> > > > > reference by Igniters on some best practices.
> > > > >
> > > > > Denis Magda
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 1:03 PM Pavel Tupitsyn <
> ptupit...@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I agree with Andrey.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And I'd like to reopen the discussion on "moving docs from
> readme.io
> > > > to
> > > > > > git" [1] [2]
> > > > > > Looks like we reached some agreement there but never moved on
> with
> > > the
> > > > > > migration.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> >

Re: [DISCUSSION] Major changes in Ignite in 2020

[Denis Magda]

My top list of changes is as follows:

   - Feature: New lightweight Apache Ignite website with advanced search
   engine optimizations and updated technical content. Why? Much better
   discoverability of Ignite via search engines like Google to let many more
   application developers learn about Ignite existence. This change is to be
   brought to live soon:
   
http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Ignite-Website-New-Look-td46324.html


   - Feature: New Ignite documentation on a new platform and with a new
   structure. Why? Ignite documentation has to help new application developers
   to get up and running as quickly as possible, it also has to become a
   primary source that answers most of the questions. Our current docs have a
   lot of gaps: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7595


   - Process Change: to be successful with the point above, documentation
   should be created/updated before we close a JIRA ticket for
   code/API/feature contribution. Why? First, application developers learn
   Ignite and create their Ignite-apps referring to API reference and
   technical documentation (and not to the source code), thus, documentation
   needs to be treated as an integral part of the whole project. Second, while
   writing a new documentation paragraph we could discover incompleteness of a
   fix/feature or usability issues before the change is released publicly.


   - Feature: complete the modularization project by defining the Ignite
   core that will be released separately from Ignite extensions. The 'why' is
   written here:
   https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-36%3A+Modularization

-
Denis


On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 11:21 AM Denis Magda  wrote:

> Dear Ignite community,
>
> Many of us want to see where Ignite is heading and ask for some sort of a
> 2020 course/plan/roadmap and a predictable schedule of major releases.
> Also, there are intentions to enhance some internal processes and
> collaboration approaches.
>
> Let's start moving in that direction by defining 3-5 major changes you
> would like to contribute this year personally or will be glad to drive
> (like processes changes) and work together with someone else. Dear, Ignite
> user community, please share your suggestions as well.
>
> Note, let's use this thread to collect major
> topics/directions/features/changes. Just respond with your proposals. Don't
> go into arguments if you don't agree with someone's opinions. Once the
> topics are collected, we'll create a wiki page and, most likely, will start
> working through specific items in focus groups and only then lay out a
> cohesive plan with some dates.
>
> -
> Denis
>

[DISCUSSION] Major changes in Ignite in 2020

[Denis Magda]

Dear Ignite community,

Many of us want to see where Ignite is heading and ask for some sort of a
2020 course/plan/roadmap and a predictable schedule of major releases.
Also, there are intentions to enhance some internal processes and
collaboration approaches.

Let's start moving in that direction by defining 3-5 major changes you
would like to contribute this year personally or will be glad to drive
(like processes changes) and work together with someone else. Dear, Ignite
user community, please share your suggestions as well.

Note, let's use this thread to collect major
topics/directions/features/changes. Just respond with your proposals. Don't
go into arguments if you don't agree with someone's opinions. Once the
topics are collected, we'll create a wiki page and, most likely, will start
working through specific items in focus groups and only then lay out a
cohesive plan with some dates.

-
Denis

Re: [DISCUSSION] Changes in Ignite release process related to documentation

[Denis Magda]

Igniters,

I've modified our release process introducing this step that ensures
documentation readiness before a vote can be started:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-4.1EnsureDocumentationReadinessandAccouncementBlogPostActivity

Thanks to everyone who joined this conversation.

-
Denis


On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 2:17 AM Artem Budnikov 
wrote:

> Denis,
>
> Both yours and Andrey's proposal are important. You should start to vote
> after the documentation is ready, just like you start to vote after all
> features are ready, and documentation is just another feature. However, the
> documentation can't be prepared if there is no information on the features.
> Implementing the feature and working on the docs should go in tandem. As
> Andrey pointed out it brings some benefits, and makes you more
> conscious about the "user" aspect of the feature, which is generally a good
> thing.
>
> -Artem
>
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 11:59 PM Denis Magda  wrote:
>
> > Hi Pavel,
> >
> > We're thinking about the same in regards to the future of Ignite
> > documentation :) Artem and I had some kitchen talks recently and we'll
> > restart that activity. Ignite definitely deserves and requires next-gen
> > docs. Artem promised to share his thoughts soon.
> >
> > Btw, check out How to write effective documentation for your open-source
> > projec <https://opensource.com/article/20/3/documentation>t article
> that I
> > found in one of my newsletters today. It feels like it can be used as a
> > reference by Igniters on some best practices.
> >
> > Denis Magda
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 1:03 PM Pavel Tupitsyn 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I agree with Andrey.
> > >
> > > And I'd like to reopen the discussion on "moving docs from readme.io
> to
> > > git" [1] [2]
> > > Looks like we reached some agreement there but never moved on with the
> > > migration.
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Move-documentation-from-readme-io-to-GitHub-pages-td16409.html
> > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7595
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 9:48 PM Denis Magda  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Andrey,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Your second point made me recall
> > > several
> > > > occasions when only after a release of some public APIs we had a
> chance
> > > to
> > > > complete documentation and discovered the APIs' ineffectiveness and
> > > oddness
> > > > from the user usage perspective. But it was already late.
> > > >
> > > > Generally, if to move incrementally with documentation process
> changes,
> > > > "documentation readiness before the vote" should work as the first
> step
> > > for
> > > > us. There will be delays with the vote for sure because we have to
> get
> > > used
> > > > to this change, but over time we should get to the point when
> > > documentation
> > > > will be prepared upon overall task resolution. Andrey, Artem, do you
> > > agree
> > > > with that?
> > > >
> > > > Other community members, please share your thoughts. If we don't hear
> > any
> > > > opposite opinions, then I would update our release procedures with
> this
> > > > change.
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > > Denis
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 9:44 AM Andrey Gura 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Denis,
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree with you.
> > > > >
> > > > > Also I think that we should move to process which will require
> > > > > documentation updates during work on issue/feature and will part of
> > > > > code review process. Such approach has some useful benefits:
> > > > >
> > > > > - Documentation readiness at the same time when fix/implementation
> is
> > > > > ready (remember, documentation is part of a product).
> > > > > - Work on documentation and review could discover incompleteness
> of a
> > > > > fix or a feature on earlier stage (It is usual situation when some
> > > > > aspects were just forgotten, but documentation writing could
> > spotlight
> > &

Re: Apache Ignite 2.8.1 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

[Denis Magda]

Igniters,

As long as 2.8.1 is inevitable and we already keep adding critical issues
to the working queue, let's settle on the release time frames and decide
who will be a release manager. This is the time proposed by Maxim and,
personally, I concur with such a schedule:

   - Scope Freeze: April 15, 2020
   - Code Freeze: April 22, 2020
   - Voting Date: April 27, 2020
   - Release Date: May 1, 2020

Do we agree on this time? Is there anybody who ready to drive the release
as a release manager?

-
Denis


On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 5:50 AM Sergey Antonov 
wrote:

> Folks,
>
> I'd like to add ticket IGNITE-12774 Transaction hangs after too many open
> files NIO exception [1] to ignite-2.8.1 scope.
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12774
>
> ср, 18 мар. 2020 г. в 16:53, Maxim Muzafarov :
>
> > Folks,
> >
> > Can we add ignite-2.8.1 [2] branch under TC.Bot protection [1]?
> >
> >
> > [1] https://mtcga.gridgain.com/guard.html
> > [2] https://github.com/apache/ignite/tree/ignite-2.8.1
> >
> > On Mon, 16 Mar 2020 at 16:32, Alexey Goncharuk
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > Folks,
> > >
> > > I've walked through all the commits to master since 2.8 branch was cut
> > and
> > > filtered some tickets that in my opinion are worth including to 2.8.1
> > > release below (note that they are ready end the effort of including
> them
> > to
> > > the release should be low as long as there are no implicit dependencies
> > > between tickets). Please share your opinion on whether we should
> include
> > > them to the 2.8.1.
> > >
> > > IGNITE-12717 SQL: index creation refactoring
> > > IGNITE-12590 MERGE INTO query is failing on Ignite client node
> > > IGNITE-12671 Update of partition's states can stuck when rebalance
> > > completed during exchange
> > > IGNITE-11798 Memory leak on unstable topology caused by partition
> > > reservation
> > > IGNITE-12665 SQL: Potential race on MapResult close.
> > > IGNITE-12605 Historical (WAL) rebalance can start on a cleared
> partition
> > if
> > > some baseline node leaves the cluster and then joins back.
> > > IGNITE-12654 Some of rentingFutures in GridDhtPartitionTopologyImpl may
> > > accumulate a huge number of eviction callbacks
> > > IGNITE-12631 Incorrect rewriting wal record type in marshalled mode
> > during
> > > iteration
> > > IGNITE-12621 Node leave may cause NullPointerException during IO
> message
> > > processing if security is enabled
> > > IGNITE-12636 Full rebalance instead of a historical one
> > > IGNITE-12618 Affinity cache for version of last server event can be
> wiped
> > > from history
> > > IGNITE-12013 NullPointerException is thrown by ExchangeLatchManager
> > during
> > > cache creation
> > > IGNITE-11797 Fix consistency issues for atomic and mixed tx-atomic
> cache
> > > groups.
> > > IGNITE-12557 Destroy of big cache which is not only cache in cache
> group
> > > causes IgniteOOME
> > > IGNITE-12567 H2Tree goes into illegal state when non-indexed columns
> are
> > > dropped
> > > IGNITE-12569 Can't set serialized enum to a BinaryObject's field
> > > IGNITE-12460 Cluster fails to find the node by consistent ID
> > > IGNITE-12459 Searching checkpoint record in WAL doesn't work with
> segment
> > > compaction
> > > IGNITE-12548 Possible tx desync during recovery on near node left.
> > > IGNITE-12546 Prevent partitions owned by other nodes switch their state
> > to
> > > MOVING due to counter difference on node join.
> > > IGNITE-12551 Partition desync if a partition is evicted then owned
> again
> > > and historically rebalanced
> > > IGNITE-12536 Inconsistency between cache data and indexes when cache
> > > operation is interrupted
> > > IGNITE-12403 Throttle page difference output in PageMemoryTracker
> > > IGNITE-12523 Continuously generated thread dumps in failure processor
> > slow
> > > down the whole system
> > > IGNITE-12489 Error during purges by expiration: Unknown page type
> >
>
>
> --
> BR, Sergey Antonov
>

Re: New Developer

[Denis Magda]

Hello Yaroslav, welcome to the community!

I've added you to the contributors' list. Let us know if you have any
questions related to the selected task.

-
Denis


On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 6:03 AM Yaroslav Molochkov 
wrote:

> Hello, I'm new to Ignite and I would like to join apache ignite
> development.
> My JIRA login is YAMolochkov
>
> Going to start from IGNITE-12749
>

Re: [DISCUSSION] Changes in Ignite release process related to documentation

[Denis Magda]

Hi Pavel,

We're thinking about the same in regards to the future of Ignite
documentation :) Artem and I had some kitchen talks recently and we'll
restart that activity. Ignite definitely deserves and requires next-gen
docs. Artem promised to share his thoughts soon.

Btw, check out How to write effective documentation for your open-source
projec <https://opensource.com/article/20/3/documentation>t article that I
found in one of my newsletters today. It feels like it can be used as a
reference by Igniters on some best practices.

Denis Magda


On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 1:03 PM Pavel Tupitsyn  wrote:

> I agree with Andrey.
>
> And I'd like to reopen the discussion on "moving docs from readme.io to
> git" [1] [2]
> Looks like we reached some agreement there but never moved on with the
> migration.
>
>
> [1]
>
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Move-documentation-from-readme-io-to-GitHub-pages-td16409.html
> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7595
>
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 9:48 PM Denis Magda  wrote:
>
> > Andrey,
> >
> > Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Your second point made me recall
> several
> > occasions when only after a release of some public APIs we had a chance
> to
> > complete documentation and discovered the APIs' ineffectiveness and
> oddness
> > from the user usage perspective. But it was already late.
> >
> > Generally, if to move incrementally with documentation process changes,
> > "documentation readiness before the vote" should work as the first step
> for
> > us. There will be delays with the vote for sure because we have to get
> used
> > to this change, but over time we should get to the point when
> documentation
> > will be prepared upon overall task resolution. Andrey, Artem, do you
> agree
> > with that?
> >
> > Other community members, please share your thoughts. If we don't hear any
> > opposite opinions, then I would update our release procedures with this
> > change.
> >
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 9:44 AM Andrey Gura  wrote:
> >
> > > Denis,
> > >
> > > I agree with you.
> > >
> > > Also I think that we should move to process which will require
> > > documentation updates during work on issue/feature and will part of
> > > code review process. Such approach has some useful benefits:
> > >
> > > - Documentation readiness at the same time when fix/implementation is
> > > ready (remember, documentation is part of a product).
> > > - Work on documentation and review could discover incompleteness of a
> > > fix or a feature on earlier stage (It is usual situation when some
> > > aspects were just forgotten, but documentation writing could spotlight
> > > such things).
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 7:49 PM Denis Magda  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Igniters,
> > > >
> > > > With the final 2.8 release steps checked out today by announcing the
> > > > version globally (congrats!), it's a proper time to consider and
> tweak
> > > our
> > > > release process, making completion of some phases more predictable
> and
> > > > aligned. I would like to dedicate this thread solely to changes
> related
> > > to
> > > > the documentation.
> > > >
> > > > If to do a recap, Ignite 2.8 announcement went out of sync with the
> > > > publication of binaries, Maven and other artifacts because our
> > technical
> > > > documentation was completed long after the vote had been closed.
> > > >
> > > > We can easily eliminate such glitches for future releases if agree to
> > > start
> > > > a vote only if Ignite docs are ready and can be published the same
> day
> > > with
> > > > other release artifacts. If the docs are completed and available
> > > > internally while the vote goes then we can work on a release blog
> post
> > > > (referring to docs details) and announce the release the same day
> when
> > > the
> > > > binaries/docs availability.
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts? Let's change the process ensuring that the vote can be
> > started
> > > > only if technical documentation is ready to be released?
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > > Denis
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSSION] Further development ignitevisorcmd

[Denis Magda]

Hi Nikolay,

I think that your proposal is reasonable. Agree, that all exceptions need
to be signaled properly - either with an ERROR message or by failing an
operation initiated by Visor CMD (you can return some error code and the
tool needs to process it properly). It's up to you and other Visor
maintainers to decide what's the best way to handle such exceptions.

-
Denis


On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 12:13 AM Nikolai Kulagin 
wrote:

> Hello, Igniters!
>
> I would like to raise a question on the work of the ignitevisorcmd.
> Currently, part of the exceptions in the ignitevisorcmd is not thrown and
> displayed on the console as WARNING. Example:
> VisorOpenCommand#open(String).
>
> The result of this is:
> 1. Complicated perception of an exception by the user. It seems to me that
> if a fat client throws an exception, the ignitevisorcmd should show this as
> an exception (or ERROR).
> 2. Most tests in the ignitevisorcmd do not have a final verification of the
> conditions. For example, the VisorKillCommandSpec test is successful,
> although the ignitevisorcmd cannot even connect to the cluster. The test
> falls only in case of an exception, but some of the exceptions are not
> thrown and are displayed as WARNING. Paradox.
>
> And it seems to me that there are two ways to solve the problem:
> 1. We throw exceptions. In this case, some of the tests begin to work;
>or
> 2. We continue to display exceptions like WARNING (or ERROR). Then we need
> to do the following:
> - Correct the tests so that they check the fulfillment of the conditions;
> - It might be worth displaying exceptions as an ERROR.
>
> A good example is IGNITE-12757. All tests pass successfully, although the
> ignitevisorcmd on default configs does not even connect to the cluster.
>
> WDYT?
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12757
>

Re: [DISCUSSION] Changes in Ignite release process related to documentation

[Denis Magda]

Andrey,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Your second point made me recall several
occasions when only after a release of some public APIs we had a chance to
complete documentation and discovered the APIs' ineffectiveness and oddness
from the user usage perspective. But it was already late.

Generally, if to move incrementally with documentation process changes,
"documentation readiness before the vote" should work as the first step for
us. There will be delays with the vote for sure because we have to get used
to this change, but over time we should get to the point when documentation
will be prepared upon overall task resolution. Andrey, Artem, do you agree
with that?

Other community members, please share your thoughts. If we don't hear any
opposite opinions, then I would update our release procedures with this
change.

-
Denis


On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 9:44 AM Andrey Gura  wrote:

> Denis,
>
> I agree with you.
>
> Also I think that we should move to process which will require
> documentation updates during work on issue/feature and will part of
> code review process. Such approach has some useful benefits:
>
> - Documentation readiness at the same time when fix/implementation is
> ready (remember, documentation is part of a product).
> - Work on documentation and review could discover incompleteness of a
> fix or a feature on earlier stage (It is usual situation when some
> aspects were just forgotten, but documentation writing could spotlight
> such things).
>
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 7:49 PM Denis Magda  wrote:
> >
> > Igniters,
> >
> > With the final 2.8 release steps checked out today by announcing the
> > version globally (congrats!), it's a proper time to consider and tweak
> our
> > release process, making completion of some phases more predictable and
> > aligned. I would like to dedicate this thread solely to changes related
> to
> > the documentation.
> >
> > If to do a recap, Ignite 2.8 announcement went out of sync with the
> > publication of binaries, Maven and other artifacts because our technical
> > documentation was completed long after the vote had been closed.
> >
> > We can easily eliminate such glitches for future releases if agree to
> start
> > a vote only if Ignite docs are ready and can be published the same day
> with
> > other release artifacts. If the docs are completed and available
> > internally while the vote goes then we can work on a release blog post
> > (referring to docs details) and announce the release the same day when
> the
> > binaries/docs availability.
> >
> > Thoughts? Let's change the process ensuring that the vote can be started
> > only if technical documentation is ready to be released?
> >
> > -
> > Denis
>

Re: IGNITE-8152

[Denis Magda]

Hi Aleksei,

Thanks for driving the resolution of the ticket. As I see @Taras Ledkov
 and @Andrey Mashenkov  has
already stepped in as reviewers and I believe they will look at your
changes soon.

-
Denis


On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 3:48 AM Aleksei Litsov
 wrote:

> Hello Igniters!
>
> I send PR for ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-8152
>
> I fixed all the comments on the ticket. Could you see the solution. If you
> need anything else, I am open for suggestions. If everything is ok, please
> accept the PR and I will take the next task
>

Re: Ignite 2.8 documentation

[Denis Magda]

Artem,

I'll create a ticket for the IGFS docs replacement once we publish the new
website that we'll have all the references needed to create new pages that
will replace the IGFS content.

@Yuriy Gerzhedovich , could you please help
with the SQL questions?

-
Denis


On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 12:22 AM Artem Budnikov 
wrote:

> Can anyone give some details about those missing features so I can
> document them?
>
> -Artem
>
> On 15.03.2020 05:31, 18624049226 wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I don't know the missing part. Is there any developer willing to add it?
> >
> > In addition, as far as I know, IGFS and Hadoop accelerator related
> > components of ignite have been discarded, should related documents
> > also be deleted?
> >
> > 在 2020/3/13 上午6:08, Ivan Pavlukhin 写道:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >>> There are the following functions. I haven't found the related
> >>> documents. Please confirm again?
> >> Thank you for checking this thoroughly! I looked into SQL and JDBC
> >> items.
> >>
> >>> 1.SQL:Added KILL QUERY command
> >> Here it is https://apacheignite-sql.readme.io/docs/kill-query but it
> >> seems no link from a parent page [1]
> >>
> >>> 4.JDBC:Added cache expiry policies
> >> Sounds strange because I an not sure that this feature was implemented.
> >>
> >> All other pointed SQL and JDBS items seems to be missing =(
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Ivan Pavlukhin
> >>
> >> чт, 12 мар. 2020 г. в 15:04, 18624049226 <18624049...@163.com>:
> >>> Hi igniters,
> >>>
> >>> There are the following functions. I haven't found the related
> >>> documents. Please confirm again?
> >>>
> >>> 1.SQL:Added KILL QUERY command
> >>>
> >>> 2.SQL:Added ability to specify query parallelism in CREATE TABLE's WITH
> >>> "" clause
> >>>
> >>> 3.SQL:Added default query timeout
> >>>
> >>> 4.JDBC:Added cache expiry policies
> >>>
> >>> 5.JDBC:Added support JDBC thin driver: connection timeout
> >>>
> >>> 6.JDBC:Added support query cancel
> >>>
> >>> 7.JDBC:Added support query timeout
> >>>
> >>> 8.REST:Added "caches" param for "top" command
> >>>
> >>> 9.REST:Added baseline topology commands to REST API
> >>>
> >>> 10.REST:Added memory policy metrics via REST
> >>>
> >>> These are great improvements, and without documentation, developers may
> >>> not know how to use them.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 在 2020/3/12 上午1:40, Artem Budnikov 写道:
> >>>> Denis,
> >>>>
> >>>> I made version 2.8 the main version on readme.io. Everybody can see
> >>>> it now.
> >>>>
> >>>> -Artem
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 7:35 PM Denis Magda 
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Artem,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Understood, let's see what Alexey says. As of now, I would suggest we
> >>>>> publishing the existing ML pages and improve the content with no
> >>>>> rush.
> >>>>> Could you also make a 2.8 version the default one? 2.7.6 is still
> >>>>> selected
> >>>>> by default when I navigate to the documentation website.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -
> >>>>> Denis
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 9:33 AM Artem Budnikov <
> >>>>> a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Denis,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'm waiting for answers from Alexey. I can't really tell how lont
> >>>>>> it will
> >>>>>> take. Of couse, we can publish everything right now and improve some
> >>>>> pages
> >>>>>> later.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -Artem
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 7:13 PM Denis Magda 
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Artem, thanks! How much time should it take to roll out the ML
> >>>>>>> pages?
>

Re: Ignite website HTML files are not updated for 2.8 release

[Denis Magda]

Mauricio,

Thanks for the quick turnaround. I've merged the patch.

Look forward to getting the updated instructions. We need to ensure that a
release manager doesn't hit any bumps while working on this release step.

-
Denis


On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 1:53 PM Mauricio Stekl 
wrote:

> hi Denis,
> Attached you can find a patch to add GA to all 2.8 and 2.7.x doc pages.
> Also adds noindex to older versions.
>
> Please let me know if you have any questions.
>
> I will work on better instructions and probably some easier script to do
> these changes.
>
> Best,
> Mauricio
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 1:23 PM Denis Magda  wrote:
>
>> Mauricio,
>>
>> I've just spotted that all 2.8 API files (java, .net, etc.) miss the GA
>> breadcrumbs. Most likely, this step of our release process was not fully
>> completed:
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-6.3.5.Updatereferencetodocsfromsite,SEOupdates
>>
>> Could you please step in and send a patch to resolve the issue? Plus,
>> please help to update the existing instruction/script to a format that
>> everyone could complete this step throughout a release. Presently, I failed
>> to figure out how to make things working.
>>
>> -
>> Denis
>>
>

Veena - subscribe to the dev list before sending emails

[Denis Magda]

Hello Veena,

Our moderators' queue for the Ignite dev list is flooded with your emails.
As suggested earlier, please subscribe to the dev list first and that will
eliminate the need for all further moderation of your messages:
https://ignite.apache.org/community/resources.html#mail-lists

Also, this last message "Server Node comes down with : (err) Failed to
notify listener: GridDhtTxPrepareFuture Error" that was added to the
moderator list and needs to be forwarded to the user list instead. Please
use the user list to report any issues or ask questions (dev list is used
solely for Ignite development needs).

Copying @dev  to let other moderators know that you
were updated on this matter.

-
Denis

Ignite website HTML files are not updated for 2.8 release

[Denis Magda]

Mauricio,

I've just spotted that all 2.8 API files (java, .net, etc.) miss the GA
breadcrumbs. Most likely, this step of our release process was not fully
completed:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-6.3.5.Updatereferencetodocsfromsite,SEOupdates

Could you please step in and send a patch to resolve the issue? Plus,
please help to update the existing instruction/script to a format that
everyone could complete this step throughout a release. Presently, I failed
to figure out how to make things working.

-
Denis

[DISCUSSION] Changes in Ignite release process related to documentation

[Denis Magda]

Igniters,

With the final 2.8 release steps checked out today by announcing the
version globally (congrats!), it's a proper time to consider and tweak our
release process, making completion of some phases more predictable and
aligned. I would like to dedicate this thread solely to changes related to
the documentation.

If to do a recap, Ignite 2.8 announcement went out of sync with the
publication of binaries, Maven and other artifacts because our technical
documentation was completed long after the vote had been closed.

We can easily eliminate such glitches for future releases if agree to start
a vote only if Ignite docs are ready and can be published the same day with
other release artifacts. If the docs are completed and available
internally while the vote goes then we can work on a release blog post
(referring to docs details) and announce the release the same day when the
binaries/docs availability.

Thoughts? Let's change the process ensuring that the vote can be started
only if technical documentation is ready to be released?

-
Denis

Re: Apache way webinar

[Denis Magda]

Nikolay,

That's an excellent idea. As Kseniya mentioned, there is plenty of tools
for such events - gotomeeting/webinar, zoom, etc. I have not heard that ASF
guides using any, it's up to us.

Also, I'll be doing a generic webinar about 2.8 (check this discussion [1])
featuring the new metrics system. Feel free to join me for that webinar to
give a high-level overview of the improvements and to encourage attendees
to join a dedicated session.

[1]
http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Ignite-2-8-announcement-plan-td46238.html

-
Denis


On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 8:50 AM Kseniya Romanova 
wrote:

> Nikolay, I believe we can use Gotowebinar (as GridGain contribution) or as
> well GoToMeeting. I will be happy to help with the announcement and
> scheduling.
> Dmitry, what do you think? ASF slack looks less comfortable for this
> purpose.
>
> чт, 12 мар. 2020 г. в 11:22, Nikolay Izhikov :
>
> > Yes.
> >
> > > 12 марта 2020 г., в 10:59, Maksim Stepachev <
> maksim.stepac...@gmail.com>
> > написал(а):
> > >
> > > It's the perfect idea. Will it in English?
> > >
> > > чт, 12 мар. 2020 г. в 10:15, Nikolay Izhikov :
> > >
> > >> Hello, Igniters.
> > >>
> > >> I want to organize the webinar for the Apache Ignite community.
> > >> The subject of the webinar - «New monitoring and system view in 2.8»
> > >>
> > >> Is there any Apache guides on how to do it?
> > >>
> > >> What software should be used? How I should announce it? etc...
> >
> >
>

Re: Apache Ignite 2.8.1 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

[Denis Magda]

Folks,

Not sure that we will be moving in the right direction discussing dates
with no clarity of what is to be released in a specific version. Instead,
let's talk out our plans/tasks first and then put them on a timeline.  That
certainly applies to big releases such as 2.9 that deserve a separate
discussion (we can initiate Ignite 2020 directions/roadmap thread and come
up with releases schedule once the community is an agreement).

As for the maintenance releases, such as 2.8.1, I would encourage us to
keep scheduling them based on necessity. For instance, we already see that
2.8 goes with several regressions and significant issues, which makes it
reasonable to plan through 2.8.1 for a ~month from now.


-
Denis


On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 7:38 AM Aleksey Chetaev 
wrote:

> Hi, Igniters!
> I propose to discuss immediately the timing of 2.9.0 and interim releases!
> My propose:
> ~ June 01 - 2.8.1
> ~ September 01 - 2.8.2
> ~ November 01 - 2.9.0
>
> Sberbank team, for its part, is ready to take on the work of management
> interim releases.
>
> Regards,
> Aleksey Chetaev.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
>

Re: MODERATE for dev@ignite.apache.org

[Denis Magda]

Following people are moderators:
dma...@apache.org
<https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/committee/committer/dmagda>,
dpav...@apache.org
<https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/committee/committer/dpavlov>,
dsetrak...@apache.org
<https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/committee/committer/dsetrakyan>,
hsapu...@apache.org
<https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/committee/committer/hsaputra>,
r...@apache.org <https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/committee/committer/rvs>,
st...@apache.org
<https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/committee/committer/stack>

If you'd like to be added to the list, please open a ticket for INFRA.

-
Denis


On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 2:42 PM Ivan Pavlukhin  wrote:

> Denis,
>
> By the way. Do you know who else receives messages for moderation (I do
> not)?
>
> Best regards,
> Ivan Pavlukhin
>
> ср, 11 мар. 2020 г. в 19:05, Denis Magda :
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Please subscribe to the dev mailing list so that we don't need to
> moderate
> > and approve your emails.
> > https://ignite.apache.org/community/resources.html#mail-lists
> >
> > Also, it looks like this question is more suited for the user list.
> Please
> > send it there (don't forget to subscribe on the user if you haven't done
> so
> > yet).
> >
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 5:39 AM <
> > dev-reject-1583930390.40791.ooeeajdjnfgedgbbd...@ignite.apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > To approve:
> > >dev-accept-1583930390.40791.ooeeajdjnfgedgbbd...@ignite.apache.org
> > > To reject:
> > >dev-reject-1583930390.40791.ooeeajdjnfgedgbbd...@ignite.apache.org
> > > To give a reason to reject:
> > > %%% Start comment
> > > %%% End comment
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -- Forwarded message --
> > > From: VeenaMithare 
> > > To: dev@ignite.apache.org
> > > Cc:
> > > Bcc:
> > > Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 07:39:42 -0500 (CDT)
> > > Subject: Server Node comes down with : (err) Failed to notify listener:
> > > GridDhtTxPrepareFuture Error
> > > Hi Team,
> > >
> > > We have a 3 node server cluster
> > >
> > > A 4th node joins as a client with a continuous query on a Table A(
> > > Transaction_mode = transactional ).
> > >
> > > Now If I bring the client down and issue an update to the Table A
> within
> > > failureDetectionTimeout 3 , I get the following error and */this
> error
> > > brings the server down/*:
> > >
> > > "(err) Failed to notify listener: GridDhtTxPrepareFuture Error"
> > > ===
> > > Basically the server , tries to update the record on the Table A, and
> tries
> > > to  notify Client since it had registered a continuous query for Table
> A.
> > > But since the Client Node has been brought down, and it undeploys the
> > > remotefilterfactory lambda, and the server is no longer able to
> complete
> > > the
> > > transaction .
> > >
> > > */This also brings the server down./
> > > *
> > > How can I resolve this issue ?
> > > ===
> > > Please find the complete stack trace for this error :
> > >
> > > [12:14:12] (err) Failed to notify listener: GridDhtTxPrepareFuture
> > > [futId=0a69e79c071-93faf34d-a776-4166-9f3b-4b5a0f54b8f9, err=null,
> > > replied=1, mapped=1, req=GridNearTxPrepareRequest
> > > [futId=4250e79c071-51438f4f-c061-45f7-b34e-57c90f2055e9, miniId=1,
> > > topVer=AffinityTopologyVersion [topVer=7, minorTopVer=0],
> > > subjId=da486d0b-36a1-43d4-b05b-47d126fd880e, taskNameHash=0,
> > > flags=[implicitSingle], super=GridDistributedTxPrepareRequest
> > > [threadId=382,
> > > concurrency=OPTIMISTIC, isolation=READ_COMMITTED,
> writeVer=GridCacheVersion
> > > [topVer=195408427, order=1583928843624, nodeOrder=1], timeout=1000,
> > > reads=null, writes=[IgniteTxEntry [key=ABCKEY [idHash=1413504800,
> > > hash=-1419375634, VALUETYPE=somevaluetype, NAME=TEST4375234],
> > > cacheId=-1512899836, txKey=IgniteTxKey [key=ABCKEY [idHash=1413504800,
> > > hash=-1419375634, VALUETYPE=somevaluetype, NAME=TEST4375234],
> > > cacheId=-1512899836], val=[op=CREATE, val=ABC [idHash=108633195,
> > > hash=-965148880, ACTIVE=true, MODIFICATIONDATE=2020-02-03 18:29:03.501,
> > > VALUETYPE=null, SCHEMAREF=null, VALUE=DEV, MACHINENAME=null,
> COMMENT=n

Re: Ignite 2.8 announcement plan

[Denis Magda]

That was published as a public page and I can see it in the feed of the
latest ASF blog posts:
https://blogs.apache.org/

<https://blogs.apache.org/>Could also open from my mobile over a cellular
network.

-
Denis


On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 3:23 PM Maxim Muzafarov  wrote:

> Denis, Folks,
>
> It the link correct?
> https://blogs.apache.org/ignite/entry/ignite-2-8-released-less
>
> I can't get access to it. Can anyone else confirm that everything is OK?
>
> On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 at 23:52, Denis Magda  wrote:
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > I've published the blog post:
> > https://blogs.apache.org/ignite/entry/ignite-2-8-released-less
> >
> > @Maxim Muzafarov, please proceed with an announcement email including a
> reference to the blog for those who'd like to find out details.
> >
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 1:17 AM Anton Vinogradov  wrote:
> >>
> >> >> Does it mean that the PME is skipped only for cases when the native
> >> >> persistence is used and a failed node was in the baseline topology?
> >> The cluster should be fully rebalanced (late affinity assignment
> happened)
> >> and the failed node should be from the baseline topology.
> >> Otherwise, you'll gain regular (PME based) switch.
> >>
> >> >> How about pure in-memory clusters and clusters with CacheStore?
> >> Such configuration leads to partitions reassignment in case of node
> left.
> >> This means we have to relocate primaries and backups once they will be
> >> rebalanced.
> >> This leads to subsequent LAA PME (after Left switch).
> >> Initial PME is required to calculate and apply new affinity and perform
> >> preparations for LAA.
> >>
> >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 7:25 PM Denis Magda  wrote:
> >>
> >> > Anton,
> >> >
> >> > Does it mean that the PME is skipped only for cases when the native
> >> > persistence is used and a failed node was in the baseline topology?
> How
> >> > about pure in-memory clusters and clusters with CacheStore?
> >> >
> >> > -
> >> > Denis
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 12:40 AM Anton Vinogradov 
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Denis,
> >> > >
> >> > > >> the blocking PME no longer happens if a node leaves the cluster
> >> > > We should mention this should be the baseline node
> >> > >
> >> > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 9:40 AM Denis Magda 
> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Pavel, thank you. I referred to your article from a blog post to
> be
> >> > > > published on blogs.apache.org. Please feel free to share feedback
> >> > before
> >> > > > it's published. You can use the comment feature of Google Docs:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ssTC1Jf_reqZFWgl4ayhaohiAJCpzdL4tPrHTxvfvAM/edit?usp=sharing
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > @Alexey Zinoviev  , @Andrey Gura
> >> > > >  , @Nikolay Izhikov ,
> @Anton
> >> > > > Vinogradov   could you glance at the paragraphs
> >> > > mentioning
> >> > > > the improvements you contributed to the release? I just want to
> be sure
> >> > > my
> >> > > > understanding is correct.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > -
> >> > > > Denis
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 3:54 AM Pavel Tupitsyn <
> ptupit...@apache.org>
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> Published:
> https://ptupitsyn.github.io/Whats-New-In-Ignite-Net-2.8/
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> On Sat, Mar 7, 2020 at 1:49 AM Pavel Tupitsyn <
> ptupit...@apache.org>
> >> > > >> wrote:
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> > Denis, ok, I'll publish on Monday afternoon then (UTC),
> weekend is
> >> > not
> >> > > >> the
> >> > > >> > best time.
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> > Thanks,
> >> > > >> > Pavel
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> > On Sat, Mar 7, 2020 at 1:25 AM

Re: Ignite 2.8 announcement plan

[Denis Magda]

Folks,

I've published the blog post:
https://blogs.apache.org/ignite/entry/ignite-2-8-released-less

@Maxim Muzafarov , please proceed with an announcement
email including a reference to the blog for those who'd like to find out
details.

-
Denis


On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 1:17 AM Anton Vinogradov  wrote:

> >> Does it mean that the PME is skipped only for cases when the native
> >> persistence is used and a failed node was in the baseline topology?
> The cluster should be fully rebalanced (late affinity assignment happened)
> and the failed node should be from the baseline topology.
> Otherwise, you'll gain regular (PME based) switch.
>
> >> How about pure in-memory clusters and clusters with CacheStore?
> Such configuration leads to partitions reassignment in case of node left.
> This means we have to relocate primaries and backups once they will be
> rebalanced.
> This leads to subsequent LAA PME (after Left switch).
> Initial PME is required to calculate and apply new affinity and perform
> preparations for LAA.
>
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 7:25 PM Denis Magda  wrote:
>
> > Anton,
> >
> > Does it mean that the PME is skipped only for cases when the native
> > persistence is used and a failed node was in the baseline topology? How
> > about pure in-memory clusters and clusters with CacheStore?
> >
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 12:40 AM Anton Vinogradov  wrote:
> >
> > > Denis,
> > >
> > > >> the blocking PME no longer happens if a node leaves the cluster
> > > We should mention this should be the baseline node
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 9:40 AM Denis Magda  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Pavel, thank you. I referred to your article from a blog post to be
> > > > published on blogs.apache.org. Please feel free to share feedback
> > before
> > > > it's published. You can use the comment feature of Google Docs:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ssTC1Jf_reqZFWgl4ayhaohiAJCpzdL4tPrHTxvfvAM/edit?usp=sharing
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > @Alexey Zinoviev  , @Andrey Gura
> > > >  , @Nikolay Izhikov , @Anton
> > > > Vinogradov   could you glance at the paragraphs
> > > mentioning
> > > > the improvements you contributed to the release? I just want to be
> sure
> > > my
> > > > understanding is correct.
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > > Denis
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 3:54 AM Pavel Tupitsyn 
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Published: https://ptupitsyn.github.io/Whats-New-In-Ignite-Net-2.8/
> > > >>
> > > >> On Sat, Mar 7, 2020 at 1:49 AM Pavel Tupitsyn  >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Denis, ok, I'll publish on Monday afternoon then (UTC), weekend is
> > not
> > > >> the
> > > >> > best time.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Thanks,
> > > >> > Pavel
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Sat, Mar 7, 2020 at 1:25 AM Denis Magda 
> > wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >> Pavel,
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Thanks for clarifying the way partition-awareness handles
> topology
> > > >> >> changes.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Please publish your article as soon as you're ready. I plan to
> > finish
> > > >> mine
> > > >> >> on Monday-Tuesday and will refer to yours.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> -
> > > >> >> Denis
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 1:36 AM Pavel Tupitsyn <
> > ptupit...@apache.org>
> > > >> >> wrote:
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> > Denis, thanks for the feedback!
> > > >> >> > When should I publish the post? Right after official release
> > > >> >> announcement,
> > > >> >> > or later?
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > > I would use "thick client" as a term instead of the "classic
> > > >> client"
> > > >> >> > Good point, fixed
> > > >> >>

Re: Ignite 2.8 documentation

[Denis Magda]

Artem,

Understood, let's see what Alexey says. As of now, I would suggest we
publishing the existing ML pages and improve the content with no rush.
Could you also make a 2.8 version the default one? 2.7.6 is still selected
by default when I navigate to the documentation website.


-
Denis


On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 9:33 AM Artem Budnikov 
wrote:

> Denis,
>
> I'm waiting for answers from Alexey. I can't really tell how lont it will
> take. Of couse, we can publish everything right now and improve some pages
> later.
>
> -Artem
>
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 7:13 PM Denis Magda  wrote:
>
> > Artem, thanks! How much time should it take to roll out the ML pages? Can
> > we release what's available right now and continue improving the pages in
> > parallel?
> >
> > Maxim, please let me publish the blog post [1] on the apache website
> before
> > sending you'll send an announcement email. The article will refer to many
> > documentation pages including ML. You'll include a reference to the blog
> > post in the email.
> >
> > [1]
> >
> >
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Ignite-2-8-announcement-plan-td46238.html
> >
> >
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 8:43 AM Maxim Muzafarov 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Artem, Folks
> > >
> > >
> > > Thank you all.
> > > I'll do announce the release tomorrow in the middle of the day (~16.00
> > MSK
> > > TZ).
> > >
> > > On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 at 16:06, Artem Budnikov
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I created the Apache Ignite Documentation 2.8 with all the new pages
> > > except for ML, which I and Alexey are still working on. The docs are
> not
> > > published yet, but you can see them under version 2.8.0 if you log into
> > > readme.io. The ML pages could take a while, but other than that the
> > > initial plan on creating the docs is accomplished, so it's no longer an
> > > obstacle to announcing the release.
> > > >
> > > > -Artem
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 11:50 AM Artem Budnikov <
> > > a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> OK, I'm going to create the 2.8 version on readme.io for all
> > > documentation pages. If anyone is still working on the docs version
> > 2.7.6,
> > > please let me know. I'll post an update in this thread when I finish.
> > > Further changes should be made in version 2.8.
> > > >>
> > > >> -Artem
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 10:16 AM Anton Vinogradov 
> > > wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Artem,
> > > >>> I've updated the Read Repair page
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 3:51 PM Artem Budnikov <
> > > a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> > Anton,
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > Could you please review the page about Read Rapair?
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/read-repair
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > -Artem
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > On 05.03.2020 12:20, Artem Budnikov wrote:
> > > >>> > > OK, I'll recreate it.
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > Nikolay, please let me know when you are finished with the
> > Metrics
> > > and
> > > >>> > > system views documentation. I'm done with the list of docs we
> > > >>> > > identified in this thread and want to publish v. 2.8.
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > -Artem
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > On 05.03.2020 11:55, Maxim Muzafarov wrote:
> > > >>> > >> Artem,
> > > >>> > >>
> > > >>> > >> I've created that. It is not public and can be safely removed
> > > since
> > > >>> > >> it's a full copy of 2.7.6 (at that moment)
> > > >>> > >>
> > > >>> > >> On Thu, 5 Mar 2020 at 11:53, Artem Budnikov
> > > >>> > >>  wrote:
> > > >>> > >>> Guys,
> > > >>&

Re: Hello Igniters)

[Denis Magda]

Aleksey, welcome to the community!

For some reason, your personal address is a bit clumsy
"aleksei_lit...@epam.com.invalid". Is it some issue with the EPAM email
domain?

-
Denis


On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 2:04 AM Aleksei Litsov
 wrote:

> Thank you very much!
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ivan Pavlukhin 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2020 12:03 PM
> To: Aleksei Litsov ; dev 
> Subject: Re: Hello Igniters)
>
> Aleksey,
>
> It seems the correct username is Aleksei_Litsov
>
> I added your to the contributors list. Now you can assign tickets to
> yourself.
>
> Do not hesitate to ask if you need any help.
>
> Best regards,
> Ivan Pavlukhin
>
> ср, 11 мар. 2020 г. в 11:59, Ivan Pavlukhin :
> >
> > Aleksey,
> >
> > Still cannot find you. Could you please write a comment in
> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNI
> >
> TE-8152__;!!GF_29dbcQIUBPA!jj5wQlhr162Z3VEyX96GDCu3XDOzbJgi-eqIvtpRO2RIqNyn-BSXFI23rcmmPHnxywg$
> ? In such way I will see a link to your profile.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Ivan Pavlukhin
> >
> > ср, 11 мар. 2020 г. в 11:47, Aleksei Litsov :
> > >
> > > Oh, I'm sorry for the typo. Correct username: Aleksey_Litsov
> > >
> > > I am ready to take the IGNITE-8152 ticket to work. Could you assign
> for me?
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Ivan Pavlukhin 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2020 11:28 AM
> > > To: dev 
> > > Subject: Re: Hello Igniters)
> > >
> > > Hello Aleksey,
> > >
> > > Welcome to Apache Ignite Community!
> > >
> > > I cannot see you account in ASF JIRA
> > >
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Dashboard.jspa__;!!GF_29dbcQIUBPA!nABDlIYp_q8vwW4_7u11MBvfNoUXvjLjPzUDrIkKpTGm4SCOhyAeLfFjnLJQpyd5f_c$
> . Are you already registered there with a name Alex_Litsov? If not please
> register. I will add you to the contributors list then.
> > >
> > > I can suggest you 2 following tickets [1, 2]. Also you can look
> through other unassigned tickets for SQL component and with a "newbie"
> > > label [3].
> > >
> > > Please check this page out for commonly asked questions pertaining to
> the contribution process:
> > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://ignite.apache.org/community/cont
> > > ribute.html__;!!GF_29dbcQIUBPA!nABDlIYp_q8vwW4_7u11MBvfNoUXvjLjPzUDr
> > > IkKpTGm4SCOhyAeLfFjnLJQNTQRiks$
> > >
> > > [1]
> > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IG
> > > NITE-8152__;!!GF_29dbcQIUBPA!nABDlIYp_q8vwW4_7u11MBvfNoUXvjLjPzUDrIk
> > > KpTGm4SCOhyAeLfFjnLJQ8Zx79S4$ [2]
> > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IG
> > > NITE-11402__;!!GF_29dbcQIUBPA!nABDlIYp_q8vwW4_7u11MBvfNoUXvjLjPzUDrI
> > > kKpTGm4SCOhyAeLfFjnLJQkcRlvko$ [3]
> > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IG
> > > NITE-8152?jql=project*20*3D*20ignite*20*26*26*20component*20*3D*20sq
> > > l*20*26*26*20labels*20*3D*20newbie*20*26*26*20resolution*20is*20EMPT
> > > Y*20__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!GF_29dbcQIUBPA!nABDlIYp_q8v
> > > wW4_7u11MBvfNoUXvjLjPzUDrIkKpTGm4SCOhyAeLfFjnLJQe1Bbmd0$
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Ivan Pavlukhin
> > >
> > > ср, 11 мар. 2020 г. в 10:55, Aleksei Litsov  .invalid>:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Hello!
> > > > My name is Aleksey!)
> > > > I would like to participate in the development of the Apache Ignite
> product.
> > > > I have been working for more than 5 years in the field of big data
> processing. My preferred Java programming language. Great experience using
> SQL.
> > > >
> > > > Despite a lot of experience in development, I first of all did not
> study in development for OpenSource projects. Maybe there is a simple task
> for me? (SQL component, for example).
> > > >
> > > > I would like to go to practice, could you please suggest me the
> > > > ticket for start contributing!)
> > > >
> > > > My JIRA:
> > > > Username: Alex_Litsov
> > > > Email: aleksei_lit...@epam.com
> > > >
> > > > Aleksei Litsov
> > > > Lead Software Engineer
> > > >
> > > > Office: +7 495 730 63
> 62xx55587Email:
> aleksei_lit...@epam.com
> > > > Nizhny Novgorod,  Russia  epam.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > CONFIDENTIALITY CAUTION AND DISCLAIMER This message is intended
> > > > only for the use of the individual(s) or entity(ies) to which it is
> addressed and contains information that is legally privileged and
> confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, or the person
> responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are
> hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
> communication is strictly prohibited. All unintended recipients are obliged
> to delete this message and destroy any printed copies.
> > > >
>

Re: Ignite 2.8 documentation

[Denis Magda]

Artem, thanks! How much time should it take to roll out the ML pages? Can
we release what's available right now and continue improving the pages in
parallel?

Maxim, please let me publish the blog post [1] on the apache website before
sending you'll send an announcement email. The article will refer to many
documentation pages including ML. You'll include a reference to the blog
post in the email.

[1]
http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Ignite-2-8-announcement-plan-td46238.html


-
Denis


On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 8:43 AM Maxim Muzafarov  wrote:

> Artem, Folks
>
>
> Thank you all.
> I'll do announce the release tomorrow in the middle of the day (~16.00 MSK
> TZ).
>
> On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 at 16:06, Artem Budnikov
>  wrote:
> >
> > I created the Apache Ignite Documentation 2.8 with all the new pages
> except for ML, which I and Alexey are still working on. The docs are not
> published yet, but you can see them under version 2.8.0 if you log into
> readme.io. The ML pages could take a while, but other than that the
> initial plan on creating the docs is accomplished, so it's no longer an
> obstacle to announcing the release.
> >
> > -Artem
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 11:50 AM Artem Budnikov <
> a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> OK, I'm going to create the 2.8 version on readme.io for all
> documentation pages. If anyone is still working on the docs version 2.7.6,
> please let me know. I'll post an update in this thread when I finish.
> Further changes should be made in version 2.8.
> >>
> >> -Artem
> >>
> >> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 10:16 AM Anton Vinogradov 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Artem,
> >>> I've updated the Read Repair page
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 3:51 PM Artem Budnikov <
> a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > Anton,
> >>> >
> >>> > Could you please review the page about Read Rapair?
> >>> >
> >>> > https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/read-repair
> >>> >
> >>> > -Artem
> >>> >
> >>> > On 05.03.2020 12:20, Artem Budnikov wrote:
> >>> > > OK, I'll recreate it.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Nikolay, please let me know when you are finished with the Metrics
> and
> >>> > > system views documentation. I'm done with the list of docs we
> >>> > > identified in this thread and want to publish v. 2.8.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > -Artem
> >>> > >
> >>> > > On 05.03.2020 11:55, Maxim Muzafarov wrote:
> >>> > >> Artem,
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> I've created that. It is not public and can be safely removed
> since
> >>> > >> it's a full copy of 2.7.6 (at that moment)
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> On Thu, 5 Mar 2020 at 11:53, Artem Budnikov
> >>> > >>  wrote:
> >>> > >>> Guys,
> >>> > >>>
> >>> > >>> I see that there is already version 2.8 for Ignite docs on
> readme.io.
> >>> > >>> Who created it and when? I've changed some pages under 2.7.6
> version
> >>> > >>> without knowing that there is a newer version.
> >>> > >>>
> >>> > >>> -Artem
> >>> > >>>
> >>> > >>> On 05.03.2020 11:45, Artem Budnikov wrote:
> >>> > >>>> I'm confused. Igor, could you please double check?
> >>> > >>>>
> >>> > >>>> -Artem
> >>> > >>>>
> >>> > >>>> On 05.03.2020 04:15, Ivan Pavlukhin wrote:
> >>> > >>>>>> That's right, only C++ and .NET clients have partition
> awareness
> >>> > >>>>> Are your sure? Was not the feature implemented for java thin
> client
> >>> > >>>>> in [1]?
> >>> > >>>>>
> >>> > >>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11898
> >>> > >>>>>
> >>> > >>>>> Best regards,
> >>> > >>>>> Ivan Pavlukhin
> >>> > >>>>>
> >>> > >>>>> ср, 4 мар. 2020 г. в 18:18, Denis M

Re: MODERATE for dev@ignite.apache.org

[Denis Magda]

Hi,

Please subscribe to the dev mailing list so that we don't need to moderate
and approve your emails.
https://ignite.apache.org/community/resources.html#mail-lists

Also, it looks like this question is more suited for the user list. Please
send it there (don't forget to subscribe on the user if you haven't done so
yet).

-
Denis


On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 5:39 AM <
dev-reject-1583930390.40791.ooeeajdjnfgedgbbd...@ignite.apache.org> wrote:

>
> To approve:
>dev-accept-1583930390.40791.ooeeajdjnfgedgbbd...@ignite.apache.org
> To reject:
>dev-reject-1583930390.40791.ooeeajdjnfgedgbbd...@ignite.apache.org
> To give a reason to reject:
> %%% Start comment
> %%% End comment
>
>
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: VeenaMithare 
> To: dev@ignite.apache.org
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 07:39:42 -0500 (CDT)
> Subject: Server Node comes down with : (err) Failed to notify listener:
> GridDhtTxPrepareFuture Error
> Hi Team,
>
> We have a 3 node server cluster
>
> A 4th node joins as a client with a continuous query on a Table A(
> Transaction_mode = transactional ).
>
> Now If I bring the client down and issue an update to the Table A within
> failureDetectionTimeout 3 , I get the following error and */this error
> brings the server down/*:
>
> "(err) Failed to notify listener: GridDhtTxPrepareFuture Error"
> ===
> Basically the server , tries to update the record on the Table A, and tries
> to  notify Client since it had registered a continuous query for Table A.
> But since the Client Node has been brought down, and it undeploys the
> remotefilterfactory lambda, and the server is no longer able to complete
> the
> transaction .
>
> */This also brings the server down./
> *
> How can I resolve this issue ?
> ===
> Please find the complete stack trace for this error :
>
> [12:14:12] (err) Failed to notify listener: GridDhtTxPrepareFuture
> [futId=0a69e79c071-93faf34d-a776-4166-9f3b-4b5a0f54b8f9, err=null,
> replied=1, mapped=1, req=GridNearTxPrepareRequest
> [futId=4250e79c071-51438f4f-c061-45f7-b34e-57c90f2055e9, miniId=1,
> topVer=AffinityTopologyVersion [topVer=7, minorTopVer=0],
> subjId=da486d0b-36a1-43d4-b05b-47d126fd880e, taskNameHash=0,
> flags=[implicitSingle], super=GridDistributedTxPrepareRequest
> [threadId=382,
> concurrency=OPTIMISTIC, isolation=READ_COMMITTED, writeVer=GridCacheVersion
> [topVer=195408427, order=1583928843624, nodeOrder=1], timeout=1000,
> reads=null, writes=[IgniteTxEntry [key=ABCKEY [idHash=1413504800,
> hash=-1419375634, VALUETYPE=somevaluetype, NAME=TEST4375234],
> cacheId=-1512899836, txKey=IgniteTxKey [key=ABCKEY [idHash=1413504800,
> hash=-1419375634, VALUETYPE=somevaluetype, NAME=TEST4375234],
> cacheId=-1512899836], val=[op=CREATE, val=ABC [idHash=108633195,
> hash=-965148880, ACTIVE=true, MODIFICATIONDATE=2020-02-03 18:29:03.501,
> VALUETYPE=null, SCHEMAREF=null, VALUE=DEV, MACHINENAME=null, COMMENT=null,
> NAME=null, APPLICATIONNAME=null, SCHEMANAME=null, KEYNAME=ENVIRONMENT,
> USERNAME=null, INTERNALVERSION=null, MODIFICATIONTYPE=null]],
> prevVal=[op=NOOP, val=null], oldVal=[op=NOOP, val=null],
> entryProcessorsCol=null, ttl=-1, conflictExpireTime=-1, conflictVer=null,
> explicitVer=null, dhtVer=null,
> filters=[o.a.i.i.processors.cache.CacheEntrySerializablePredicate@388c822f
> ],
> filtersPassed=false, filtersSet=false, entry=GridDhtCacheEntry [rdrs=[],
> part=136, super=GridDistributedCacheEntry [super=GridCacheMapEntry
> [key=ABCKEY [idHash=1413504800, hash=-1419375634, VALUETYPE=somevaluetype,
> NAME=TEST4375234], val=null, ver=GridCacheVersion [topVer=195408427,
> order=1583928843625, nodeOrder=4], hash=-1419375634,
> extras=GridCacheObsoleteEntryExtras [obsoleteVer=GridCacheVersion
> [topVer=2147483647, order=0, nodeOrder=0]], flags=2]]], prepared=1,
> locked=false, nodeId=null, locMapped=false, expiryPlc=null,
> transferExpiryPlc=false, flags=2, partUpdateCntr=0, serReadVer=null,
> xidVer=null]], dhtVers=null, txSize=0, plc=2,
> txState=IgniteTxImplicitSingleStateImpl [init=true, recovery=false],
> flags=onePhase|last, super=GridDistributedBaseMessage [ver=GridCacheVersion
> [topVer=195408427, order=1583928843624, nodeOrder=1], committedVers=null,
> rolledbackVers=null, cnt=0, super=GridCacheIdMessage [cacheId=0,
> trackable=true, nearMiniId=1, last=true, retVal=false, ret=GridCacheReturn
> [v=null, cacheObj=null, success=true, invokeRes=false, loc=false,
> cacheId=0], lockKeys=[], forceKeysFut=null, locksReady=true, invoke=false,
> timeoutObj=PrepareTimeoutObject [timeout=1000], xid=GridCacheVersion
> [topVer=195408427, order=1583928843625, nodeOrder=4],
> innerFuts=[[node=da486d0b-36a1-43d4-b05b-47d126fd880e, loc=false,
> done=true]], super=GridCompoundFuture
>
> [rdc=o.a.i.i.processors.cache.distributed.dht.GridDhtTxPrepareFuture$1@73415bf
> ,
> initFlag=1, lsnrCalls=1, done=true, cancelled=false, err=null,
> futs=[true]]]java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:

Re: Cache metrics on server nodes does not update correctly

[Denis Magda]

@Nikolay Izhikov , @Andrey Gura ,
could you folks check out this thread?

I have a feeling that what Dominik is describing was talked out before and
rather some sort of a limitation than an issue with the current
implementation.

-
Denis


On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 11:41 PM Dominik Przybysz 
wrote:

> Hi,
> I am trying to use partitioned cache on server nodes to which I connect
> with client node. Statistics of cache in the cluster are updated, but only
> for hits metric - misses metric is always 0.
>
> To reproduce this problem I created cluster of two nodes:
>
> Server node 1 adds 100 random test cases and prints cache statistics
> continuously:
>
> public class IgniteClusterNode1 {
> public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException {
> IgniteConfiguration igniteConfiguration = new
> IgniteConfiguration();
>
> CacheConfiguration cacheConfiguration = new CacheConfiguration();
> cacheConfiguration.setName("test");
> cacheConfiguration.setCacheMode(CacheMode.PARTITIONED);
> cacheConfiguration.setAtomicityMode(CacheAtomicityMode.ATOMIC);
> cacheConfiguration.setStatisticsEnabled(true);
> igniteConfiguration.setCacheConfiguration(cacheConfiguration);
>
> TcpCommunicationSpi communicationSpi = new TcpCommunicationSpi();
> communicationSpi.setLocalPort(47500);
> igniteConfiguration.setCommunicationSpi(communicationSpi);
>
> TcpDiscoverySpi discoverySpi = new TcpDiscoverySpi();
> discoverySpi.setLocalPort(47100);
> discoverySpi.setLocalPortRange(100);
> TcpDiscoveryVmIpFinder ipFinder = new TcpDiscoveryVmIpFinder();
> ipFinder.setAddresses(Arrays.asList("127.0.0.1:47100..47200",
> "127.0.0.1:48100..48200"));
> igniteConfiguration.setDiscoverySpi(discoverySpi);
>
> try (Ignite ignite = Ignition.start(igniteConfiguration)) {
> try (IgniteCache cache =
> ignite.getOrCreateCache("test")) {
> new Random().ints(1000).map(i -> Math.abs(i %
> 1000)).distinct().limit(100).forEach(i -> {
> String key = "data_" + i;
> String value = UUID.randomUUID().toString();
> cache.put(key, value);
> }
> );
> }
> while (true) {
> System.out.println(ignite.cache("test").metrics());
> Thread.sleep(5000);
> }
> }
> }
> }
>
> Server node 2 only prints cache statistics continuously:
>
> public class IgniteClusterNode2 {
> public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException {
> IgniteConfiguration igniteConfiguration = new
> IgniteConfiguration();
>
> CacheConfiguration cacheConfiguration = new CacheConfiguration();
> cacheConfiguration.setName("test");
> cacheConfiguration.setCacheMode(CacheMode.PARTITIONED);
> cacheConfiguration.setStatisticsEnabled(true);
> igniteConfiguration.setCacheConfiguration(cacheConfiguration);
>
> TcpCommunicationSpi communicationSpi = new TcpCommunicationSpi();
> communicationSpi.setLocalPort(48500);
> igniteConfiguration.setCommunicationSpi(communicationSpi);
>
> TcpDiscoverySpi discoverySpi = new TcpDiscoverySpi();
> discoverySpi.setLocalPort(48100);
> discoverySpi.setLocalPortRange(100);
> TcpDiscoveryVmIpFinder ipFinder = new TcpDiscoveryVmIpFinder();
> ipFinder.setAddresses(Arrays.asList("127.0.0.1:47100..47200",
> "127.0.0.1:48100..48200"));
> igniteConfiguration.setDiscoverySpi(discoverySpi);
>
> try (Ignite ignite = Ignition.start(igniteConfiguration)) {
> while (true) {
> System.out.println(ignite.cache("test").metrics());
> Thread.sleep(5000);
> }
> }
> }
> }
>
> Next I start a client node which continuously read data from the cluster:
>
> public class CacheClusterReader {
> public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException {
> IgniteConfiguration cfg = new IgniteConfiguration();
> cfg.setClientMode(true);
>
> TcpDiscoverySpi spi = new TcpDiscoverySpi();
> TcpDiscoveryVmIpFinder tcMp = new TcpDiscoveryVmIpFinder();
> tcMp.setAddresses(Arrays.asList("127.0.0.1:47100..47200",
> "127.0.0.1:48100..48200"));
> spi.setIpFinder(tcMp);
> cfg.setDiscoverySpi(spi);
>
> CacheConfiguration cacheConfig = new
> CacheConfiguration<>("test");
> cacheConfig.setStatisticsEnabled(true);
> cacheConfig.setCacheMode(CacheMode.PARTITIONED);
> cfg.setCacheConfiguration(cacheConfig);
>
> try (Ignite ignite = Ignition.start(cfg)) {
> System.out.println(ignite.cacheNames());
>
> while (true) {
> try (IgniteCache cache =
> ignite.getOrCreateCache(cacheConfig)) {
> 

Re: Ignite Website: New Look

[Denis Magda]

Hi Dmitry,

Thanks for the guidance. I've created the repository and will keep things
moving.

https://github.com/apache/ignite-website

-
Denis


On Sat, Mar 7, 2020 at 3:08 AM Dmitriy Pavlov  wrote:

> Hi Denis,
>
> Unfortunately, I don't know details on how to set it up.
>
> One thing I've noticed in Apache Training (incubating) and in Apache DLab
> (incubating) that both projects
> 1. added site sources to Git repository and
> 2. created an INFRA ticket for setting up the site.
>
> Let's try it too, and let's hope INFRA will guide us on the required steps.
>
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
>
> сб, 7 мар. 2020 г. в 01:08, Denis Magda :
>
> > Dmitry,
> >
> > Agree on the Github repository. Let me look into it. If you have any
> > pointers or came across any instructions earlier please let me know.
> >
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 8:03 AM Dmitriy Pavlov 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Igniters,
> > >
> > > IMO, new design looks good, but please pay attention
> > > - every mention of Apache Ignite is better to be followed by (R) mark
> > since
> > > it is registered trademark of the ASF in the US and other countries.
> > > - download page is not available (as Denis mentioned it should not be
> an
> > > issue).
> > >
> > > And one more side note: since 1) it is a major change in the site look
> > and
> > > 2) our site is  still stored in the SVN, could we consider migrating to
> > Git
> > > repository first?
> > >
> > > Git benefits are more or less obvious:
> > > - It will allow us to make a PRs for contributions to the site.
> > > - Git repository is slightly more convenient. It works faster during
> > clone,
> > > commit, and update.
> > > - It should help to recognize contributions from  Mauricio and Ignacio
> > and
> > > all other members, who updates and maintains the site (we don't have
> > > contributors listing page and we use git for listing of the project's
> > > developers).
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > >
> > > BTW, since this is important topic, I suggest every email with proposal
> > is
> > > marked with [DISCUSSION] to help it to be noticed.
> > >
> > > пт, 6 мар. 2020 г. в 03:21, Nikita Ivanov :
> > >
> > > > Denis - looks very nice! I do indeed think we need to work on better
> > > > content (home page specifically).
> > > > Thanks!
> > > > --
> > > > Nikita Ivanov
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 3:18 PM Denis Magda 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Folks,
> > > > >
> > > > > As many of you know, these days I mostly contribute by optimizing
> our
> > > > > website, preparing different content including
> > documentation/articles,
> > > > and
> > > > > presenting the project at various events. One of the continuous
> > website
> > > > > activities we undertake together with Mauricio and Ignacio is
> search
> > > > engine
> > > > > optimization (SEO). It helps our website to be ranked higher by
> > search
> > > > > engines for user searches falling in categories of in-memory
> caches,
> > > > grids,
> > > > > databases, etc. (check this simple guide [1] if you'd like to learn
> > the
> > > > > internals of SEO).
> > > > >
> > > > > After checking the results of our recent user questionnaire [2] and
> > > > > confirming key capabilities with use cases Ignite is selected for,
> we
> > > > > decided to put more effort into the SEO. And, in addition to the
> > > keywords
> > > > > optimizations, we invested some time into the structural and UI
> > changes
> > > > of
> > > > > the website trying to make the experience better and, as a result,
> be
> > > > > ranked higher.
> > > > >
> > > > > So, today we'd like to share our first results and check your
> > thoughts.
> > > > In
> > > > > particular, pay attention to:
> > > > >
> > > > >- The new UI - instead of a dark and bloody theme, we decided to
> > > > >experiment with a more lightweight and contemporary design.
> > > > >- A new main pa

Re: Ignite 2.8 announcement plan

[Denis Magda]

Anton,

Does it mean that the PME is skipped only for cases when the native
persistence is used and a failed node was in the baseline topology? How
about pure in-memory clusters and clusters with CacheStore?

-
Denis


On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 12:40 AM Anton Vinogradov  wrote:

> Denis,
>
> >> the blocking PME no longer happens if a node leaves the cluster
> We should mention this should be the baseline node
>
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 9:40 AM Denis Magda  wrote:
>
> > Pavel, thank you. I referred to your article from a blog post to be
> > published on blogs.apache.org. Please feel free to share feedback before
> > it's published. You can use the comment feature of Google Docs:
> >
> >
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ssTC1Jf_reqZFWgl4ayhaohiAJCpzdL4tPrHTxvfvAM/edit?usp=sharing
> >
> >
> > @Alexey Zinoviev  , @Andrey Gura
> >  , @Nikolay Izhikov , @Anton
> > Vinogradov   could you glance at the paragraphs
> mentioning
> > the improvements you contributed to the release? I just want to be sure
> my
> > understanding is correct.
> >
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 3:54 AM Pavel Tupitsyn 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Published: https://ptupitsyn.github.io/Whats-New-In-Ignite-Net-2.8/
> >>
> >> On Sat, Mar 7, 2020 at 1:49 AM Pavel Tupitsyn 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Denis, ok, I'll publish on Monday afternoon then (UTC), weekend is not
> >> the
> >> > best time.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Pavel
> >> >
> >> > On Sat, Mar 7, 2020 at 1:25 AM Denis Magda  wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Pavel,
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks for clarifying the way partition-awareness handles topology
> >> >> changes.
> >> >>
> >> >> Please publish your article as soon as you're ready. I plan to finish
> >> mine
> >> >> on Monday-Tuesday and will refer to yours.
> >> >>
> >> >> -
> >> >> Denis
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 1:36 AM Pavel Tupitsyn 
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Denis, thanks for the feedback!
> >> >> > When should I publish the post? Right after official release
> >> >> announcement,
> >> >> > or later?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > I would use "thick client" as a term instead of the "classic
> >> client"
> >> >> > Good point, fixed
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > partition-awareness doesn't handle topology changes automatically
> >> >> > (partition map won't be updated on the client-side)
> >> >> > This is not true, we keep the partition map up to date by checking
> >> >> > AffinityTopologyVersion [1]
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > Now I can run Ignite.NET easily on my Mac OS machine
> >> >> > Just to clarify, you can do that since 2.4 release [2].
> >> >> > In 2.8 we have refined build-related things (jar file handling),
> and
> >> >> made
> >> >> > sure that recent .NET versions are supported.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > [1]
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-23%3A+Best+Effort+Affinity+for+thin+clients
> >> >> > [2] https://habr.com/ru/company/gridgain/blog/347374/ (in Russian)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 2:40 AM Denis Magda 
> >> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > Pavel, thanks,
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > I enjoyed reading the blog, crystal clear and straight to the
> >> point!
> >> >> > Please
> >> >> > > consider these several items that might strengthen the article a
> >> bit:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >- I would use "thick client" as a term instead of the "classic
> >> >> client"
> >> >> > >(and mention that Ignite.NET client is a thick one). The thick
> >> >> client
> >> >> > is
> >> >> > >already a coined term that based on my observations are used a
> &

Re: Ignite 2.8 announcement plan

[Denis Magda]

Pavel, thank you. I referred to your article from a blog post to be
published on blogs.apache.org. Please feel free to share feedback before
it's published. You can use the comment feature of Google Docs:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ssTC1Jf_reqZFWgl4ayhaohiAJCpzdL4tPrHTxvfvAM/edit?usp=sharing


@Alexey Zinoviev  , @Andrey Gura 
 , @Nikolay Izhikov , @Anton Vinogradov
  could
you glance at the paragraphs mentioning the improvements you contributed to
the release? I just want to be sure my understanding is correct.

-
Denis


On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 3:54 AM Pavel Tupitsyn  wrote:

> Published: https://ptupitsyn.github.io/Whats-New-In-Ignite-Net-2.8/
>
> On Sat, Mar 7, 2020 at 1:49 AM Pavel Tupitsyn 
> wrote:
>
> > Denis, ok, I'll publish on Monday afternoon then (UTC), weekend is not
> the
> > best time.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Pavel
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 7, 2020 at 1:25 AM Denis Magda  wrote:
> >
> >> Pavel,
> >>
> >> Thanks for clarifying the way partition-awareness handles topology
> >> changes.
> >>
> >> Please publish your article as soon as you're ready. I plan to finish
> mine
> >> on Monday-Tuesday and will refer to yours.
> >>
> >> -
> >> Denis
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 1:36 AM Pavel Tupitsyn 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Denis, thanks for the feedback!
> >> > When should I publish the post? Right after official release
> >> announcement,
> >> > or later?
> >> >
> >> > > I would use "thick client" as a term instead of the "classic client"
> >> > Good point, fixed
> >> >
> >> > > partition-awareness doesn't handle topology changes automatically
> >> > (partition map won't be updated on the client-side)
> >> > This is not true, we keep the partition map up to date by checking
> >> > AffinityTopologyVersion [1]
> >> >
> >> > > Now I can run Ignite.NET easily on my Mac OS machine
> >> > Just to clarify, you can do that since 2.4 release [2].
> >> > In 2.8 we have refined build-related things (jar file handling), and
> >> made
> >> > sure that recent .NET versions are supported.
> >> >
> >> > [1]
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-23%3A+Best+Effort+Affinity+for+thin+clients
> >> > [2] https://habr.com/ru/company/gridgain/blog/347374/ (in Russian)
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 2:40 AM Denis Magda  wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Pavel, thanks,
> >> > >
> >> > > I enjoyed reading the blog, crystal clear and straight to the point!
> >> > Please
> >> > > consider these several items that might strengthen the article a
> bit:
> >> > >
> >> > >- I would use "thick client" as a term instead of the "classic
> >> client"
> >> > >(and mention that Ignite.NET client is a thick one). The thick
> >> client
> >> > is
> >> > >already a coined term that based on my observations are used a
> lot
> >> by
> >> > > dev
> >> > >and user communities. Also, you might add some differences of
> thick
> >> > vs.
> >> > >thin taking from this page -
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> https://www.gridgain.com/docs/latest/installation-guide/deployment-modes#thick-vs-thin-clients
> >> > >- Should we mention that presently partition-awareness doesn't
> >> handle
> >> > >topology changes automatically (partition map won't be updated on
> >> the
> >> > >client-side)? This might be a blocker for some users.
> >> > >- Excited to read about the cross-platform support, that's huge!
> >> Now I
> >> > >can run Ignite.NET easily on my Mac OS machine. I would insert a
> >> > > reference
> >> > >to updated documentation pages that explain how to start with
> >> > > Ignite.NET on
> >> > >various platforms.
> >> > >
> >> > > Hope, you will find this helpful, thanks for helping with project
> >> > > promotion!
> >> > >
> >> > > -
> >> > > Denis
> >> > >
> >> > >
>

Re: Zookeeper discovery with Ignite 2.8.0 - class NoClassDefFound

[Denis Magda]

Mike,

Have we filed a ticket to fix the issue in an upcoming release?


On Monday, March 9, 2020, Mikhail  wrote:

> Hi Dominik,
>
> in new zookeeper 3.5.5 version part of classes were moved in new jar:
> https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.zookeeper/
> zookeeper-jute/3.5.5
> which is missed in Apache Ignite release.
> Please add it manually to lib folder.
>
> Thanks,
> Mike.
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/
>


-- 
-
Denis

Re: Ignite 2.8 announcement plan

[Denis Magda]

Pavel,

Thanks for clarifying the way partition-awareness handles topology changes.

Please publish your article as soon as you're ready. I plan to finish mine
on Monday-Tuesday and will refer to yours.

-
Denis


On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 1:36 AM Pavel Tupitsyn  wrote:

> Denis, thanks for the feedback!
> When should I publish the post? Right after official release announcement,
> or later?
>
> > I would use "thick client" as a term instead of the "classic client"
> Good point, fixed
>
> > partition-awareness doesn't handle topology changes automatically
> (partition map won't be updated on the client-side)
> This is not true, we keep the partition map up to date by checking
> AffinityTopologyVersion [1]
>
> > Now I can run Ignite.NET easily on my Mac OS machine
> Just to clarify, you can do that since 2.4 release [2].
> In 2.8 we have refined build-related things (jar file handling), and made
> sure that recent .NET versions are supported.
>
> [1]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-23%3A+Best+Effort+Affinity+for+thin+clients
> [2] https://habr.com/ru/company/gridgain/blog/347374/ (in Russian)
>
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 2:40 AM Denis Magda  wrote:
>
> > Pavel, thanks,
> >
> > I enjoyed reading the blog, crystal clear and straight to the point!
> Please
> > consider these several items that might strengthen the article a bit:
> >
> >- I would use "thick client" as a term instead of the "classic client"
> >(and mention that Ignite.NET client is a thick one). The thick client
> is
> >already a coined term that based on my observations are used a lot by
> > dev
> >and user communities. Also, you might add some differences of thick
> vs.
> >thin taking from this page -
> >
> >
> https://www.gridgain.com/docs/latest/installation-guide/deployment-modes#thick-vs-thin-clients
> >- Should we mention that presently partition-awareness doesn't handle
> >topology changes automatically (partition map won't be updated on the
> >client-side)? This might be a blocker for some users.
> >- Excited to read about the cross-platform support, that's huge! Now I
> >can run Ignite.NET easily on my Mac OS machine. I would insert a
> > reference
> >to updated documentation pages that explain how to start with
> > Ignite.NET on
> >various platforms.
> >
> > Hope, you will find this helpful, thanks for helping with project
> > promotion!
> >
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 7:32 AM Pavel Tupitsyn 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Denis,
> > >
> > > The first post is going to be ready soon, probably by tomorrow.
> > > Here is a draft, feedback welcome:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/ptupitsyn/ptupitsyn.github.io/blob/ignite-2.8/_posts/2020-03-05-Whats-New-In-Ignite-Net-2.8.md
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 5:15 PM Denis Magda  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Pavel,
> > > >
> > > > Excellent! It will be good to publish the first article (what's new
> in
> > > > Ignite.NET 2.8) prior to a generic blog on blogs.apache.org so that
> we
> > > can
> > > > link your post in for those who are looking for more details. Do you
> > have
> > > > any timeline in mind for this article?
> > > >
> > > > @Alexey Zinoviev , how about you preparing
> > > several
> > > > paragraphs for the blog highlighting the biggest changes in ML? The
> > same
> > > > highlighted content will be elaborated during the webinar.
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > > Denis
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 2:29 AM Pavel Tupitsyn 
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Denis, I have a few blog posts on Ignite.NET planned:
> > > > >
> > > > > * What's new in Ignite.NET 2.8 (Thin Client Partition Awareness,
> > > logging,
> > > > > expiry policy, cluster API, .NET Core 3.x, Dockerfile)
> > > > > * Ignite.NET performance improvements on .NET Core 3.x
> > > > > * Ignite.NET Partition Awareness performance
> > > > > * Fixing JNI thread leak in Ignite.NET
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you think? Should we have a schedule of some sorts?
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 9:58 PM Alexey Zinoviev <
> > zaleslaw@gmai

Re: Read load balancing, read-though, ttl and optimistic serializable transactions

[Denis Magda]

Alex, thanks for monitoring various discussion threads and sharing these
problems with the rest of the dev community.

>> As a short-term solution for [2] I suggest to force reads from a primary
> node inside optimistic serializable transactions.


Totally agree on this. Anyway, consistency and predictable behavior matter
most. Also, it shouldn't affect performance anyhow dramatically.

>> I think it may be better to make read-through and entry expiry a
> partition-wide operation with the underlying cache guarantees.


That's a pain in the neck! As you properly mentioned, an in-memory data
grid sitting on top of an external database is still our dominating use
case. So, a partition-wide operation assumes that if a record is read from
a CacheStore than its value will be replicated to all the primary and
backup copies, right?

-
Denis


On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 12:58 AM Alexey Goncharuk 
wrote:

> Anton,
>
>
> > >> In short, the root cause of this issue is that there are
> configurations
> > >> that allow a key to be stored on primary and backup nodes with
> different
> > >> versions.
> > Faced with the same problem during ReadRepair development.
> >
> > >> I suggest to force reads from a primary
> > >> node inside optimistic serializable transactions.
> > It looks like a proper fix (read-from-backup= ... && !read-through).
> >
> > >>  I would suggest to revisit the
> > >> read-through and TTL expiry semantics.
> > Do we really need these features?
> > - we have great full-featured consistent persistence, what's the point to
> > use limited-featured inconsistent persistence via the external database?
> > Can we get rid of this feature at 3.0?
> > - Expiry policy is expensive (slowdown the cluster) and does not
> guarantee
> > the in-time removal, and always may be replaced by proper design (state
> > machine, query, eviction, in-memory cluster restart, etc).
> >
>
> Caching a 3rd-party persistence is one of the most widely used Ignite
> use-cases, I am sure we cannot drop this. Perhaps, it makes sense to
> separate the caching scenario in an explicit configuration and cache mode.
> Probably, even separate cache and database cases.
>
> As for expiry policy - I agree that a user can always implement it on
> application level, but a user can always implement transactions as well. If
> we already have a feature and we can fix it properly, why not keep it?
>

Re: Ignite Website: New Look

[Denis Magda]

Dmitry,

Agree on the Github repository. Let me look into it. If you have any
pointers or came across any instructions earlier please let me know.

-
Denis


On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 8:03 AM Dmitriy Pavlov  wrote:

> Hi Igniters,
>
> IMO, new design looks good, but please pay attention
> - every mention of Apache Ignite is better to be followed by (R) mark since
> it is registered trademark of the ASF in the US and other countries.
> - download page is not available (as Denis mentioned it should not be an
> issue).
>
> And one more side note: since 1) it is a major change in the site look and
> 2) our site is  still stored in the SVN, could we consider migrating to Git
> repository first?
>
> Git benefits are more or less obvious:
> - It will allow us to make a PRs for contributions to the site.
> - Git repository is slightly more convenient. It works faster during clone,
> commit, and update.
> - It should help to recognize contributions from  Mauricio and Ignacio and
> all other members, who updates and maintains the site (we don't have
> contributors listing page and we use git for listing of the project's
> developers).
>
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
>
> BTW, since this is important topic, I suggest every email with proposal is
> marked with [DISCUSSION] to help it to be noticed.
>
> пт, 6 мар. 2020 г. в 03:21, Nikita Ivanov :
>
> > Denis - looks very nice! I do indeed think we need to work on better
> > content (home page specifically).
> > Thanks!
> > --
> > Nikita Ivanov
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 3:18 PM Denis Magda  wrote:
> >
> > > Folks,
> > >
> > > As many of you know, these days I mostly contribute by optimizing our
> > > website, preparing different content including documentation/articles,
> > and
> > > presenting the project at various events. One of the continuous website
> > > activities we undertake together with Mauricio and Ignacio is search
> > engine
> > > optimization (SEO). It helps our website to be ranked higher by search
> > > engines for user searches falling in categories of in-memory caches,
> > grids,
> > > databases, etc. (check this simple guide [1] if you'd like to learn the
> > > internals of SEO).
> > >
> > > After checking the results of our recent user questionnaire [2] and
> > > confirming key capabilities with use cases Ignite is selected for, we
> > > decided to put more effort into the SEO. And, in addition to the
> keywords
> > > optimizations, we invested some time into the structural and UI changes
> > of
> > > the website trying to make the experience better and, as a result, be
> > > ranked higher.
> > >
> > > So, today we'd like to share our first results and check your thoughts.
> > In
> > > particular, pay attention to:
> > >
> > >- The new UI - instead of a dark and bloody theme, we decided to
> > >experiment with a more lightweight and contemporary design.
> > >- A new main page structure with the following blocks - banner, use
> > >cases, features, quicks links + tweeter feed.
> > >- Updated navigation menu - kept essential or highly-ranked pages.
> > >
> > >
> > > Do NOT pay attention to the following yet (we're ready to carry on with
> > the
> > > items below once hear your feedback):
> > >
> > >- Text on the front page will be massaged and tweaked going forward
> to
> > >get better SEO. Presently, something might sound off to you.
> > >- Secondary pages are broken from the UI and structure standpoint
> > >- Some of the pages of the navigation menu, such as Videos, are not
> > >created yet.
> > >
> > >
> > > Alright, we deployed our branch to this test server. Go and check:
> > > http://157.245.190.104 (user: ignite, pass: apache2020)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [1] https://moz.com/beginners-guide-to-seo
> > > [2]
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Ignite-Evolution-Direction-short-questionary-td44577.html
> > >
> > > -
> > > Denis
> > >
> >
>

Re: Apache Ignite ML & Python

[Denis Magda]

Folks,

Does it make sense to take an approach of Python ML implementation
available for GridGain in a beta mode? (where Python APIs wrap around Java
ML library)
https://www.gridgain.com/docs/latest/developers-guide/python-ml/using-python-ml

-
Denis


On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 6:50 AM Alexey Zinoviev 
wrote:

> Agree with simple case, I think we could start from the simple poc for the
> Python for ML in the next release
>
> чт, 5 мар. 2020 г., 17:05 AG :
>
> >
> > Thanks, for the reply!
> >
> > It looks like a high-level API similar to Sklearn pipelines.
> > In my opinion, for the first steps easier to add simple assess to gain
> the
> > ability to run a simple model or simple preprocessor from python.
> >
> > According to your example:
> > Here is raw dataset, already inside this cluster cache "myName", with
> > Label column "MyLable".
> >
> > I want to run from notebook UI imputer and knn using python API. Export
> > results to file storage as an example.
> >
> > In my opinion, the ability to create such a simple workflow should be our
> > goal for the first time.
> >
> > Thank You!
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Andrei Gavrilov.
> >
> > Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
> >
> > ‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
> > On Wednesday, March 4, 2020 10:49 PM, kencottrell <
> > ken.cottr...@gridgain.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Andrei,
> > >
> > > I am also working with Apache Ignite ML and am interested in providing
> > > wrappers for Ignite ML API, but am wondering if instead of simply
> > recreating
> > > the low level Java API for ML inside Python, how about creating some
> > higher
> > > level services "Auto ML" workflow ? For example:
> > >
> > > 1.  here is raw dataset, already inside this cluster cache "myName",
> with
> > > Label column "MyLable" , take N samples tell me which appear to be
> > numeric,
> > > unique id, and categorical values?
> > >
> > > 2.  based on N samples, , please run some analysis and tell me the top
> 5
> > > feature columns in terms of predictive value using algorithm =
> > RandonForest
> > >
> > > 3.  do a batch run, sample size = N, using these preprocessing steps
> list
> > > {impute, scale, etc} and algorithms (knn, Decision Tree, etc} and
> > give me a
> > > report of accuracies obtain with each.
> > >
> > > In other words, we have a simple sample in the Tutorial demo where
> > these
> > > all run and then we compare outputs - why not automate these with a
> > Python
> > > Notebook UI of some sort?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>

Re: Ignite 2.8 announcement plan

[Denis Magda]

Pavel, thanks,

I enjoyed reading the blog, crystal clear and straight to the point! Please
consider these several items that might strengthen the article a bit:

   - I would use "thick client" as a term instead of the "classic client"
   (and mention that Ignite.NET client is a thick one). The thick client is
   already a coined term that based on my observations are used a lot by dev
   and user communities. Also, you might add some differences of thick vs.
   thin taking from this page -
   
https://www.gridgain.com/docs/latest/installation-guide/deployment-modes#thick-vs-thin-clients
   - Should we mention that presently partition-awareness doesn't handle
   topology changes automatically (partition map won't be updated on the
   client-side)? This might be a blocker for some users.
   - Excited to read about the cross-platform support, that's huge! Now I
   can run Ignite.NET easily on my Mac OS machine. I would insert a reference
   to updated documentation pages that explain how to start with Ignite.NET on
   various platforms.

Hope, you will find this helpful, thanks for helping with project promotion!

-
Denis


On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 7:32 AM Pavel Tupitsyn  wrote:

> Denis,
>
> The first post is going to be ready soon, probably by tomorrow.
> Here is a draft, feedback welcome:
>
> https://github.com/ptupitsyn/ptupitsyn.github.io/blob/ignite-2.8/_posts/2020-03-05-Whats-New-In-Ignite-Net-2.8.md
>
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 5:15 PM Denis Magda  wrote:
>
> > Hi Pavel,
> >
> > Excellent! It will be good to publish the first article (what's new in
> > Ignite.NET 2.8) prior to a generic blog on blogs.apache.org so that we
> can
> > link your post in for those who are looking for more details. Do you have
> > any timeline in mind for this article?
> >
> > @Alexey Zinoviev , how about you preparing
> several
> > paragraphs for the blog highlighting the biggest changes in ML? The same
> > highlighted content will be elaborated during the webinar.
> >
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 2:29 AM Pavel Tupitsyn 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Denis, I have a few blog posts on Ignite.NET planned:
> > >
> > > * What's new in Ignite.NET 2.8 (Thin Client Partition Awareness,
> logging,
> > > expiry policy, cluster API, .NET Core 3.x, Dockerfile)
> > > * Ignite.NET performance improvements on .NET Core 3.x
> > > * Ignite.NET Partition Awareness performance
> > > * Fixing JNI thread leak in Ignite.NET
> > >
> > > What do you think? Should we have a schedule of some sorts?
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 9:58 PM Alexey Zinoviev  >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Sounds ineresting, will help with the post, please share the
> template,
> > > not
> > > > sure about webinar
> > > >
> > > > вт, 3 мар. 2020 г., 20:59 Denis Magda :
> > > >
> > > > > Igniters,
> > > > >
> > > > > Let's discuss approaches for a global announcement/promotion of the
> > > > > release. I would suggest focusing on a blog post and a community
> > > webinar.
> > > > >
> > > > > The blog post will introduce significant improvements (service
> grid,
> > > thin
> > > > > clients, new metrics system, ML, etc.) sharing references to
> > > > documentation
> > > > > pages with more details.  It will be published on blogs.apache.org
> > in
> > > a
> > > > > format similar to this one -
> > > > > https://blogs.apache.org/ignite/entry/apache-ignite-2-7-deep. I
> can
> > > work
> > > > > on
> > > > > it unless anybody else is willing to share the news on behalf of
> the
> > > > > community.
> > > > >
> > > > > Next, the blog post will be featuring a community webinar that is
> > > > breaking
> > > > > down a subset of the improvements in more detail. Please see an
> > > abstract
> > > > > below with suggested topics for a detailed overview. @Alexey
> Zinoviev
> > > > > , would you be able to present the ML
> part?
> > > > > @Nikolay
> > > > > Izhikov  or @Andrey Gura 
> > > would
> > > > > you like to take over the metrics section? I'll work the attendees
> > > > through
> > > > > the items listed in "Sustainable production under high load". We
> > should
> > > > > target the webinar for the April timefr

Ignite Website: New Look

[Denis Magda]

Folks,

As many of you know, these days I mostly contribute by optimizing our
website, preparing different content including documentation/articles, and
presenting the project at various events. One of the continuous website
activities we undertake together with Mauricio and Ignacio is search engine
optimization (SEO). It helps our website to be ranked higher by search
engines for user searches falling in categories of in-memory caches, grids,
databases, etc. (check this simple guide [1] if you'd like to learn the
internals of SEO).

After checking the results of our recent user questionnaire [2] and
confirming key capabilities with use cases Ignite is selected for, we
decided to put more effort into the SEO. And, in addition to the keywords
optimizations, we invested some time into the structural and UI changes of
the website trying to make the experience better and, as a result, be
ranked higher.

So, today we'd like to share our first results and check your thoughts. In
particular, pay attention to:

   - The new UI - instead of a dark and bloody theme, we decided to
   experiment with a more lightweight and contemporary design.
   - A new main page structure with the following blocks - banner, use
   cases, features, quicks links + tweeter feed.
   - Updated navigation menu - kept essential or highly-ranked pages.


Do NOT pay attention to the following yet (we're ready to carry on with the
items below once hear your feedback):

   - Text on the front page will be massaged and tweaked going forward to
   get better SEO. Presently, something might sound off to you.
   - Secondary pages are broken from the UI and structure standpoint
   - Some of the pages of the navigation menu, such as Videos, are not
   created yet.


Alright, we deployed our branch to this test server. Go and check:
http://157.245.190.104 (user: ignite, pass: apache2020)



[1] https://moz.com/beginners-guide-to-seo
[2]
http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Ignite-Evolution-Direction-short-questionary-td44577.html

-
Denis

Re: [DISCUSSION] Release Apache Ignite 2.8.0 RC1

[Denis Magda]

Actually, we already have a related discussion:
http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Slim-binary-release-and-docker-image-for-Apache-Ignite-td45110.html

Ilya, would you mind restarting it highlighting that it's suggested to
release a slim package for Ignite 2.8.

-
Denis


On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 12:27 PM Denis Magda  wrote:

> Ilya,
>
> Thanks for driving this activity. It would be nice to shift this
> conversation to another thread, agree on the slim package structure and
> release it for 2.8. This discussion is not the most visible one for the
> topic you're raising.
>
> -
> Denis
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 10:49 AM Ilya Kasnacheev 
> wrote:
>
>> Hello!
>>
>> Unfortunately, ignite-zookeeper has a lot of dependencies (8M) which we do
>> not update often enough (such as guava, curator, jackson), and which may
>> form an attack surface.
>>
>> Not a pressing problem for 'integrated' ignite-zookeeper users, since they
>> can re-import these dependencies with more recent versions using maven or
>> gradle.
>> But for our users who rely on binary package for all JARs, outdated
>> dependencies may pose a problem.
>>
>> Therefore my opinion is to exclude this dependency and not put our faith
>> on
>> zookeeper dependency version.
>>
>> The same can be put for ignite-compress, and indeed, I'm not sure if we
>> should keep it.
>>
>> We can have an ad-hoc vote here.
>>
>> I would like to hear arguments for both inclusion and exclusion of
>> ignite-zookeeper and ignite-compress into slim package (in any
>> combination).
>>
>> I would also like to know if you want a formal vote on the issue.
>>
>> Regards,
>> --
>> Ilya Kasnacheev
>>
>>
>> чт, 5 мар. 2020 г. в 21:08, Maxim Muzafarov :
>>
>> > Ilya,
>> >
>> >
>> > Thank you for preparing the slim package. Can we discuss and fix the
>> > list of modules which will be included to "slim" package in the
>> > appropriate thread [1]? From my understanding, we should include
>> > `ignite-zookeeper` to the package and update the TeamCity release
>> > suite also.
>> >
>> >
>> > I see no reasons to rush with it since, as you mentioned, it doesn't
>> > affect the release build and we can upload a bit later for 2.8.0 too.
>> >
>> >
>> > [1]
>> >
>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Slim-binary-release-and-docker-image-for-Apache-Ignite-td45110.html
>> >
>> > On Thu, 5 Mar 2020 at 20:27, Ilya Kasnacheev > >
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Hello!
>> > >
>> > > libs:
>> > > core/shmem/jcache
>> > > ignite-indexing
>> > > ignite-spring
>> > >
>> > > libs/optional:
>> > > ignite-compress  ignite-kubernetes  ignite-log4j2
>> ignite-rest-http
>> > >  ignite-spring-data_2.2
>> > > ignite-jta   ignite-log4j   ignite-opencensus  ignite-slf4j
>> > >  ignite-urideploy
>> > >
>> > > I have kept examples, but removed benchmarks. sqlline still present,
>> of
>> > > course.
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > > --
>> > > Ilya Kasnacheev
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > чт, 5 мар. 2020 г. в 20:19, Nikolay Izhikov :
>> > >
>> > > > Hello, Ilya!
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks for putting your effort into this task.
>> > > >
>> > > > Can you, please, list modules that you include in the slim package?
>> > > >
>> > > > > 5 марта 2020 г., в 20:17, Ilya Kasnacheev <
>> ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com
>> > >
>> > > > написал(а):
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Hello!
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I have prepared assemblies for Apache Ignite slim packaging:
>> > > > > https://github.com/apache/ignite/tree/ignite-slim
>> > > > >
>> > > > > It is based on ignite-2.8
>> > > > >
>> > > > > You can build it with mvn initialize -Prelease,lgpl
>> > > > > -Dignite.edition=apache-ignite-slim
>> > > > > after a normal release build.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Please consider the contents of resulting
>> > > > > target/bin/apache-ignite-slim-2.8.0-bin.zip
>> > > > &

Re: [DISCUSSION] Release Apache Ignite 2.8.0 RC1

[Denis Magda]

gt; > --
> > > > > Ilya Kasnacheev
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > чт, 5 мар. 2020 г. в 13:26, Sergey-A Kosarev <
> > sergey-a.kosa...@db.com>:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Classification: Public
> > > > >>
> > > > >> There are no RC anymore, I believe. It's now just 2.8.0 (as in
> Maven
> > > > >> Central)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thank you to all involved in the release guys, especially Maxim!
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Kind regards,
> > > > >> Sergey Kosarev
> > > > >>
> > > > >> -Original Message-
> > > > >> From: Ivan Pavlukhin [mailto:vololo...@gmail.com]
> > > > >> Sent: 05 March 2020 12:49
> > > > >> To: dev 
> > > > >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Release Apache Ignite 2.8.0 RC1
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Wow. I impressed that users try out even RC.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Best regards,
> > > > >> Ivan Pavlukhin
> > > > >>
> > > > >> чт, 5 мар. 2020 г. в 12:01, Maxim Muzafarov :
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Ivan,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> I think `final steps` is mostly related not to binary\sources
> > itself
> > > > >>> but for the announce message. All documentation must be
> up-to-date
> > > > >>> when it occurs.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> But I think you're right that users already using a new version
> of
> > > > >>> Apache Ignite without announcing. We've got some questions\bugs
> on
> > > > >>> user-list already [1] [2].
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> [1]
> > > > >>>
> > http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Ignite-2-8-get-exceptio
> > > > >>> n-while-use-batch-insert-in-streaming-mode-td31614.html
> > > > >>> [2]
> > > > >>>
> > http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Zookeeper-discovery-wit
> > > > >>> h-Ignite-2-8-0-class-NoClassDefFound-td31615.html
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On Thu, 5 Mar 2020 at 11:51, Ivan Pavlukhin  >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Maxim,
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> You did the great job! Many thanks for that!
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> I suppose there is some confusion with terminology. I understand
> > > > >>>> that Ignite release process has several final steps. And for
> > example
> > > > >>>> binaries can be published before documentation is ready and it
> is
> > ok
> > > > >>>> (I suppose opposite will make no harm as well). My personal
> > > > >>>> understanding is that a product version "is considered released"
> > > > >>>> once a user can receive and use it tagged with the target
> version.
> > > > >>>> In other words, once it is generally available (GA). And we
> should
> > > > >>>> not force users to check product web sites and other
> announcement
> > > > >>>> channels to check that a package available in the Maven
> repository
> > > > >>>> is valid. For someone it might be just "keeping all dependencies
> > up to
> > > > >> date".
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Best regards,
> > > > >>>> Ivan Pavlukhin
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> чт, 5 мар. 2020 г. в 09:33, Maxim Muzafarov  >:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Ivan,
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> I did something wrong?
> > > > >>>>> What should I do to release all effectively?
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> On Thu, 5 Mar 2020 at 08:23, Denis Magda 
> > wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Ivan,
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>

Re: [DISCUSSION] Release Apache Ignite 2.8.0 RC1

[Denis Magda]

Ivan,

The release of binaries is one of the final steps. There are still several
steps left before we can consider all the 2.8 release activities completed:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-6.3.4.Releasedocumentaiononreadme.io
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-6.4.Announcerelease

-
Denis


On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 7:57 PM Ivan Pavlukhin  wrote:

> Denis, folks,
>
> As it was already mentioned 2.8 is already in maven [1]. Consequently
> "effectively" released. In my opinion it is not correct to consider
> release in progress.
>
> Agree that 2.8.1 sounds as a proper option here.
>
> [1] https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.ignite/ignite-core/2.8.0
>
> Best regards,
> Ivan Pavlukhin
>
> ср, 4 мар. 2020 г. в 17:08, Denis Magda :
> >
> > Dmitriy,
> >
> > Ignite 2.8 will be announced as soon as the documentation is prepared and
> > released. Until then, the release is still considered under progress.
> Here
> > is a dedicated discussion for documentation activities. We should be
> ready
> > soon:
> >
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Ignite-2-8-documentation-td46008.html
> >
> > Also, I've started a discussion related to our announcement steps. Please
> > check it out and get involved:
> >
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Ignite-2-8-announcement-plan-td46238.html
> >
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 6:29 AM Dmitriy Pavlov 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Folks,
> > >
> > > Unfortunately https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/ignite/2.8.0/
> is
> > > already there, so release was happened. I'm not sure it is a good idea
> to
> > > substitute binaries later.  Was it announced to announce@ ?
> > >
> > > IMO, 2.8.1 is ok for that case.
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > >
> > > ср, 4 мар. 2020 г. в 11:29, Nikolay Izhikov :
> > >
> > > > Pavel, ++1.
> > > >
> > > > > 4 марта 2020 г., в 11:20, Pavel Tupitsyn 
> > > > написал(а):
> > > > >
> > > > > Igniters,
> > > > >
> > > > > The release has already happened.
> > > > > It is on our website [1], it is on Maven [2].
> > > > > People are using it, so I don't think we can do anything at this
> point.
> > > > >
> > > > > Bugs happen, we can't delay the release forever because of them.
> Let's
> > > > fix
> > > > > things in 2.8.1.
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://ignite.apache.org/download.cgi
> > > > > [2] https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.ignite
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 10:06 AM Nikolay Izhikov <
> nizhi...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Hello, Igniters.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Do we have a person who can fix this issue in the nearest time?
> > > > >> Right now IGNITE-12746 is Open and Unassigned.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> 3 марта 2020 г., в 23:54, Denis Magda 
> > > написал(а):
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Ilya,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Thanks for catching that and sharing. I wonder if there are any
> other
> > > > >>> blockers that were pushed to 2.8.x version. If there are a few
> then
> > > we
> > > > >> can
> > > > >>> produce 2.8.1 shortly, otherwise, it sounds reasonable to me to
> fix
> > > the
> > > > >>> issue with putAll, update the binaries and finish the process.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> -
> > > > >>> Denis
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 2:34 PM Ilya Kasnacheev <
> > > > >> ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> Hello!
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> I have filed an issue
> > > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12746
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> I think this is potentially a ga

Distributed DMX Lighting Control With Apache Ignite.NET

[Denis Magda]

Hi Igniters,

Let me introduce you to Mike James, who has been working on a gripping
project that uses Apache Ignite as a backbone for a distributed DMX Control
system. That's a use case of the entertainment industry and, hopefully,
many rockstars will switch to the solution to produce light effects and
shows during their performances ;)

Check this two-part series by Mike:

   - Intro and use case:
   https://lightconsole.dev/2020/02/26/intro-to-dmx-control-systems/
   - Architecture:
   
https://lightconsole.dev/2020/03/04/distributing-dmx-compute-with-apache-ignite/

You might be interested to see how the system relies on various
capabilities of Ignite to make the things working at scale - compute,
storage, service grid, etc.

@Pavel Tupitsyn, I would especially want to connect you with Mike, who can
share his feedback in regards to our .NET component. Mike, stay in touch
with Pavel, who is our main maintainer and contributor to .NET.

-
Denis

Re: Ignite 2.8 documentation

[Denis Magda]

Maxim,

Yes, it's preferable to have metrics pages fully completed even though the
feature is an experimental state. We want to encourage to try it out and
switch to the new APIs eventually. Without technical instructions available
our users will have a hard time checking the new capabilities.

Nikolay, thanks a lot!

-
Denis


On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 8:52 AM Nikolay Izhikov  wrote:

> I think yes.
>
> I will prepare documentation shortly.
>
> > 4 марта 2020 г., в 17:50, Maxim Muzafarov 
> написал(а):
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> >
> > Do we need a fully complete public documentation for metrics marked
> > with @ExperimentalFeature? The API can significantly be changed.
> >
> > On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 at 17:10, Artem Budnikov 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> The only feature that is left is "WAL page compression"
> >>
> >> The three other features are  limitations that were present in Ignite
> >> 2.7 and now they are removed. Since they were never mentioned in the
> >> docs, there is nothing to do.
> >>
> >> -Artem
> >>
> >> On 04.03.2020 17:02, Denis Magda wrote:
> >>>> I'll work on the following items today and tomorrow:
> >>>>
> >>>>- JDBC: Support for query cancellation
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>- JDBC: Support for query timeout
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>- suspend/resume for pessimistic transactions
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>- WAL page compression
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> Artem, are these the only tickets left apart from the metrics &
> >>> monitoring? @Nikolay
> >>> Izhikov  how soon will you be able to finish the
> >>> metrics documentation pages?
> >>>
> >>> -
> >>> Denis
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 2:55 AM Artem Budnikov 
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi everyone,
> >>>>
> >>>> I have created the docs for the following items so far:
> >>>>
> >>>>-Default Ignite work dir location
> >>>>
> >>>>
> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/getting-started-28#section-setting-up-work-directory
> >>>>
> >>>>- Baseline auto-adjust feature
> >>>>
> >>>>
> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/baseline-topology-28#section-baseline-topology-autoadjustment
> >>>>
> >>>>- Cluster (de)activation events documentation
> >>>>
> >>>>
> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/baseline-topology-28#section-cluster-activationdeactivation-events
> >>>>
> >>>>- Remove SqlQuery documentation
> >>>>done
> >>>>
> >>>>- Partition awareness for thin clients
> >>>>
> >>>>
> https://apacheignite-net.readme.io/docs/thin-client-28#section-partition-awareness
> >>>>
> >>>>
> https://apacheignite-cpp.readme.io/docs/thin-client-28#section-partition-awareness
> >>>>
> >>>>- Transactions support in java thin client
> >>>>
> >>>>
> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/key-value-28#section-client-transactions
> >>>>
> >>>>- KILL QUERY command
> >>>>
> >>>>
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite-sql/v2.7.6/docs/kill-query
> >>>>
> >>>>- Move rebalance configuration properties to the
> >>>>IgniteConfiguration level
> >>>>
> >>>>
> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/data-rebalancing-28#section-configuration
> >>>>
> >>>>- Renamed IGNITE schema to SYS
> >>>>done
> >>>>
> >>>> I'll work on the following items today and tomorrow:
> >>>>
> >>>>- JDBC: Support for query cancellation
> >>>>- JDBC: Support for query timeout
> >>>>- suspend/resume for pessimistic transactions
> >>>>- WAL page compression
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Nikolay,
> >>>>
> >>>> How is your progress with the Metrics and System Views documentation?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Artem Budnikov
> >

Re: Ignite 2.8 announcement plan

[Denis Magda]

Hi Pavel,

Excellent! It will be good to publish the first article (what's new in
Ignite.NET 2.8) prior to a generic blog on blogs.apache.org so that we can
link your post in for those who are looking for more details. Do you have
any timeline in mind for this article?

@Alexey Zinoviev , how about you preparing several
paragraphs for the blog highlighting the biggest changes in ML? The same
highlighted content will be elaborated during the webinar.

-
Denis


On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 2:29 AM Pavel Tupitsyn  wrote:

> Denis, I have a few blog posts on Ignite.NET planned:
>
> * What's new in Ignite.NET 2.8 (Thin Client Partition Awareness, logging,
> expiry policy, cluster API, .NET Core 3.x, Dockerfile)
> * Ignite.NET performance improvements on .NET Core 3.x
> * Ignite.NET Partition Awareness performance
> * Fixing JNI thread leak in Ignite.NET
>
> What do you think? Should we have a schedule of some sorts?
>
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 9:58 PM Alexey Zinoviev 
> wrote:
>
> > Sounds ineresting, will help with the post, please share the template,
> not
> > sure about webinar
> >
> > вт, 3 мар. 2020 г., 20:59 Denis Magda :
> >
> > > Igniters,
> > >
> > > Let's discuss approaches for a global announcement/promotion of the
> > > release. I would suggest focusing on a blog post and a community
> webinar.
> > >
> > > The blog post will introduce significant improvements (service grid,
> thin
> > > clients, new metrics system, ML, etc.) sharing references to
> > documentation
> > > pages with more details.  It will be published on blogs.apache.org in
> a
> > > format similar to this one -
> > > https://blogs.apache.org/ignite/entry/apache-ignite-2-7-deep. I can
> work
> > > on
> > > it unless anybody else is willing to share the news on behalf of the
> > > community.
> > >
> > > Next, the blog post will be featuring a community webinar that is
> > breaking
> > > down a subset of the improvements in more detail. Please see an
> abstract
> > > below with suggested topics for a detailed overview. @Alexey Zinoviev
> > > , would you be able to present the ML part?
> > > @Nikolay
> > > Izhikov  or @Andrey Gura 
> would
> > > you like to take over the metrics section? I'll work the attendees
> > through
> > > the items listed in "Sustainable production under high load". We should
> > > target the webinar for the April timeframe.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > *Topmost changes in Apache Ignite 2.8 for production maintenance and
> > > machine learning*
> > >
> > >
> > > *Apache Ignite community rolled out more than 1900 changes in Ignite
> 2.8
> > > that enhanced almost all the components of the platform. The release
> > notes
> > > go with hundreds of lines trying to catalog the improvements. Join this
> > > webinar led by Ignite community members demonstrating and dissecting
> new
> > > capabilities related to production maintenance, monitoring, and machine
> > > learning that you do not want to lose sight of:*
> > >
> > >- *Sustainable production under high load: Ignite persistence
> > compaction
> > >and consistent crash recovery, baseline topology auto-adjustment, no
> > >interruption of operations for some cluster topology change events.*
> > >- *Next-generation system for monitoring and code tracing: design
> and
> > >usage, exporters configuration (JMX, SQL, OpenCensus) *
> > >- *Ignite Machine Learning major upgrade: a revised approach for
> > models
> > >training/evaluation, models importing from Spark ML, XGBoost and
> much
> > > more
> > >  *
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > > Denis
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSSION] Release Apache Ignite 2.8.0 RC1

[Denis Magda]

Dmitriy,

Ignite 2.8 will be announced as soon as the documentation is prepared and
released. Until then, the release is still considered under progress. Here
is a dedicated discussion for documentation activities. We should be ready
soon:
http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Ignite-2-8-documentation-td46008.html

Also, I've started a discussion related to our announcement steps. Please
check it out and get involved:
http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Ignite-2-8-announcement-plan-td46238.html

-
Denis


On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 6:29 AM Dmitriy Pavlov  wrote:

> Hi Folks,
>
> Unfortunately https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/ignite/2.8.0/ is
> already there, so release was happened. I'm not sure it is a good idea to
> substitute binaries later.  Was it announced to announce@ ?
>
> IMO, 2.8.1 is ok for that case.
>
> Sincerely,
> Dmitriy Pavlov
>
> ср, 4 мар. 2020 г. в 11:29, Nikolay Izhikov :
>
> > Pavel, ++1.
> >
> > > 4 марта 2020 г., в 11:20, Pavel Tupitsyn 
> > написал(а):
> > >
> > > Igniters,
> > >
> > > The release has already happened.
> > > It is on our website [1], it is on Maven [2].
> > > People are using it, so I don't think we can do anything at this point.
> > >
> > > Bugs happen, we can't delay the release forever because of them. Let's
> > fix
> > > things in 2.8.1.
> > >
> > > [1] https://ignite.apache.org/download.cgi
> > > [2] https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.apache.ignite
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 10:06 AM Nikolay Izhikov 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hello, Igniters.
> > >>
> > >> Do we have a person who can fix this issue in the nearest time?
> > >> Right now IGNITE-12746 is Open and Unassigned.
> > >>
> > >>> 3 марта 2020 г., в 23:54, Denis Magda 
> написал(а):
> > >>>
> > >>> Ilya,
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks for catching that and sharing. I wonder if there are any other
> > >>> blockers that were pushed to 2.8.x version. If there are a few then
> we
> > >> can
> > >>> produce 2.8.1 shortly, otherwise, it sounds reasonable to me to fix
> the
> > >>> issue with putAll, update the binaries and finish the process.
> > >>>
> > >>> -
> > >>> Denis
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 2:34 PM Ilya Kasnacheev <
> > >> ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Hello!
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I have filed an issue
> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12746
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I think this is potentially a game breaker and makes me recommend
> > >> avoiding
> > >>>> 2.8, if we release it without fix (for now).
> > >>>>
> > >>>> If you are using any partitioned caches, anyway.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> So I suggest we withhold 2.8.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Regards,
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Ilya Kasnacheev
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> вт, 3 мар. 2020 г. в 20:53, Maxim Muzafarov :
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Ilya,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I do not want to force the release no matter what happens, but I
> > think
> > >>>>> we should release what we have to get feedback not just from the
> > >>>>> developer community but from our users too.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> And fix all these issues in 2.8.1.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Tue, 3 Mar 2020 at 20:33, Ilya Kasnacheev <
> > >> ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com>
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Hello!
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Can we please hold back publishing AI-2.8.0-rc1 as public Apache
> > >> Ignite
> > >>>>> 2.8
> > >>>>>> release?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I have just been notified that
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>
> >
> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.distributed.dh

Re: Ignite 2.8 documentation

[Denis Magda]

>
> I'll work on the following items today and tomorrow:
>
>- JDBC: Support for query cancellation
>
>
>- JDBC: Support for query timeout
>
>
>- suspend/resume for pessimistic transactions
>
>
>- WAL page compression
>
>
Artem, are these the only tickets left apart from the metrics &
monitoring? @Nikolay
Izhikov  how soon will you be able to finish the
metrics documentation pages?

-
Denis


On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 2:55 AM Artem Budnikov 
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> I have created the docs for the following items so far:
>
>-Default Ignite work dir location
>
>
> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/getting-started-28#section-setting-up-work-directory
>
>- Baseline auto-adjust feature
>
>
> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/baseline-topology-28#section-baseline-topology-autoadjustment
>
>- Cluster (de)activation events documentation
>
>
> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/baseline-topology-28#section-cluster-activationdeactivation-events
>
>- Remove SqlQuery documentation
>done
>
>- Partition awareness for thin clients
>
>
> https://apacheignite-net.readme.io/docs/thin-client-28#section-partition-awareness
>
>
> https://apacheignite-cpp.readme.io/docs/thin-client-28#section-partition-awareness
>
>- Transactions support in java thin client
>
>
> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/key-value-28#section-client-transactions
>
>- KILL QUERY command
>
>https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite-sql/v2.7.6/docs/kill-query
>
>- Move rebalance configuration properties to the
>IgniteConfiguration level
>
>
> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/data-rebalancing-28#section-configuration
>
>- Renamed IGNITE schema to SYS
>done
>
> I'll work on the following items today and tomorrow:
>
>- JDBC: Support for query cancellation
>- JDBC: Support for query timeout
>- suspend/resume for pessimistic transactions
>- WAL page compression
>
>
> Nikolay,
>
> How is your progress with the Metrics and System Views documentation?
>
>
> Artem Budnikov
> Technical Writergridgain.com
>
> On 03.03.2020 19:06, Maxim Muzafarov wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
> This is in the `Ignite Core` section, so I think mostly related to
> java functionality and thin client protocol extension [1]. Sorry for
> not being too accurate with this statement
> .
> The same change is mentioned for C++ and .NET sections of the release
> notes (but not for other thin clients).
>
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11898
>
> On Tue, 3 Mar 2020 at 17:33, Igor Sapego  
>  wrote:
>
> That's right, only C++ and .NET clients have partition awareness
>
> Best Regards,
> Igor
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 5:02 PM Artem Budnikov  
> 
> wrote:
>
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Looks like the following line from the Ignite 2.8 release notes is a bit
> of an overstatement and should be removed:
>
>
> Added support best effort affinity for thin clients (partition awareness)
>
> Java thin client does not support partition awareness. Nodejs and python
> thin clients from the distribution package do not have signs of this
> feature as well.
>
> Igor,
>
> Could you please confirm or deny this?
>
> -Artem
>
> Artem Budnikov
> Technical Writergridgain.com
>
> On 03.03.2020 01:47, Denis Magda wrote:
>
> Hi Alexey,
>
> Thanks for updating the documentation. The update process is cumbersome as
> of now. What will happen is that we will be replacing the content of the
> current pages (pre 2.8 pages) with the content from the 2.8 versions. Once
> the text is copied manually, a 2.8 version of the page will be deleted. I
> would advise Artem to do that this time and update the wiki page with more
> details:https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Document
>
> Also, why should we release this 
> page?https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/genetic-algorithms
>
> -
> Denis
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 1, 2020 at 7:59 AM Alexey Zinoviev  
> 
> wrote:
>
>
> Hi, Igniters, I've finished the ML documentation.
>
> I have the issue that, for example I've created a new version of page with
> postfix -2.8 and the page name contains this postfix.
> How are we going to replace the URL? Or we will replace the content from
> initial page?
>
> For example, I've created the new version of 
> pagehttps://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/decision-trees
> and
> moved it under ne

Re: Ignite Hadoop Accelerator #CGO#

[Denis Magda]

Hello Prachi,

A recommended approach is to deploy Ignite in its standard configuration
and pre-load the required data there. This page shares more details:
https://www.gridgain.com/docs/latest/integrations/datalake-accelerator/getting-started

In case synchronization is needed between Ignite and Hadoop you can explore
various CDC methods or consider implementing CacheStore interface as
mentioned here:
http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/How-to-access-IGFS-file-written-one-node-from-other-node-in-cluster-td31495.html#a31508

-
Denis


On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 5:19 AM Shah, Prachi
 wrote:

> Hi Team,
>
> We are trying to use Ignite Hadoop Accelerator for one of our
> implementation.
>
> But I understand Ignite Hadoop Acceleration is to be discontinued very
> soon.
>
> Need to know the alternatives to the Accelerator to use Ignite for Hadoop
> file system.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Prachi
> This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential
> and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the
> person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you
> are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute,
> or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in
> error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this
> message.
>

Re: [DISCUSSION] Release Apache Ignite 2.8.0 RC1

[Denis Magda]

Ilya,

Thanks for catching that and sharing. I wonder if there are any other
blockers that were pushed to 2.8.x version. If there are a few then we can
produce 2.8.1 shortly, otherwise, it sounds reasonable to me to fix the
issue with putAll, update the binaries and finish the process.

-
Denis


On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 2:34 PM Ilya Kasnacheev 
wrote:

> Hello!
>
> I have filed an issue https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12746
>
> I think this is potentially a game breaker and makes me recommend avoiding
> 2.8, if we release it without fix (for now).
>
> If you are using any partitioned caches, anyway.
>
> So I suggest we withhold 2.8.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Ilya Kasnacheev
>
>
> вт, 3 мар. 2020 г. в 20:53, Maxim Muzafarov :
>
> > Ilya,
> >
> > I do not want to force the release no matter what happens, but I think
> > we should release what we have to get feedback not just from the
> > developer community but from our users too.
> >
> > And fix all these issues in 2.8.1.
> >
> > On Tue, 3 Mar 2020 at 20:33, Ilya Kasnacheev 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello!
> > >
> > > Can we please hold back publishing AI-2.8.0-rc1 as public Apache Ignite
> > 2.8
> > > release?
> > >
> > > I have just been notified that
> > >
> >
> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.distributed.dht.GridCacheColocatedDebugTest#testPutsMultithreadedColocated
> > >
> >
> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.distributed.dht.GridCacheColocatedDebugTest#testPutsMultithreadedMixed
> > > are flaky: they seem to deadlock on putAll sorted keys maps. They used
> to
> > > pass solidly on 2.7, but fail on master and ignite-2.8.
> > >
> > > (They fail around 1 time out of 10, so just run them 25 times to check)
> > >
> > > If there is indeed a deadlock, this would become a blocker to this
> > release,
> > > in my opinion, but I need some time to check.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > --
> > > Ilya Kasnacheev
> > >
> > >
> > > вс, 1 мар. 2020 г. в 11:29, Maxim Muzafarov :
> > >
> > > > Ivan,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I agree with you that the more members will check the release the
> > > > better will be. That's why I've shared the release candidate links
> [1]
> > > > before starting a vote. The best time for starting a vote is not
> > > > mentioned at our release wiki page [2] (should we?) and I've also
> > > > failed with googling the best practices for it too. So, I've supposed
> > > > since all of us are working on their own tasks during weekdays the
> > > > free time on the weekend is the best choice for cheking\voting on the
> > > > release. Probably this decision was wrong.
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > > >
> >
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Apache-Ignite-2-8-RELEASE-Time-Scope-Manager-tp43616p46117.html
> > > > [2]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, 1 Mar 2020 at 00:37, Ivan Pavlukhin 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Also I have a comment regarding to voting. Voting for 72 hour
> > spanning
> > > > > a weekend sounds a little bit odd to me. In a particular case the
> > more
> > > > > people check the release the better. And I suppose there is more
> time
> > > > > for it on weekdays for the majority.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > Ivan Pavlukhin
> > > > >
> > > > > вс, 1 мар. 2020 г. в 00:33, Ivan Pavlukhin :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > As I remember, that Pavlov suggested to discuss threats on a
> > private
> > > > PMC list
> > > > > > Cannot understand why it should be discussed on a private list.
> > What
> > > > > > is the clue?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > Ivan Pavlukhin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > сб, 29 февр. 2020 г. в 16:00, Alexey Zinoviev <
> > zaleslaw@gmail.com
> > > > >:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As I remember, that Pavlov suggested to discuss threats on a
> > private
> > > > PMC
> > > > > > > list
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > сб, 29 февр. 2020 г., 15:12 Ilya Kasnacheev <
> > > > ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com>:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hello!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > As far as my understanding goes, ignite-zookeeper is listed
> for
> > > > removal
> > > > > > > > because it brings a lot of dependencies, some of which may
> have
> > > > known
> > > > > > > > vulnerabilities, which will make the distribution also
> > considered
> > > > > > > > vulnerable by some scanners.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Ilya Kasnacheev
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > сб, 29 февр. 2020 г. в 14:18, Alexey Zinoviev <
> > > > zaleslaw@gmail.com>:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Ok, lets move to this thread. Also, the slim release could
> be
> > > > form by
> > > > > > > > > voting on user-list
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > сб, 29 февр. 2020 г., 9:55 Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > >:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Nikolay, Alexey,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > First, the idea of the slim binary release a

Re: Update Apache Ignite docker documentation

[Denis Magda]

Could we also update the "Overview" page with the content from the README
file of GitHub?
https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/README.md

-
Denis


On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 1:26 PM Maxim Muzafarov  wrote:

> Igniters,
>
>
> I've just found that a script with docked Apache Ignite on docker hub
> site [1] doesn't work for newer versions (start from 2.6.0?) since the
> word `fabric` has been removed from a release distribution name.
>
> Can we update this documentation to the newer one?
> I can also suggest using this URL [2] for resource download since at
> dist.apache.org will be available only the latest version.
>
>
> RUN curl
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/ignite/${IGNITE_VERSION}/apache-ignite-fabric-${IGNITE_VERSION}-bin.zip
> -o ignite.zip \ && unzip ignite.zip \ && rm ignite.zip
>
>
> [1] https://hub.docker.com/r/apacheignite/ignite/dockerfile
> [2] https://archive.apache.org/dist/ignite/
>

Ignite 2.8 announcement plan

[Denis Magda]

Igniters,

Let's discuss approaches for a global announcement/promotion of the
release. I would suggest focusing on a blog post and a community webinar.

The blog post will introduce significant improvements (service grid, thin
clients, new metrics system, ML, etc.) sharing references to documentation
pages with more details.  It will be published on blogs.apache.org in a
format similar to this one -
https://blogs.apache.org/ignite/entry/apache-ignite-2-7-deep. I can work on
it unless anybody else is willing to share the news on behalf of the
community.

Next, the blog post will be featuring a community webinar that is breaking
down a subset of the improvements in more detail. Please see an abstract
below with suggested topics for a detailed overview. @Alexey Zinoviev
, would you be able to present the ML part? @Nikolay
Izhikov  or @Andrey Gura  would
you like to take over the metrics section? I'll work the attendees through
the items listed in "Sustainable production under high load". We should
target the webinar for the April timeframe.



*Topmost changes in Apache Ignite 2.8 for production maintenance and
machine learning*


*Apache Ignite community rolled out more than 1900 changes in Ignite 2.8
that enhanced almost all the components of the platform. The release notes
go with hundreds of lines trying to catalog the improvements. Join this
webinar led by Ignite community members demonstrating and dissecting new
capabilities related to production maintenance, monitoring, and machine
learning that you do not want to lose sight of:*

   - *Sustainable production under high load: Ignite persistence compaction
   and consistent crash recovery, baseline topology auto-adjustment, no
   interruption of operations for some cluster topology change events.*
   - *Next-generation system for monitoring and code tracing: design and
   usage, exporters configuration (JMX, SQL, OpenCensus) *
   - *Ignite Machine Learning major upgrade: a revised approach for models
   training/evaluation, models importing from Spark ML, XGBoost and much more
 *


-
Denis

Re: [Apache Ignite Integrations Documentation] Added ALB documentation.

[Denis Magda]

Emmanouil, thanks, I've reviewed and merged the changes!

-
Denis


On Sun, Mar 1, 2020 at 4:30 PM ReadMe  wrote:

> *Emmanouil Gkatziouras* suggested edits to page *Amazon AWS Discovery*.
>
> +++ Added: 27
>
> --- Removed: 2
>
> *Added ALB documentation.*
>
> Documentation for the new Ignite ALB finder
> View Suggested Edits
> 
> — ReadMe
> Follow@readme  on Twitter.· Unsubscribe
> 
> from notifications
>

Re: Ignite 2.8 documentation

[Denis Magda]

Hi Alexey,

Thanks for updating the documentation. The update process is cumbersome as
of now. What will happen is that we will be replacing the content of the
current pages (pre 2.8 pages) with the content from the 2.8 versions. Once
the text is copied manually, a 2.8 version of the page will be deleted. I
would advise Artem to do that this time and update the wiki page with more
details:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Document

Also, why should we release this page?
https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/genetic-algorithms
<https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/genetic-algorithms>
-
Denis


On Sun, Mar 1, 2020 at 7:59 AM Alexey Zinoviev 
wrote:

> Hi, Igniters, I've finished the ML documentation.
>
> I have the issue that, for example I've created a new version of page with
> postfix -2.8 and the page name contains this postfix.
> How are we going to replace the URL? Or we will replace the content from
> initial page?
>
> For example, I've created the new version of page
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/decision-trees and
> moved it under new page
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/decision-trees-28
> How it will be processed to obtain the  decision-trees url for the new
> page?
>
>
> In all case the full list of removed/replaced pages for ML is next:
>
> In the release 2.8, please remove the pages
>
>1.
>
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/genetic-algorithms
>
>2.
>
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/svm-multi-class-classification
>
>3. DeepLearning block with 3 pages
>4.
>
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/model-cross-validation
>
>
> Next pages were replaced with postfix 2.8 and grouped under new pages
>
>1.
>
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/machine-learning
>
>2.
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/preprocessing
>
>3.
>
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/ols-multiple-linear-regression
>
>4.
>
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/k-means-clustering
>
>5.
>
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/multilayer-perceptron
>
>6.
>
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/knn-classification
>
>7.
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/knn-regression
>
>8.
>
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/svm-binary-classification
>
>9.
>
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/logistic-regression
>
>10.
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/random-forest
>
>11.
>
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/gradient-boosting
>
>12.
>https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/model-updating
>13.
>
> https://dash.readme.io/project/apacheignite/v2.7.6/docs/ann-approximate-nearest-neighbor
>
>
>
>
> ср, 26 февр. 2020 г. в 03:32, Denis Magda :
>
> > Hi Prasad,
> >
> > This is odd behavior and before changing the docs I would try to get to
> the
> > bottom. Let me join the user list conversation.
> >
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 3:46 AM Prasad Bhalerao <
> > prasadbhalerao1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Can we have this behavior documented? This will help user to design
> their
> > > caches appropriately.
> > >
> > > *For Replicated Cache:*
> > >
> > > Reference mail thread:
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Read-through-not-working-as-expected-in-case-of-Replicated-cache-td29990.html
> > >
> > >  read through for replicated cache would work where there is either:
> > > - writeThrough enabled and all changes do through it.
> > > - database contents do not change for already read keys.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Prasad
> > >
> > > On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 7:31 PM Alexey Zinoviev <
> zaleslaw@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Please, could you post in this thread a few examples of the
> > documentation
> > > > tickets in JIRA for the current release, to create them correctly?
> > > >
> > > > пн, 24 февр. 2020 г. в 14:53, Alexey Zinoviev <
> zaleslaw@gmail.com
> > >:
> > > >
> > > > > Ok, will make ticket, 

Re: Permissions to edit Apache Ignite documentation

[Denis Magda]

Maxim,

Please stay in touch with Artem If you'd like to release Ignite 2.8 docs.
It's a bit complicated with readme and either Artem can complete this step
or he can collaborate with you letting you experience it. Anyway, before we
release 2.8 version of the docs we need to finish the pages. Here is a bit
more on the process:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Document#HowtoDocument-Readme.ioDocsforaNextRelease

-
Denis


On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 7:57 AM Nikolay Izhikov  wrote:

> Just made you an administrator of Ignite documentation site.
>
> > 2 марта 2020 г., в 18:54, Maxim Muzafarov 
> написал(а):
> >
> > login: maxmu...@gmail.com
> >
> > On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 18:54, Maxim Muzafarov  wrote:
> >>
> >> Igniters,
> >>
> >>
> >> Can anyone give permissions to edit\publish documentation Apache
> >> Ignite pages [1]?
> >>
> >>
> >> [1]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-6.3.4.Releasedocumentaiononreadme.io
>
>

Re: Premissions to upload a release to official releases directory

[Denis Magda]

Nikolay, thanks for offering to help with this step of the process. If
Maxim is fine then I would let you publish the artifacts.

The docs should be completed this week and we need to develop the practice
to announce releases only after technical pages are updated and available.
The vote can run in parallel. Ignite users need to have a full release
package once a release is published - binaries, Docker images,
documentation, release notes, etc.


-
Denis


On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 7:54 AM Nikolay Izhikov  wrote:

> I thought documentation can be updated after the release.
> Isn’t it?
>
> > Is there anybody who can do that?
>
> I can do it.
>
>
> > 2 марта 2020 г., в 18:44, Maxim Muzafarov 
> написал(а):
> >
> > Denis,
> >
> > Thank you, I think yes.
> > But I don't expect that the release will be delayed since we still
> > need some time for documentation preparation.
> >
> > On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 18:40, Denis Magda  wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Maxim,
> >>
> >> This sounds like an option but can take delay the release for more than
> a
> >> week. Alternatively, someone from the PMC group can execute this step
> for
> >> you. Is there anybody who can do that?
> >>
> >> -
> >> Denis
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 6:21 AM Maxim Muzafarov 
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Ignite PMCs,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Hopefully, if not the current release voting, but one of the next one
> >>> get success soon we'll get the 2.8.0 release candidate accepted.
> >>>
> >>> To execute the next release scripts for an accepted release candidate
> >>> (release_*.sh from a release archive) I need some permissions to
> >>> upload a release candidate to official release directory. According to
> >>> Apache documentation [1]: "The PMC can also vote to let
> >>> non-PMC-members update the dist/release area. To get this set up,
> >>> please open a JIRA ticket at the INFRA JIRA referencing the PMC vote."
> >>>
> >>> As the release manager of Apache Ignite 2.8, I ask your help if you
> >>> consider it necessary to give me the required agreement for upload
> >>> release. After that, I'll file a JIRA ticket to INFRA.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#upload-ci
> >>>
>
>

Re: Who can merge excessive backups warning ticket?

[Denis Magda]

Alex Schrbakov,

As a reviewer, could you merge the changes?


-
Denis


On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 6:15 AM Zhenya Stanilovsky
 wrote:

>
> Hello, no objections found, plz who can merge it [1]?
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12725
>
>
>

Re: Premissions to upload a release to official releases directory

[Denis Magda]

Hi Maxim,

This sounds like an option but can take delay the release for more than a
week. Alternatively, someone from the PMC group can execute this step for
you. Is there anybody who can do that?

-
Denis


On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 6:21 AM Maxim Muzafarov  wrote:

> Ignite PMCs,
>
>
> Hopefully, if not the current release voting, but one of the next one
> get success soon we'll get the 2.8.0 release candidate accepted.
>
> To execute the next release scripts for an accepted release candidate
> (release_*.sh from a release archive) I need some permissions to
> upload a release candidate to official release directory. According to
> Apache documentation [1]: "The PMC can also vote to let
> non-PMC-members update the dist/release area. To get this set up,
> please open a JIRA ticket at the INFRA JIRA referencing the PMC vote."
>
> As the release manager of Apache Ignite 2.8, I ask your help if you
> consider it necessary to give me the required agreement for upload
> release. After that, I'll file a JIRA ticket to INFRA.
>
>
> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#upload-ci
>

Re: Read through not working as expected in case of Replicated cache

[Denis Magda]

Ivan, thanks for stepping in.

Prasad, is Ivan's assumption correct that you query the data with SQL under
the observed circumstances? My guess is that you were referring to the
key-value APIs as long as the issue is gone when the write-through is
enabled.

-
Denis


On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 2:30 PM Ivan Pavlukhin  wrote:

> As I understand the thing here is in combination of read-through and
> SQL. SQL queries do not read from underlying storage when read-through
> is configured. And an observed result happens because query from a
> client node over REPLICATED cache picks random server node (kind of
> load-balancing) to retrieve data. Following happens in the described
> case:
> 1. Value is loaded to a cache from an underlying storage on a primary
> node when cache.get is called.
> 2. Query is executed multiple times and when the chose node is the
> primary node then the value is observed. On other nodes the value is
> absent.
>
> Actually, behavior for PARTITIONED cache is similar, but an
> inconsistency is not observed because SQL queries read data from the
> primary node there. If the primary node leaves a cluster then an SQL
> query will not see the value anymore. So, the same inconsistency will
> appear.
>
> Best regards,
> Ivan Pavlukhin
>
> пт, 28 февр. 2020 г. в 13:23, Prasad Bhalerao <
> prasadbhalerao1...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > Can someone please comment on this?
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 6:04 AM Denis Magda  wrote:
> >
> > > Ignite Dev team,
> > >
> > > This sounds like an issue in our replicated cache implementation rather
> > > than an expected behavior. Especially, if partitioned caches don't have
> > > such a specificity.
> > >
> > > Who can explain why write-through needs to be enabled for replicated
> caches
> > > to reload an entry from an underlying database properly/consistently?
> > >
> > > -
> > > Denis
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 5:11 AM Ilya Kasnacheev <
> ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello!
> > > >
> > > > I think this is by design. You may suggest edits on readme.io.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > --
> > > > Ilya Kasnacheev
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > пн, 24 февр. 2020 г. в 17:28, Prasad Bhalerao <
> > > > prasadbhalerao1...@gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi,
> > > >>
> > > >> Is this a bug or the cache is designed to work this way?
> > > >>
> > > >> If it is as-designed, can this behavior be updated in ignite
> > > >> documentation?
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >> Prasad
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 7:19 PM Ilya Kasnacheev <
> > > >> ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Hello!
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I have discussed this with fellow Ignite developers, and they say
> read
> > > >>> through for replicated cache would work where there is either:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> - writeThrough enabled and all changes do through it.
> > > >>> - database contents do not change for already read keys.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I can see that neither is met in your case, so you can expect the
> > > >>> behavior that you are seeing.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Regards,
> > > >>> --
> > > >>> Ilya Kasnacheev
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> вт, 29 окт. 2019 г. в 18:18, Akash Shinde :
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> I am using Ignite 2.6 version.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I am starting 3 server nodes with a replicated cache and 1 client
> > > node.
> > > >>>> Cache configuration is as follows.
> > > >>>> Read-through true on but write-through is false. Load data by key
> is
> > > >>>> implemented as given below in cache-loader.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Steps to reproduce issue:
> > > >>>> 1) Delete an entry from cache using IgniteCache.remove() method.
> > > (Entry
> > > >>>> is just removed from cache but present in DB as write-through is
> > > false)
> > > >>&g

Re: [DISCUSSION] Release Apache Ignite 2.8.0 RC1

[Denis Magda]

Sounds reasonable to produce the slim package. Though, if it's time
consuming then we should target it to 2.8.1.

-
Denis


On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 1:36 PM Ilya Kasnacheev 
wrote:

> Hello!
>
> Are we doing a "slim" package for 2.8, though?
>
> There was a suggestion to remove the following modules from slim binary
> distribution:
>
> ignite-aop
> ignite-aws
> ignite-camel
> ignite-cassandra-serializers
> ignite-cassandra-store
> ignite-cloud
> ignite-direct-io
> ignite-flink
> ignite-flume
> ignite-gce
> ignite-jcl
> ignite-jms11
> ignite-jta
> ignite-kafka
> ignite-mesos
> ignite-ml
> ignite-mqtt
> ignite-osgi
> ignite-osgi-karaf
> ignite-osgi-paxlogging
> ignite-rocketmq
> ignite-scalar
> ignite-scalar_2.10
> ignite-spark
> ignite-ssh
> ignite-storm
> ignite-tensorflow
> ignite-twitter
> ignite-web
> ignite-yarn
> ignite-zeromq
> ignite-zookeeper
>
> Plus, remove benchmarks/ from slim package either.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Regards,
> --
> Ilya Kasnacheev
>
>
> пт, 28 февр. 2020 г. в 19:57, Denis Magda :
>
> > Maxim,
> >
> > Finally, thanks a lot for starting the voting process!
> >
> > I've already cast my vote and want to bring up some issues that are not
> > blockers though:
> >
> >1. Ignite technical documentation is not finished yet - @Artem
> Budnikov
> > is coordinating this process as well as
> >contributes to many open tickets. Even if the vote passes, the release
> >cannot be *announced* until the docs are finished. I would encourage
> >everyone involved in 2.8 docs creation to pull together, collaborate
> and
> >complete all the pending tickets throughout the next week.
> >2. Missing API references for Node.JS, Python and PHP clients [1] -
> need
> >to be addressed at least for 2.8.1 since the problem is not new to
> 2.8.
> >
> >
> > [1]
> >
> >
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Node-JS-PHP-Python-API-references-for-Ignite-2-8-release-td46097.html
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 7:10 AM Maxim Muzafarov 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Community,
> > >
> > >
> > > Please use this thread for all non-voting, discussion, questions
> > > related to this 2.8.0-rc1 release.
> > >
> > >
> > > Cast your vote here:
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Apache-Ignite-2-8-0-RC1-td46140.html
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSSION] Release Apache Ignite 2.8.0 RC1

[Denis Magda]

Maxim,

Finally, thanks a lot for starting the voting process!

I've already cast my vote and want to bring up some issues that are not
blockers though:

   1. Ignite technical documentation is not finished yet - @Artem Budnikov
is coordinating this process as well as
   contributes to many open tickets. Even if the vote passes, the release
   cannot be *announced* until the docs are finished. I would encourage
   everyone involved in 2.8 docs creation to pull together, collaborate and
   complete all the pending tickets throughout the next week.
   2. Missing API references for Node.JS, Python and PHP clients [1] - need
   to be addressed at least for 2.8.1 since the problem is not new to 2.8.


[1]
http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Node-JS-PHP-Python-API-references-for-Ignite-2-8-release-td46097.html
-
Denis


On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 7:10 AM Maxim Muzafarov  wrote:

> Dear Community,
>
>
> Please use this thread for all non-voting, discussion, questions
> related to this 2.8.0-rc1 release.
>
>
> Cast your vote here:
>
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Apache-Ignite-2-8-0-RC1-td46140.html
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.8.0 RC1

[Denis Magda]

+1 (binding)

Downloaded, started a cluster, ran several examples pulling Maven
artifacts from the staging.


-
Denis


On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 7:09 AM Maxim Muzafarov  wrote:

> Dear Community,
>
>
> I have uploaded a release candidate to:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/2.8.0-rc1/
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/packages_2.8.0-rc1/
>
> The following staging can be used for testing:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheignite-1474/
>
> Tag with name 2.8.0-rc1 created:
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=commit;h=341b01dfd8abf2d9b01d468ad1bb26dfe84ac4f6
>
> Release 2.8 contains a lot of changes, please refer to the RELEASE_NOTES:
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob_plain;f=RELEASE_NOTES.txt;hb=ignite-2.8
>
> Complete list of resolved issues:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20IGNITE%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.8%20and%20status%20%3D%20Resolved%20and%20resolution%20%3D%20Fixed%20order%20by%20updated
>
> DEVNOTES
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob_plain;f=DEVNOTES.txt;hb=ignite-2.8
>
>
> Additional checks have been performed (available for users included
> into the release group on TeamCity).
>
> TC [Check RC: Licenses, compile, chksum]
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5085462&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote4CheckRcLicensesChecksum&tab=buildResultsDiv
>
> TC [3] Build & Upload Nuget Staging Packages
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5085460&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_PrepareVote3BuildNuGetPackages&tab=buildResultsDiv
>
> TC [2] Compare w/ Previous Release
>
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=5085458&buildTypeId=ApacheIgniteReleaseJava8_IgniteRelease72CheckFileConsistency&tab=buildResultsDiv
>
>
> The vote is formal, see voting guidelines
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
> +1 - to accept Apache Ignite 2.8.0-rc1
> 0 - don't care either way
> -1 - DO NOT accept Apache Ignite Ignite 2.8.0-rc1 (explain why)
>
> See notes on how to verify release here
> https://www.apache.org/info/verification.html
> and
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process#ReleaseProcess-P5.VotingonReleaseandReleaseVerification
>
> The vote will hold for 72 hours and will end on March 2-nd 2020 15:10 UTC
>
> https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?iso=20200302T181010&p0=166&msg=%5BVOTE%5D+Release+Apache+Ignite+2.8.0+RC1&font=sanserif
>

Re: Subscription Request

[Denis Magda]

Duplicate message, responded in a similar thread.

-
Denis


On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 8:04 AM Javad Alimohammadi <
bs.alimohamm...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello to everybody. I would be glad to be part of your community.
>
> *My Areas of Expertise *
> Core Java, Concurrent Programming, Performance Optimization, Distributed
> System, SQL
>
> *How Could I Help*
> Fix bugs
> Develop a new feature
> Fix documentation
>
> *My Jir Account *
> j-alimohammadi
>

Re: Subscription request

[Denis Magda]

Hello Javad,

Welcome to the community, and thanks for sharing your areas of expertise
with interests! You were added to the contributors' list in JIRA.

Please check the "Pick a Ticket" section on this page [1] selecting a task
you'd like to start with. Our community members have refreshed the list
recently adding the most urgent tickets we need help with. All those
tickets are good for newcomers to the community.

Btw, do you have any experience with Ignite?

[1] https://ignite.apache.org/community/contribute.html

-
Denis


On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 12:03 PM Javad Alimohammadi <
bs.alimohamm...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello to everybody. I would like to be part of your community.
>
> *My Areas of Expertise *
> Core Java, Concurrent Programming, Performance Optimization, Distributed
> System, SQL
>
> *How Could I Help*
> Fix bugs
> Develop a new feature
> Fix documentation
>
> *My Jir Account *
> j-alimohammadi
>

Node.JS, PHP, Python API references for Ignite 2.8 release

[Denis Magda]

Igor Sapego, Igniters,

I've been working on Ignite website improvements that will be introduced
and contributed later and found that we still don't generate API references
for Node.JS, PHP, Python. The APIs are not even shipped withing binary
packages.

Do our scripts for build/release generate those APIs? Can we start
uploading them to the website under this path?
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ignite/site/trunk/releases

-
Denis

Re: Read through not working as expected in case of Replicated cache

[Denis Magda]

Ignite Dev team,

This sounds like an issue in our replicated cache implementation rather
than an expected behavior. Especially, if partitioned caches don't have
such a specificity.

Who can explain why write-through needs to be enabled for replicated caches
to reload an entry from an underlying database properly/consistently?

-
Denis


On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 5:11 AM Ilya Kasnacheev 
wrote:

> Hello!
>
> I think this is by design. You may suggest edits on readme.io.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Ilya Kasnacheev
>
>
> пн, 24 февр. 2020 г. в 17:28, Prasad Bhalerao <
> prasadbhalerao1...@gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Is this a bug or the cache is designed to work this way?
>>
>> If it is as-designed, can this behavior be updated in ignite
>> documentation?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Prasad
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 7:19 PM Ilya Kasnacheev <
>> ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> I have discussed this with fellow Ignite developers, and they say read
>>> through for replicated cache would work where there is either:
>>>
>>> - writeThrough enabled and all changes do through it.
>>> - database contents do not change for already read keys.
>>>
>>> I can see that neither is met in your case, so you can expect the
>>> behavior that you are seeing.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> --
>>> Ilya Kasnacheev
>>>
>>>
>>> вт, 29 окт. 2019 г. в 18:18, Akash Shinde :
>>>
 I am using Ignite 2.6 version.

 I am starting 3 server nodes with a replicated cache and 1 client node.
 Cache configuration is as follows.
 Read-through true on but write-through is false. Load data by key is
 implemented as given below in cache-loader.

 Steps to reproduce issue:
 1) Delete an entry from cache using IgniteCache.remove() method. (Entry
 is just removed from cache but present in DB as write-through is false)
 2) Invoke IgniteCache.get() method for the same key in step 1.
 3) Now query the cache from client node. Every invocation returns
 different results.
 Sometimes it returns reloaded entry, sometime returns the results
 without reloaded entry.

 Looks like read-through is not replicating the reloaded entry on all
 nodes in case of REPLICATED cache.

 So to investigate further I changed the cache mode to PARTITIONED and
 set the backup count to 3 i.e. total number of nodes present in cluster (to
 mimic REPLICATED behavior).
 This time it worked as expected.
 Every invocation returned the same result with reloaded entry.

 *  private CacheConfiguration networkCacheCfg() {*



















 *CacheConfiguration networkCacheCfg = new
 CacheConfiguration<>(CacheName.NETWORK_CACHE.name
 ());
 networkCacheCfg.setAtomicityMode(CacheAtomicityMode.TRANSACTIONAL);
 networkCacheCfg.setWriteThrough(false);
 networkCacheCfg.setReadThrough(true);
 networkCacheCfg.setRebalanceMode(CacheRebalanceMode.ASYNC);
 networkCacheCfg.setWriteSynchronizationMode(CacheWriteSynchronizationMode.FULL_SYNC);
   //networkCacheCfg.setBackups(3);
 networkCacheCfg.setCacheMode(CacheMode.REPLICATED);
 Factory storeFactory =
 FactoryBuilder.factoryOf(NetworkDataCacheLoader.class);
 networkCacheCfg.setCacheStoreFactory(storeFactory);
 networkCacheCfg.setIndexedTypes(DefaultDataAffinityKey.class,
 NetworkData.class);networkCacheCfg.setSqlIndexMaxInlineSize(65);
 RendezvousAffinityFunction affinityFunction = new
 RendezvousAffinityFunction();
 affinityFunction.setExcludeNeighbors(false);
 networkCacheCfg.setAffinity(affinityFunction);
 networkCacheCfg.setStatisticsEnabled(true);   //
 networkCacheCfg.setNearConfiguration(nearCacheConfiguration());return
 networkCacheCfg;  }*

 @Override
 public V load(K k) throws CacheLoaderException {
 V value = null;
 DataSource dataSource = springCtx.getBean(DataSource.class);
 try (Connection connection = dataSource.getConnection();
  PreparedStatement statement = 
 connection.prepareStatement(loadByKeySql)) {
 //statement.setObject(1, k.getId());
 setPreparedStatement(statement,k);
 try (ResultSet rs = statement.executeQuery()) {
 if (rs.next()) {
 value = rowMapper.mapRow(rs, 0);
 }
 }
 } catch (SQLException e) {

 throw new CacheLoaderException(e.getMessage(), e);
 }

 return value;
 }


 Thanks,

 Akash

Re: Ignite 2.8 documentation

[Denis Magda]

Hi Prasad,

This is odd behavior and before changing the docs I would try to get to the
bottom. Let me join the user list conversation.

-
Denis


On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 3:46 AM Prasad Bhalerao <
prasadbhalerao1...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Can we have this behavior documented? This will help user to design their
> caches appropriately.
>
> *For Replicated Cache:*
>
> Reference mail thread:
>
> http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/Read-through-not-working-as-expected-in-case-of-Replicated-cache-td29990.html
>
>  read through for replicated cache would work where there is either:
> - writeThrough enabled and all changes do through it.
> - database contents do not change for already read keys.
>
> Thanks,
> Prasad
>
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 7:31 PM Alexey Zinoviev 
> wrote:
>
> > Please, could you post in this thread a few examples of the documentation
> > tickets in JIRA for the current release, to create them correctly?
> >
> > пн, 24 февр. 2020 г. в 14:53, Alexey Zinoviev :
> >
> > > Ok, will make ticket, no problemo
> > >
> > > вс, 23 февр. 2020 г., 23:28 Denis Magda :
> > >
> > >> Alex, thanks for helping with the documentation. Frankly, the tickets
> > >> will be useful to get a complete list of all the updates pages with
> the
> > >> goal of extracting info for blog post(s) - we'll be preparing at least
> > one
> > >> blog for Ignite 2.8 and can create an ML specific blog as well. Also,
> > the
> > >> tickets might simplify the review process between you and Artem.
> > >>
> > >> -
> > >> Denis
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 2:18 AM Alexey Zinoviev <
> zaleslaw@gmail.com
> > >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> I've created a draft pages on apache.readme.io and will continue my
> > >>> work there during next 2 weeks.
> > >>> Should I create any tickets for that? Or could miss that step?
> > >>>
> > >>> Will notify in this thread than the work will be done!
> > >>>
> > >>> чт, 20 февр. 2020 г. в 12:16, Alexey Zinoviev <
> zaleslaw@gmail.com
> > >:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Yes, there are a lot of changes in ML from 2.7, I'm going to prepare
> > >>>> new documentation  and create documentation related tickets for the
> ML
> > >>>> component.
> > >>>> After some consultation and review from Artem side I'll add new
> > >>>> documentation on readme.io.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> чт, 20 февр. 2020 г. в 02:34, Denis Magda :
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Artem,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Thanks for stepping in and preparing the list of top priority
> > >>>>> documentation tasks! How about labeling those tickets somehow and
> > creating
> > >>>>> a filter similar to this one [1] but for "Required & Unresolved
> > >>>>> Documentation Tasks"? I would simply add this as a new section to
> the
> > >>>>> Ignite 2.8 release wiki page for ease of tracking and start working
> > with
> > >>>>> the guys contributed improvements directly. Will see the names of
> the
> > >>>>> authors who need to be involved ;)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> *Alexey Zinoviev*, there are many ML related changes coming in the
> > >>>>> release. Could you check existing ML docs and suggest any changes?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> [1]
> > >>>>>
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.8#ApacheIgnite2.8-Unresolveddocumentationtasks
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> -
> > >>>>> Denis
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 11:14 AM Artem Budnikov <
> > >>>>> a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Maxim,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> One note from my side, I think we can move disk page compression
> [1]
> > >>>>>> > to the 2-nd priority, but definitely must document WAL page
> > >>>>>> > compression first [2]
&g

Re: Ignite 2.8 documentation

[Denis Magda]

Alex, thanks for helping with the documentation. Frankly, the tickets will
be useful to get a complete list of all the updates pages with the goal of
extracting info for blog post(s) - we'll be preparing at least one blog for
Ignite 2.8 and can create an ML specific blog as well. Also, the tickets
might simplify the review process between you and Artem.

-
Denis


On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 2:18 AM Alexey Zinoviev 
wrote:

> I've created a draft pages on apache.readme.io and will continue my work
> there during next 2 weeks.
> Should I create any tickets for that? Or could miss that step?
>
> Will notify in this thread than the work will be done!
>
> чт, 20 февр. 2020 г. в 12:16, Alexey Zinoviev :
>
>> Yes, there are a lot of changes in ML from 2.7, I'm going to prepare new
>> documentation  and create documentation related tickets for the ML
>> component.
>> After some consultation and review from Artem side I'll add new
>> documentation on readme.io.
>>
>>
>>
>> чт, 20 февр. 2020 г. в 02:34, Denis Magda :
>>
>>> Artem,
>>>
>>> Thanks for stepping in and preparing the list of top priority
>>> documentation tasks! How about labeling those tickets somehow and creating
>>> a filter similar to this one [1] but for "Required & Unresolved
>>> Documentation Tasks"? I would simply add this as a new section to the
>>> Ignite 2.8 release wiki page for ease of tracking and start working with
>>> the guys contributed improvements directly. Will see the names of the
>>> authors who need to be involved ;)
>>>
>>> *Alexey Zinoviev*, there are many ML related changes coming in the
>>> release. Could you check existing ML docs and suggest any changes?
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.8#ApacheIgnite2.8-Unresolveddocumentationtasks
>>>
>>> -
>>> Denis
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 11:14 AM Artem Budnikov <
>>> a.budnikov.ign...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Maxim,
>>>>
>>>> One note from my side, I think we can move disk page compression [1]
>>>> > to the 2-nd priority, but definitely must document WAL page
>>>> > compression first [2]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> OK, good to know.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 6:48 PM Maxim Muzafarov 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Artem,
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Thank you for starting this thread.
>>>> > One note from my side, I think we can move disk page compression [1]
>>>> > to the 2-nd priority, but definitely must document WAL page
>>>> > compression first [2]
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > The list of important tasks [3].
>>>> > The list of documentation tasks [4].
>>>> >
>>>> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10330
>>>> > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11336
>>>> > [3]
>>>> >
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.8#ApacheIgnite2.8-Themostimportantreleasetasks
>>>> > [4]
>>>> >
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.8#ApacheIgnite2.8-Unresolveddocumentationtasks
>>>> >
>>>> > On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 18:15, Artem Budnikov
>>>> >  wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Hi everyone,
>>>> > >
>>>> > > As the release of Ignite 2.8 is getting closer, let's discuss which
>>>> > features should be documented. I created a list of features based on
>>>> the
>>>> > release notes and the documentation tickets in jira (see below). Much
>>>> more
>>>> > has been added, but these seemed to have first priority. It's not to
>>>> say
>>>> > that other features are not important, but given the limited
>>>> resources a
>>>> > list of high-priority task would help to schedule the time of those
>>>> who
>>>> > will help with the docs.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Here is the list of features:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Disk page compression
>>>> > > Metrics and System Views documentation
>>>> > > Default Ignite work dir location
>>>> > > Baseline auto-adjust feature
>>>> > > Cluster (de)activation events documentation
>>>> > > Remove SqlQuery documentation
>>>> > > Partition awareness for thin clients
>>>> > > Transactions support in thin clients
>>>> > > KILL QUERY command
>>>> > > Move rebalance configuration properties to the IgniteConfiguration
>>>> level
>>>> > > Renamed IGNITE schema to SYS
>>>> > > JDBC: Support for query cancellation
>>>> > > JDBC: Support for query timeout
>>>> > > suspend/resume for pessimistic transactions
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Now, two really big questions here:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > If you want to add anything else to the documentation, please let us
>>>> > know in this thread.
>>>> > > If you are the author of any of the features listed above, please
>>>> share
>>>> > the details on the feature. You can do it by creating a documentation
>>>> > ticket. If you want to contribute a page or section to the existing
>>>> docs,
>>>> > you can write directly on apacheignite.readme.io (send me a note if
>>>> you
>>>> > don't have an account there). Any help is greatly appreciated.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > -Artem
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>

Re: AWS EBS Discovery: Contributor Wanted

[Denis Magda]

Emmanouil,

All looks good to me as well. Thanks for your contribution!

Sergey, would you merge the PR as the primary reviewer?

-
Denis


On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 9:53 AM Emmanouil Gkatziouras 
wrote:

> Hi!
>
> With regards to the PR review if there is anything I can do please tell me.
>
> Kind Regards
> *Emmanouil Gkatziouras*
> https://egkatzioura.com/ |
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/gkatziourasemmanouil/
> https://github.com/gkatzioura
>
>
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 08:03, Sergey Chugunov 
> wrote:
>
> > Denis, Emmanouil,
> >
> > Sure, I'll take a look at the code shortly.
> >
> > --
> > Thank you,
> > Sergey.
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 8:59 PM Denis Magda  wrote:
> >
> > > I support the idea of triggering such tests on demand. We can create a
> > wiki
> > > page with instructions on how to run the tests. Unless there is a more
> > > elegant solution.
> > >
> > > Sergey, would you be able to review Emmanouil's changes in the IP
> Finder
> > > source code?
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-8617
> > >
> > > -
> > > Denis
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 2:22 AM Emmanouil Gkatziouras <
> > > gkatzio...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all!
> > > >
> > > > I do believe being able to execute some AWS integration tests on
> demand
> > > > would be of value, especially for reviewers who cannot have an AWS
> > stack
> > > > created on demand.
> > > > More than happy to help on that.
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards
> > > > *Emmanouil Gkatziouras*
> > > > https://egkatzioura.com/ |
> > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/gkatziourasemmanouil/
> > > > https://github.com/gkatzioura
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 at 15:15, Sergey Chugunov <
> > sergey.chugu...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hello Emmanouil,
> > > > >
> > > > > It would be great if we have at least basic integration tests in
> real
> > > AWS
> > > > > environment. Even though they may require more work to keep them
> > green
> > > (I
> > > > > mean here AWS quotas and additional configuration/reconfiguration
> > > > efforts)
> > > > > it worth it because these tests can also be useful as an examples.
> > > > >
> > > > > As the same time as IpFinder is such a basic component I don't
> think
> > we
> > > > > need to include them in constantly triggered suites like Run All
> but
> > to
> > > > > trigger them manually before/right after merging them to master
> > branch
> > > or
> > > > > when developing something in related code.
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you think?
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Thank you,
> > > > > Sergey Chugunov.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 5:32 PM Emmanouil Gkatziouras <
> > > > > gkatzio...@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes It seems possible to get some free quota for integration
> tests
> > on
> > > > AWS
> > > > > > [1] however most probably they are not gonna last forever.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/opensource/aws-promotional-credits-open-source-projects/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > King Regards
> > > > > > *Emmanouil Gkatziouras*
> > > > > > https://egkatzioura.com/ |
> > > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/gkatziourasemmanouil/
> > > > > > https://github.com/gkatzioura
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 at 16:48, Denis Magda 
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Emmanouil,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks for preparing a pull-request for Application Load
> > Balancer:
> > > > > > > https://issues.apac

Re: Let's make BinaryObjectImpl and CacheKeyObject Comparable

[Denis Magda]

Hi Ilya,

We can oblige users to implement Comparable if they use BinaryObject keys.
Ignite can print out a warning if BinaryObject keys passed to putAll
methods don't do that.

I also wonder how a similar task was solved for Ignite INSERTs. Our engine
should use BinaryObjects for compound primary keys and insert them at
patches. That implementation can suggest us some hints.

-
Denis


On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 6:53 AM Ilya Kasnacheev 
wrote:

> Hello!
>
> Since we have merged https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6804 we
> have to face an embarrassing fact that BinaryObject is not Comparable,
> i.e., when you do cache.withKeepBinary().putAll(), there are no obvious
> ways to not get a deadlock (or at least warning) here.
>
> One can use LinkedHashMap, but they will have to sort BinaryObject's on
> their side, which is not trivial.
>
> So my proposal is to make BinaryObjectImpl and KeyCacheObject (?)
> Comparable, by their binary representation. We can't add this constraint to
> BinaryObject since it is a public interface (can we), but we can do that
> for the implementation types. What do you think?
>
> Regards,
> --
> Ilya Kasnacheev
>

Re: Apache Ignite 2.8 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

[Denis Magda]

Folks,

Is there anything else apart from the open documentation tickets that
prevent us from starting the release vote? I think that it should take
around two weeks to run the release through the vote and announce it. The
top doc changes should be finished throughout that time already.

-
Denis


On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 9:55 AM Maxim Muzafarov  wrote:

> Ilya,
>
>
> I think we must accept only blocker issues to the release branch.
>
> My previous experience tells me that even a small change which seems
> absolutely easy and clear can break everything. So, let's move this
> issue [1] to the next release. Currently, it doesn't look like a
> blocker.
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12672
>
> On Tue, 18 Feb 2020 at 13:51, Maxim Muzafarov  wrote:
> >
> > Igniters,
> >
> >
> > I've prepared the issue [1] and PR [2] with removing @deprecate
> > annotation on DataRegionMetrics and adding @IgniteExperimental to the
> > new metrics API.
> > Can anyone review my changes?
> >
> >
> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12690
> > [2] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/7440
> >
> > On Tue, 18 Feb 2020 at 13:42, Ilya Kasnacheev 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello!
> > >
> > > I have just merged a fix for embarrassing issue where you could UPDATE
> > > entries with Spring Data, but not "Update" or "update" them.
> > >
> > > I suggest adding this fix to the scope of 2.8, since Spring Data is
> popular
> > > and it does not in any way affect code outside of its modules.
> > >
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12672
> > >
> > > WDYT?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > --
> > > Ilya Kasnacheev
> > >
> > >
> > > пн, 17 февр. 2020 г. в 12:44, Maxim Muzafarov :
> > >
> > > > Alexey,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yes. I will remove @deprecation according to the vote results and
> will
> > > > go further with the release steps [1] since there no blockers left.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Release+Process
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 17 Feb 2020 at 11:48, Alexey Goncharuk
> > > >  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Folks,
> > > > >
> > > > > I have merged IGNITE-12650 (mark MVCC as experimental) to master
> and
> > > > > ignite-2.8. What's left? Should we remove deprecation from the old
> > > > metrics
> > > > > and start the vote?
> > > >
>

Re: Ignite 2.8 documentation

[Denis Magda]

Artem,

Thanks for stepping in and preparing the list of top priority documentation
tasks! How about labeling those tickets somehow and creating a filter
similar to this one [1] but for "Required & Unresolved Documentation
Tasks"? I would simply add this as a new section to the Ignite 2.8 release
wiki page for ease of tracking and start working with the guys contributed
improvements directly. Will see the names of the authors who need to be
involved ;)

*Alexey Zinoviev*, there are many ML related changes coming in the release.
Could you check existing ML docs and suggest any changes?

[1]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.8#ApacheIgnite2.8-Unresolveddocumentationtasks

-
Denis


On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 11:14 AM Artem Budnikov 
wrote:

> Maxim,
>
> One note from my side, I think we can move disk page compression [1]
> > to the 2-nd priority, but definitely must document WAL page
> > compression first [2]
>
>
> OK, good to know.
>
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 6:48 PM Maxim Muzafarov  wrote:
>
> > Artem,
> >
> >
> > Thank you for starting this thread.
> > One note from my side, I think we can move disk page compression [1]
> > to the 2-nd priority, but definitely must document WAL page
> > compression first [2]
> >
> >
> > The list of important tasks [3].
> > The list of documentation tasks [4].
> >
> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10330
> > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11336
> > [3]
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.8#ApacheIgnite2.8-Themostimportantreleasetasks
> > [4]
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.8#ApacheIgnite2.8-Unresolveddocumentationtasks
> >
> > On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 18:15, Artem Budnikov
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > As the release of Ignite 2.8 is getting closer, let's discuss which
> > features should be documented. I created a list of features based on the
> > release notes and the documentation tickets in jira (see below). Much
> more
> > has been added, but these seemed to have first priority. It's not to say
> > that other features are not important, but given the limited resources a
> > list of high-priority task would help to schedule the time of those who
> > will help with the docs.
> > >
> > > Here is the list of features:
> > >
> > > Disk page compression
> > > Metrics and System Views documentation
> > > Default Ignite work dir location
> > > Baseline auto-adjust feature
> > > Cluster (de)activation events documentation
> > > Remove SqlQuery documentation
> > > Partition awareness for thin clients
> > > Transactions support in thin clients
> > > KILL QUERY command
> > > Move rebalance configuration properties to the IgniteConfiguration
> level
> > > Renamed IGNITE schema to SYS
> > > JDBC: Support for query cancellation
> > > JDBC: Support for query timeout
> > > suspend/resume for pessimistic transactions
> > >
> > > Now, two really big questions here:
> > >
> > > If you want to add anything else to the documentation, please let us
> > know in this thread.
> > > If you are the author of any of the features listed above, please share
> > the details on the feature. You can do it by creating a documentation
> > ticket. If you want to contribute a page or section to the existing docs,
> > you can write directly on apacheignite.readme.io (send me a note if you
> > don't have an account there). Any help is greatly appreciated.
> > >
> > > -Artem
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Apache Ignite downloads are redirecting from https to http

[Denis Magda]

Peter,

Would you mind checking this issue and suggest a proper solution?

Dmitry,

Might this be somehow related to the RPM changes ASF INFRA suggested to
make?

-
Denis


On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 4:33 AM Stephen Darlington <
stephen.darling...@gridgain.com> wrote:

> As seen in the user mailing list. Looks like there’s a redirect from a
> https on apache.org to a non-https link. Is there anyone who can fi this?
>
> Regards,
> Stephen
>
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > From: Devin Anderson 
> > Subject: Apache Ignite downloads are redirecting from https to http
> > Date: 18 February 2020 at 01:42:14 GMT
> > To: 
> > Reply-To: u...@ignite.apache.org
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm not sure if this is the correct mailing list to bring up this
> issue.  If I'm writing the wrong mailing list, please let me know and I'll
> gladly send my message to a more appropriate list/person.
> >
> > When I attempt to run `apt-get update` on Ubuntu 18.04 with the Apache
> Ignite repository in /etc/apt/sources.list, the update fails due to an
> https to http redirect.  Here's the output from stdout:
> >
> > --
> >
> > Hit:1 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu <
> http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu> bionic InRelease
> > Hit:2 http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu <
> http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu> bionic-security InRelease
> > Hit:3 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu <
> http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu> bionic-updates InRelease
> > Ign:4 https://downloads.apache.org/ignite/deb <
> https://downloads.apache.org/ignite/deb> apache-ignite InRelease
> > Err:5 https://downloads.apache.org/ignite/deb <
> https://downloads.apache.org/ignite/deb> apache-ignite Release
> >   Redirection from https to '
> http://dl.bintray.com/apache/ignite-deb/dists/apache-ignite/Release <
> http://dl.bintray.com/apache/ignite-deb/dists/apache-ignite/Release>' is
> forbidden [IP: 88.99.95.219 443]
> > Reading package lists...
> >
> > --
> >
> > ... and stderr:
> >
> > --
> >
> > E: The repository 'http://apache.org/dist/ignite/deb <
> http://apache.org/dist/ignite/deb> apache-ignite Release' does not have a
> Release file.
> >
> > --
> >
> > You can see the redirect for yourself by visiting:
> >
> > https://downloads.apache.org/ignite/deb <
> https://downloads.apache.org/ignite/deb>
> >
> > ... and noting that your browser is redirected to:
> >
> > http://dl.bintray.com/apache/ignite-deb/ <
> http://dl.bintray.com/apache/ignite-deb/>
> >
> > I found one or two other places on downloads.apache.org that redirected
> to dl.bintray.com, and those instances appear to redirect to an https
> URI, so this looks like a problem specific to the way redirects are
> configured for Apache Ignite assets.
> >
> > Any ideas?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --
> > Devin
> >
>
>
>

Re: Apache Ignite 2.8 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

[Denis Magda]

Maxim,

There are some of the tasks that are being moved from a release to a
release or exist for a while and might be skipped for 2.8 if nobody is
willing to document them. A could of examples of such tickets:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10331
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7704

How about preparing a list of the tickets that represent either a new
functionality added in 2.8 (new metrics, service grid improvements, etc.)
or change in behavior (it might be the case we need to update the baseline
topology or rebalancing pages)? Once we get the list, we'll find the names
of contributors and they will be able to cooperate with Artem who agreed to
assist with this effort.

The docs are needed before we announce the release and start bragging about
new capabilities.

-
Denis


On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 8:46 AM Maxim Muzafarov  wrote:

> Denis,
>
> Actually, I've already filtered documentation issues previously and
> left only major documentation tasks. Should I shrink the list more?
>
> On Thu, 13 Feb 2020 at 18:58, Denis Magda  wrote:
> >
> > Maxim,
> >
> > Thanks for the list. How many of those tickets relate to new capabilities
> > or changed behavior in 2.8? You can probably come up with such a
> sub-list.
> > This filter returns all the documentation tickets we have in JIRA, and,
> > indeed, many of them can be pushed to further releases.
> >
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 3:19 AM Maxim Muzafarov 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Denis,
> > >
> > >
> > > We still need additional work over the whole documentation, not only
> > > resolving comments for the new monitoring feature [2].
> > > Here is the full list of issues related to documentation - [1].
> > >
> > > Examples need to be extended too. For instance,
> > > - suspend/resume for pessimistic transactions
> > > - default Ignite work dir location (changed in 2.7.6 right?)
> > > - baseline auto-adjustment feature
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.8#ApacheIgnite2.8-Unresolveddocumentationtasks
> > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12408
> > >
> > > On Thu, 13 Feb 2020 at 00:48, Denis Magda  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Maxim,
> > > >
> > > > Do you have any understanding in regards to documentation readiness?
> I do
> > > > remember Nikolay was creating a page for the new metrics framework
> and
> > > > Artem stepped in as a reviewer. But not sure if that supposedly the
> > > largest
> > > > item is completed and if the other pages need to be updated.
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > > Denis
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 6:19 AM Maxim Muzafarov 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Igniters,
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Current the 2.8 release status
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. The PR with RELEASE_NOTES fully updated [1].
> > > > >
> > > > > 2. Previously mentioned performance drop has not been confirmed.
> Run
> > > > > many times in different environments. All test results within the
> > > > > margin of error.
> > > > > In-memory, putAll, 4 nodes, 1 client
> > > > > IgnitePutAllBenchmark: +1%
> > > > > IgnitePutAllTxBenchmark: -6%
> > > > >
> > > > > 3. Waiting for the vote completion
> > > > > (Allow or prohibit a joint use of @deprecated and
> @IgniteExperimental)
> > > > >
> > > > > 4. Mark MVCC with IgniteExperimental [2].
> > > > >
> > > > > 5. Wait for ML examples to be fixed [3].
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/7367/files
> > > > > [2]
> > > > >
> > >
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html
> > > > > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12657
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 15:08, Ivan Bessonov  >
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hello Igniters,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'd like to add one more fix to the release: [1]
> > > > > > It adds versioning to internal classes of distributed metastorage
> &

Re: Apache Ignite 2.8 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

[Denis Magda]

Maxim,

Thanks for the list. How many of those tickets relate to new capabilities
or changed behavior in 2.8? You can probably come up with such a sub-list.
This filter returns all the documentation tickets we have in JIRA, and,
indeed, many of them can be pushed to further releases.

-
Denis


On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 3:19 AM Maxim Muzafarov  wrote:

> Denis,
>
>
> We still need additional work over the whole documentation, not only
> resolving comments for the new monitoring feature [2].
> Here is the full list of issues related to documentation - [1].
>
> Examples need to be extended too. For instance,
> - suspend/resume for pessimistic transactions
> - default Ignite work dir location (changed in 2.7.6 right?)
> - baseline auto-adjustment feature
>
>
> [1]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.8#ApacheIgnite2.8-Unresolveddocumentationtasks
> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12408
>
> On Thu, 13 Feb 2020 at 00:48, Denis Magda  wrote:
> >
> > Hi Maxim,
> >
> > Do you have any understanding in regards to documentation readiness? I do
> > remember Nikolay was creating a page for the new metrics framework and
> > Artem stepped in as a reviewer. But not sure if that supposedly the
> largest
> > item is completed and if the other pages need to be updated.
> >
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 6:19 AM Maxim Muzafarov 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Igniters,
> > >
> > >
> > > Current the 2.8 release status
> > >
> > >
> > > 1. The PR with RELEASE_NOTES fully updated [1].
> > >
> > > 2. Previously mentioned performance drop has not been confirmed. Run
> > > many times in different environments. All test results within the
> > > margin of error.
> > > In-memory, putAll, 4 nodes, 1 client
> > > IgnitePutAllBenchmark: +1%
> > > IgnitePutAllTxBenchmark: -6%
> > >
> > > 3. Waiting for the vote completion
> > > (Allow or prohibit a joint use of @deprecated and @IgniteExperimental)
> > >
> > > 4. Mark MVCC with IgniteExperimental [2].
> > >
> > > 5. Wait for ML examples to be fixed [3].
> > >
> > > [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/7367/files
> > > [2]
> > >
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html
> > > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12657
> > >
> > > On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 15:08, Ivan Bessonov 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello Igniters,
> > > >
> > > > I'd like to add one more fix to the release: [1]
> > > > It adds versioning to internal classes of distributed metastorage
> > > component.
> > > > Without this fix it would be much harder to update these classes
> without
> > > > breaking binary compatibility.
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12638
> > > >
> > > > ср, 5 февр. 2020 г. в 22:33, Maxim Muzafarov :
> > > >
> > > > > Ivan,
> > > > >
> > > > > > Should not we state in release notes what new experimental API
> was
> > > added?
> > > > >
> > > > > I think we should. Will do.
> > > > > Just not to miss anything that we should mark with
> > > > > @IgniteExperimental: Consistency Check [1], Monitoring [2] anything
> > > > > else?
> > > > >
> > > > > > As Flink integration was moved to external repository how Ignite
> 2.8
> > > > > users will be able to use that integration?
> > > > >
> > > > > Since ignite-extension has a separate release cycle (right?), it is
> > > > > better to release ignite-extension rather than cherry-pick this
> change
> > > > > back to 2.8. I also think it is not a blocker for the release, but
> we
> > > > > should do our best make the first ignite-extension release as
> earlier
> > > > > as possible.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10663
> > > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11848
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 at 22:07, Ivan Pavlukhin 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Maxim,
> > > > > >
> > > > >

Re: Apache Ignite 2.8 RELEASE [Time, Scope, Manager]

[Denis Magda]

Hi Maxim,

Do you have any understanding in regards to documentation readiness? I do
remember Nikolay was creating a page for the new metrics framework and
Artem stepped in as a reviewer. But not sure if that supposedly the largest
item is completed and if the other pages need to be updated.

-
Denis


On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 6:19 AM Maxim Muzafarov  wrote:

> Igniters,
>
>
> Current the 2.8 release status
>
>
> 1. The PR with RELEASE_NOTES fully updated [1].
>
> 2. Previously mentioned performance drop has not been confirmed. Run
> many times in different environments. All test results within the
> margin of error.
> In-memory, putAll, 4 nodes, 1 client
> IgnitePutAllBenchmark: +1%
> IgnitePutAllTxBenchmark: -6%
>
> 3. Waiting for the vote completion
> (Allow or prohibit a joint use of @deprecated and @IgniteExperimental)
>
> 4. Mark MVCC with IgniteExperimental [2].
>
> 5. Wait for ML examples to be fixed [3].
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/7367/files
> [2]
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Mark-MVCC-with-IgniteExperimental-td45669.html
> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12657
>
> On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 15:08, Ivan Bessonov  wrote:
> >
> > Hello Igniters,
> >
> > I'd like to add one more fix to the release: [1]
> > It adds versioning to internal classes of distributed metastorage
> component.
> > Without this fix it would be much harder to update these classes without
> > breaking binary compatibility.
> >
> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12638
> >
> > ср, 5 февр. 2020 г. в 22:33, Maxim Muzafarov :
> >
> > > Ivan,
> > >
> > > > Should not we state in release notes what new experimental API was
> added?
> > >
> > > I think we should. Will do.
> > > Just not to miss anything that we should mark with
> > > @IgniteExperimental: Consistency Check [1], Monitoring [2] anything
> > > else?
> > >
> > > > As Flink integration was moved to external repository how Ignite 2.8
> > > users will be able to use that integration?
> > >
> > > Since ignite-extension has a separate release cycle (right?), it is
> > > better to release ignite-extension rather than cherry-pick this change
> > > back to 2.8. I also think it is not a blocker for the release, but we
> > > should do our best make the first ignite-extension release as earlier
> > > as possible.
> > >
> > >
> > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10663
> > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11848
> > >
> > > On Wed, 5 Feb 2020 at 22:07, Ivan Pavlukhin 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Maxim,
> > > >
> > > > A couple of questions:
> > > > 1. We added an annotation to designate experimental API. Should not
> we
> > > > state in release notes what new experimental API was added? Perhaps
> in
> > > > a separate block.
> > > > 2. As Flink integration was moved to external repository how Ignite
> > > > 2.8 users will be able to use that integration?
> > > >
> > > > ср, 5 февр. 2020 г. в 21:21, Maxim Muzafarov :
> > > > >
> > > > > Igniters,
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I've prepared RELEASE_NOTES pull-request [1] to the 2.8 release.
> > > > >
> > > > > Currently, IEP-35 monitoring issues are not included in this PR.
> Will
> > > > > do it soon.
> > > > > Please, take a look.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/7367/files
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 at 14:38, Maxim Muzafarov 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Igniters,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Let me share the current status of the release.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1.
> > > > > > Waiting for the issues [1] [2] (discussed previously this
> thread) to
> > > > > > be tested by TC.Bot and merged to the 2.8 release branch.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2.
> > > > > > Only 2 release BLOCKER issues left. I'm planning to move these
> issues
> > > > > > to 2.8.1 release.
> > > > > > The issue [4] (Error during purges by expiration: Unknown page
> type)
> > > > > > will be covered by [1] [2].
> > > > > > The issue [3] (Apache Ignite Cluster(Amazon S3 Based Discovery)
> Nodes
> > > > > > getting down) probably require additional info to reproduce the
> > > issue.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 3.
> > > > > > A potential performance drop on `putAll` operations on an
> in-memory
> > > > > > cluster (see [5] for details).
> > > > > > I'll try to reproduce in another test environment.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Will keep you posted.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12593
> > > > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12594
> > > > > > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12398
> > > > > > [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12489
> > > > > > [5]
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+2.8#ApacheIgnite2.8-Benchmarks(LATEST)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 at 15:02, Alexey Goncharuk
> > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sounds good, will do!
> > 

Re: [VOTE] Allow or prohibit a joint use of @deprecated and @IgniteExperimental

[Denis Magda]

[-1 Prohibit]

-
Denis


On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 12:02 AM Alexey Goncharuk 
wrote:

> Dear Apache Ignite community,
>
> We would like to conduct a formal vote on the subject of whether to allow
> or prohibit a joint existence of @deprecated annotation for an old API
> and @IgniteExperimental [1] for a new (replacement) API. The result of this
> vote will be formalized as an Apache Ignite development rule to be used in
> future.
>
> The discussion thread where you can address all non-vote messages is [2].
>
> The votes are:
> *[+1 Allow]* Allow to deprecate the old APIs even when new APIs are marked
> with @IgniteExperimental to explicitly notify users that an old APIs will
> be removed in the next major release AND new APIs are available.
> *[-1 Prohibit]* Never deprecate the old APIs unless the new APIs are stable
> and released without @IgniteExperimental. The old APIs javadoc may be
> updated with a reference to new APIs to encourage users to evaluate new
> APIs. The deprecation and new API release may happen simultaneously if the
> new API is not marked with @IgniteExperimental or the annotation is removed
> in the same release.
>
> Neither of the choices prohibits deprecation of an API without a
> replacement if community decides so.
>
> The vote will hold for 72 hours and will end on February 13th 2020 08:00
> UTC:
>
> https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/to?year=2020&month=2&day=13&hour=8&min=0&sec=0&p0=utc-1
>
> All votes count, there is no binding/non-binding status for this.
>
> [1]
>
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/modules/core/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/lang/IgniteExperimental.java
> [2]
>
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Public-API-deprecation-rules-td45647.html
>
> Thanks,
> --AG
>

Re: Hello all

[Denis Magda]

Hello Mahesh,

Welcome to the community! It's a pleasure to get you interested in the
contribution.

Just in case, copying some useful pages for getting started:

   - Ignite contribution process and a collection of tickets for newcomers:
   https://ignite.apache.org/community/contribute.html
   - Communication channels selected by the community:
   https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Collaborate

Considering your experience, I might suggest you involving in the following
areas:

   - Ignite and Spark integration:
   
http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Ignite-Spark-integration-meeting-td43986.html
   - Better Spring ecosystem support:
   
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-8382?jql=project%20%3D%20Ignite%20and%20summary%20~%20%22spring%22%20and%20status%20not%20in%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed)


I've added you to JIRA contributors' list, so, you're free to go ahead and
select a ticket of your choice. Please send us a note once you are ready
with the first task.
-
Denis


On Sun, Feb 9, 2020 at 8:47 AM mahesh jadhav 
wrote:

> Hello Team,
>
> My name is Mahesh, I have couple of years of experience. I write code in
> Java,  Scala and R. I have work on Spring, Akka, Vertx, Spark and
> distributed computing.
> I am keen to contribute in any of the above areas.
>
> My JIRA ID is : msjadhav1990
>
> --
> Regards
> Mahesh
>

Re: Hello all

[Denis Magda]

Hello Erel,

Thanks for introducing yourself and welcome to the community! Hope Ignite
will work out for your solutions, and the community will benefit by having
you as a member. Don't hesitate to reach out for architectural discussions
or if you come across any uncertainties.

Most likely, you've already seen these resources but let me highlight them
just in case:

   - Ignite contribution process and a collection of tickets for newcomers:
   https://ignite.apache.org/community/contribute.html
   - Communication channels selected by the community:
   https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Collaborate

On top of that, feel free to join Ignite offline community-based in
London. Kseniya (copied) is planning a meetup for March in the city, and
it's a good opportunity to meet with Ignite experts in person:
https://ignite.apache.org/meetup-groups.html


-
Denis


On Sat, Feb 8, 2020 at 2:02 PM Erel Magnus  wrote:

> Hi dev team
>
> My name is Erel Magnus. I work for Citigroup in London UK as a team lead.
> My work involves developing a platform that uses graphs to model financial
> assets, and distribute running the graphs on clouds (AWS,GCP) working on
> this product I have exposure to Java 8,  OpenShift, Docker, Hazelcast ,
> Redis, MongoDb, Rabbit MQ, node.js, React, Jenkins, IntelliJ.
> I have around 20 years experience in Java 8 , C++, databases, networking.
>
> I am going to be giving Ignite a try and I might want to fix or improve
> bsomething.
>
> I'd be happy to work on reviewing prs - there seem to be lots!
>
> My newly created jira id is magner.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Erel Magnus
>

Re: [DISCUSSION] ignite-extension - ignite-spring-boot-autoconfigurer release.

[Denis Magda]

Folks, have we agreed on the release process? Saikat, could you point all
of us to a related discussion. If my memory doesn't fail me Alex Goncharuk
also wanted to step in before we do the first release.

-
Denis


On Fri, Feb 7, 2020 at 8:02 AM Saikat Maitra 
wrote:

> Hi Nikolay, Ivan, Denis
>
> I think we can release for spring boot autoconfigure module.
>
>
> I will also go ahead and make release for flink ext.
>
> I have pending PR for flume and zeromq, if I can get review and approval I
> can go ahead and merge and release these modules as well.
>
> Regards
> Saikat
>
> On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 at 2:06 AM, Nikolay Izhikov 
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for clarification.
> >
> > Igniters, I will proceed with the release in the next few days if there
> is
> > no objections on it.
> >
> > > 7 февр. 2020 г., в 10:57, Ivan Pavlukhin 
> > написал(а):
> > >
> > > Hi Nikolay,
> > >
> > > In fact I did not mean anything supernatural. A scheme you mentioned
> > >> I thought we just release module with the 1.0.0 version and specify
> > supported Ignite version somewhere in the documentation.
> > > sounds fine to me.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Ivan Pavlukhin
> > >
> > > чт, 6 февр. 2020 г. в 15:00, Nikolay Izhikov :
> > >>
> > >> Hello, Ivan.
> > >>
> > >>> As usual we need to decide about versioning and a correspondence to
> > Ignite versions
> > >>> As we are going to have a separate release cycle I can imagine an
> > independent versioning scheme with a range of supported Ignite versions.
> > >>
> > >> Please, clarify, what do you mean?
> > >> Do you have any idea how it should be implemented?
> > >>
> > >> I thought we just release module with the 1.0.0 version and specify
> > supported Ignite version somewhere in the documentation.
> > >>
> > >>> 6 февр. 2020 г., в 11:15, Ivan Pavlukhin 
> > написал(а):
> > >>>
> > >>> Nikolay,
> > >>>
> > >>> Thank you for driving it! It is great to establish this process in
> > >>> practice earlier because it seems that we need to release a Flink
> > >>> integration soon because Ignite 2.8 is going to be released without
> > >>> that integration bundled.
> > >>>
> > >>> As usual we need to decide about versioning and a correspondence to
> > >>> Ignite versions. As we are going to have a separate release cycle I
> > >>> can imagine an independent versioning scheme with a range of
> supported
> > >>> Ignite versions.
> > >>>
> > >>> Also I think it is a good idea to update ignite-extensions README on
> > >>> GitHub and provide a link to relevant TC jobs.
> > >>>
> > >>> Best regards,
> > >>> Ivan Pavlukhin
> > >>>
> > >>> ср, 5 февр. 2020 г. в 17:44, Denis Magda :
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Alex, did you have a chance to review Saikat’s changes related to
> the
> > >>>> extensions repository organization and release approach?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Denis
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Wednesday, February 5, 2020, Nikolay Izhikov <
> nizhi...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Hello, Igniters.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> We don't have a release process for newly created ignite-extensions
> > >>>>> modules.
> > >>>>> I want to release two modules:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> * ignite-spring-boot-autoconfigure
> > >>>>> * ignite-client-spring-boot-autoconfigure
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Let's discuss it.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Any objections to it?
> > >>>>> What should be done before release?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> -
> > >>>> Denis
> > >>
> >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Public API deprecation rules

[Denis Magda]

The justification and choices look crystal clear to me.

-
Denis


On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 1:36 PM Alexey Goncharuk 
wrote:

> Igniters,
>
> We would like to add some formal requirements to the API deprecation
> process. So far the API deprecation was more like intuitive-driven which
> recently led to some disagreement and delaying the AI 2.8 release [1][2].
>
> During the discussion [1] we agreed to add an
> annotation @IgniteExperimental [3] which marks APIs which are yet not
> stable, dangerous, partially implemented or are allowed to be changed in a
> future. The reason to release such APIs is to expose the APIs to users and
> collect feedback on the usability and possible bugs.
>
> The argument we did not manage to resolve is whether we are allowed to
> deprecate the old APIs _before_ the new ones get stable and get released
> without @IgniteExperimental annotation. We decided to resolve the
> uncertainty with a vote.
>
> The vote we are going to have is reduced to two choices so far:
>  * Never deprecate the old APIs unless the new APIs are stable and released
> without @IgniteExperimental. The old APIs javadoc may be updated with a
> reference to new APIs to encourage users to evaluate new APIs
>  * Allow to deprecate the old APIs even when new APIs are marked
> with @IgniteExperimental to explicitly notify users that the new APIs are
> available
>
> Nikolay, Andrey, please let us know if we should correct the choices
> articulation or add another option for the vote.
>
> --AG
>
> [1]
>
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Internal-classes-are-exposed-in-public-API-td45146.html
> [2]
>
> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Internal-classes-are-exposed-in-public-API-td45146.html
> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12559
>

Re: Data vanished from cluster after INACTIVE/ACTIVE switch

[Denis Magda]

I believe there might be a consistency-related reason why this flag was
disabled by default for caches that store data in Ignite native
persistence. I hope, Alex Goncharuk or Scherbakov can shed some light on
this.

As for the memory-only caches or caches backed up by a CacheStore such as
an RDBMS, enabling of the flag should be harmless. Once we do this, we'll
eliminate the need to load the data back into the cluster which can be a
time-consuming operation depending on the data volume.


-
Denis


On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 11:58 AM Vladimir Steshin  wrote:

> Denis, but why reuse-data-on-deactivate was disabled by default? There
> should be a reason for that. Any data consistency issues when node gets
> activated anew? We may use both solutions because the flag can be switched
> off again.
>
> ср, 5 февр. 2020 г. в 20:47, Denis Magda :
>
> > Hi Vladimir,
> >
> > Yes, I'm suggesting us to enable this flag by
> >
> org.apache.ignite.IgniteSystemProperties#IGNITE_REUSE_MEMORY_ON_DEACTIVATE
> > default instead of introducing --force flag and showing any warnings.
> >
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 2:33 AM Vladimir Steshin 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hello all.
> > >
> > > Denis, which changes exactly? In current implementation of ticket [2]
> > flag
> > > [1] is checked before requiring --force flag and showing any warnings.
> Do
> > > we need to set reuse-memory-on-deactivate to true by default?
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> >
> org.apache.ignite.IgniteSystemProperties#IGNITE_REUSE_MEMORY_ON_DEACTIVATE
> > >
> > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12614
> > >
> > >
> > > вт, 4 февр. 2020 г. в 22:45, Denis Magda :
> > >
> > > > That's the best solution for this scenario. Should we readjust the
> > > already
> > > > created ticket [1] suggesting to implement the changes of Alex
> > Scherbakov
> > > > instead?
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12614
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > > Denis
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 11:54 PM Alexei Scherbakov <
> > > > alexey.scherbak...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Folks,
> > > > >
> > > > > For a long time we have a flag [1]
> > > > >
> > > > > It does almost what we want here.
> > > > >
> > > > > I suggest to make this behavior default and rework it to keep data
> in
> > > > > memory as well (we already have special "recovery" mode for
> caches).
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.ignite.IgniteSystemProperties#IGNITE_REUSE_MEMORY_ON_DEACTIVATE
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > пн, 3 февр. 2020 г. в 18:47, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com
> > > > > >:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I do not mind making this change if we explicitly and clearly
> > define
> > > > what
> > > > > > 'new inactive state' means. What should happen if a partition is
> > lost
> > > > in
> > > > > > inactive state? What if such node joins back the cluster after?
> > Etc.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > пт, 31 янв. 2020 г. в 20:57, Denis Magda :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Back up Ivan's opinion here. Initially, the
> > activation/deactivation
> > > > was
> > > > > > > created for the baseline topology designed for cases with
> native
> > > > > > > persistence. My thinking was that the mechanism itended to
> > prevent
> > > > data
> > > > > > > inconsistencies while nodes with data on the disk will be in
> the
> > > > > process
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > joining the cluster.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Artem, could you please update the docs bringing this to the
> > > > attention
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > the user community?
> > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12615
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > AG, what if we don't purge data from memo

Re: Data vanished from cluster after INACTIVE/ACTIVE switch

[Denis Magda]

Hi Vladimir,

Yes, I'm suggesting us to enable this flag by
org.apache.ignite.IgniteSystemProperties#IGNITE_REUSE_MEMORY_ON_DEACTIVATE
default instead of introducing --force flag and showing any warnings.

-
Denis


On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 2:33 AM Vladimir Steshin  wrote:

> Hello all.
>
> Denis, which changes exactly? In current implementation of ticket [2] flag
> [1] is checked before requiring --force flag and showing any warnings. Do
> we need to set reuse-memory-on-deactivate to true by default?
>
> [1]
> org.apache.ignite.IgniteSystemProperties#IGNITE_REUSE_MEMORY_ON_DEACTIVATE
>
> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12614
>
>
> вт, 4 февр. 2020 г. в 22:45, Denis Magda :
>
> > That's the best solution for this scenario. Should we readjust the
> already
> > created ticket [1] suggesting to implement the changes of Alex Scherbakov
> > instead?
> >
> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12614
> >
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 11:54 PM Alexei Scherbakov <
> > alexey.scherbak...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Folks,
> > >
> > > For a long time we have a flag [1]
> > >
> > > It does almost what we want here.
> > >
> > > I suggest to make this behavior default and rework it to keep data in
> > > memory as well (we already have special "recovery" mode for caches).
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> >
> org.apache.ignite.IgniteSystemProperties#IGNITE_REUSE_MEMORY_ON_DEACTIVATE
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > пн, 3 февр. 2020 г. в 18:47, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com
> > > >:
> > >
> > > > I do not mind making this change if we explicitly and clearly define
> > what
> > > > 'new inactive state' means. What should happen if a partition is lost
> > in
> > > > inactive state? What if such node joins back the cluster after? Etc.
> > > >
> > > > пт, 31 янв. 2020 г. в 20:57, Denis Magda :
> > > >
> > > > > Back up Ivan's opinion here. Initially, the activation/deactivation
> > was
> > > > > created for the baseline topology designed for cases with native
> > > > > persistence. My thinking was that the mechanism itended to prevent
> > data
> > > > > inconsistencies while nodes with data on the disk will be in the
> > > process
> > > > of
> > > > > joining the cluster.
> > > > >
> > > > > Artem, could you please update the docs bringing this to the
> > attention
> > > of
> > > > > the user community?
> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12615
> > > > >
> > > > > AG, what if we don't purge data from memory at least for the caches
> > not
> > > > > backed by the native persistence? Is this a big deal? We can
> > certainly
> > > > put
> > > > > this off by my guts feel we'll return to this question sooner or
> > later.
> > > > >
> > > > > -
> > > > > Denis
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 2:17 AM Ivan Pavlukhin <
> vololo...@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > For me it looks like some coincidence effect. I understand that
> we
> > > get
> > > > > > such behavior because deactivation works the same way as for
> > > > > > persistent caches. Was cluster activation/deactivation designed
> and
> > > > > > described for in-memory caches? Current behavior sounds for me a
> as
> > > > > > big risk. I expect a lot of upset users unexpectedly purged all
> > their
> > > > > > data.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > пт, 31 янв. 2020 г. в 00:00, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > > > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com
> > > > > > >:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Because originally the sole purpose of deactivation was
> resource
> > > > > > > deallocation.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > чт, 30 янв. 2020 г. в 22:13, Denis Magda :
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Such a revelation for me that data is purged from RAM if
> > someone
> > > > > > > > deactivates the cluster. Alex, do you remember why we decided
> > to
> > > > > > implement
> > > > > > > > it this way initially?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > Denis
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 2:09 AM Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > > > > > > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I agree on CLI and JMX because those interfaces can be used
> > by
> > > a
> > > > > > system
> > > > > > > > > administrator and can be invoked by mistake.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > As for the Java API, personally, I find it strange to add
> > > 'force'
> > > > > or
> > > > > > > > > 'confirm' flags to it because it is very unlikely that such
> > an
> > > > > > invocation
> > > > > > > > > is done by mistake. Such mistakes are caught during the
> > testing
> > > > > > phase and
> > > > > > > > > developers will end up hard-coding 'true' as a flag
> anyways.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > Ivan Pavlukhin
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Alexei Scherbakov
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSSION] ignite-extension - ignite-spring-boot-autoconfigurer release.

[Denis Magda]

Alex, did you have a chance to review Saikat’s changes related to the
extensions repository organization and release approach?

Denis

On Wednesday, February 5, 2020, Nikolay Izhikov  wrote:

> Hello, Igniters.
>
> We don't have a release process for newly created ignite-extensions
> modules.
> I want to release two modules:
>
> * ignite-spring-boot-autoconfigure
> * ignite-client-spring-boot-autoconfigure
>
> Let's discuss it.
>
> Any objections to it?
> What should be done before release?
>


-- 
-
Denis

Re: Internal classes are exposed in public API

[Denis Magda]

Let's run a vote if that's the only option to come to a consensus. It will
be best if either Alex Goncharuk, Andrey Gura or Nikolay Izhikov creates a
discussion thread stating the problem and possible choices. Folks, who
would like to take over?

Generally, the vote should help us to decide how to deal with similar
situations in the future. We need to agree on how and in what circumstances
we deprecate existing APIs and engrave this on our wiki. As for this
discussion related to the new metrics framework, it should be used just as
a reference.

-
Denis


On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 2:38 AM Maxim Muzafarov  wrote:

> Folks,
>
> Let's start a vote?
>
> On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 at 15:05, Andrey Gura  wrote:
> >
> > Just post here article from Oracle documentation "How and When To
> > Deprecate APIs" [1].
> >
> > [1]
> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/technotes/guides/javadoc/deprecation/deprecation.html
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 10:44 AM Pavel Tupitsyn 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Agree with Andrey, let's remove deprecation for now and unblock the
> release.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 10:23 PM Andrey Gura  wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'll just repeat one thought with some changes.
> > > >
> > > > There are at least two groups of people in this discussion. One group
> > > > sure that new API is complete and production ready while other group
> > > > disagree with it. Obviously we can't reach consensus about it right
> > > > now. But we can do it in the future.
> > > > At present we just can't deprecate existing API and mark new API as
> > > > experimental at the same time. So we must remove deprecation until
> the
> > > > consensus is reached.
> > > >
> > > > Also there is the third group of people. This people aren't related
> > > > with the API, they may be don't need the API and they wait for bug
> > > > fixes and other features. It is very easy to satisfy third group:
> just
> > > > cut off what caused the release blocking. But it is much easier to
> > > > remove @deprecated annotations.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 8:54 PM Nikolay Izhikov  >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Alexey.
> > > > >
> > > > > I answered to your examples and issues you provide.
> > > > > But, it seems the discussion of the API and the Java code itself
> is not
> > > > the goal of this thread anymore.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Should we provide a way to know the number of metrics and
> registries
> > > > in advance?
> > > > >
> > > > > No.
> > > > > If you think this is the real use-as let’s add `size` methods.
> > > > > It will be the simple API *extension*.
> > > > >
> > > > > > There is no separation on public and internal metrics
> > > > >
> > > > > Any metric can be changed(removed) in any time.
> > > > > But we will try not to do it unless we have a strong reason.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Will we allow users to register their own metrics?
> > > > >
> > > > > No.
> > > > >
> > > > > > It's still not clear how a user will map old interfaces and
> methods to
> > > > the new metric names.
> > > > >
> > > > > We should write this information in the deprecation message.
> > > > >
> > > > > > 30 янв. 2020 г., в 20:27, Alexey Goncharuk <
> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>
> > > > написал(а):
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Nikita,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Disagree here. I already gave an example in this thread of how
> you
> > > > need to
> > > > > > peek into configuration in order to obtain an instance of
> exporter SPI
> > > > > > which may not necessarily be the type you need. That's why
> > > > IGNITE-12553 was
> > > > > > created in the first place.
> > > > >
> > > >
>

Re: Data vanished from cluster after INACTIVE/ACTIVE switch

[Denis Magda]

That's the best solution for this scenario. Should we readjust the already
created ticket [1] suggesting to implement the changes of Alex Scherbakov
instead?

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12614

-
Denis


On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 11:54 PM Alexei Scherbakov <
alexey.scherbak...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Folks,
>
> For a long time we have a flag [1]
>
> It does almost what we want here.
>
> I suggest to make this behavior default and rework it to keep data in
> memory as well (we already have special "recovery" mode for caches).
>
> [1]
> org.apache.ignite.IgniteSystemProperties#IGNITE_REUSE_MEMORY_ON_DEACTIVATE
>
>
>
> пн, 3 февр. 2020 г. в 18:47, Alexey Goncharuk  >:
>
> > I do not mind making this change if we explicitly and clearly define what
> > 'new inactive state' means. What should happen if a partition is lost in
> > inactive state? What if such node joins back the cluster after? Etc.
> >
> > пт, 31 янв. 2020 г. в 20:57, Denis Magda :
> >
> > > Back up Ivan's opinion here. Initially, the activation/deactivation was
> > > created for the baseline topology designed for cases with native
> > > persistence. My thinking was that the mechanism itended to prevent data
> > > inconsistencies while nodes with data on the disk will be in the
> process
> > of
> > > joining the cluster.
> > >
> > > Artem, could you please update the docs bringing this to the attention
> of
> > > the user community?
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12615
> > >
> > > AG, what if we don't purge data from memory at least for the caches not
> > > backed by the native persistence? Is this a big deal? We can certainly
> > put
> > > this off by my guts feel we'll return to this question sooner or later.
> > >
> > > -
> > > Denis
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 2:17 AM Ivan Pavlukhin 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > For me it looks like some coincidence effect. I understand that we
> get
> > > > such behavior because deactivation works the same way as for
> > > > persistent caches. Was cluster activation/deactivation designed and
> > > > described for in-memory caches? Current behavior sounds for me a as
> > > > big risk. I expect a lot of upset users unexpectedly purged all their
> > > > data.
> > > >
> > > > пт, 31 янв. 2020 г. в 00:00, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com
> > > > >:
> > > > >
> > > > > Because originally the sole purpose of deactivation was resource
> > > > > deallocation.
> > > > >
> > > > > чт, 30 янв. 2020 г. в 22:13, Denis Magda :
> > > > >
> > > > > > Such a revelation for me that data is purged from RAM if someone
> > > > > > deactivates the cluster. Alex, do you remember why we decided to
> > > > implement
> > > > > > it this way initially?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -
> > > > > > Denis
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 2:09 AM Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > > > > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I agree on CLI and JMX because those interfaces can be used by
> a
> > > > system
> > > > > > > administrator and can be invoked by mistake.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As for the Java API, personally, I find it strange to add
> 'force'
> > > or
> > > > > > > 'confirm' flags to it because it is very unlikely that such an
> > > > invocation
> > > > > > > is done by mistake. Such mistakes are caught during the testing
> > > > phase and
> > > > > > > developers will end up hard-coding 'true' as a flag anyways.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Ivan Pavlukhin
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
> Alexei Scherbakov
>

Re: Forbid mixed cache groups with both atomic and transactional caches

[Denis Magda]

+1 from my end. It doesn't sound like a big deal if Ignite users need to
define separate groups for atomic and transactional caches.

-
Denis


On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 3:28 AM Ivan Rakov  wrote:

> Igniters,
>
> Apparently it's possible in Ignite to configure a cache group with both
> ATOMIC and TRANSACTIONAL caches.
> Proof: IgniteCacheGroupsTest#testContinuousQueriesMultipleGroups* tests.
> In my opinion, it would be better to remove such possibility from the
> product. There are several reasons:
>
> 1) The original idea of grouping caches was optimizing storage overhead and
> PME time by joining data of similar caches into the same partitions. ATOMIC
> and TRANSACTIONAL caches provide different guarantees and are designed for
> different use cases, thus they can hardly be called "similar".
>
> 2) Diving deeper: synchronization protocols and possible reasons for
> primary-backup divergences are conceptually different for ATOMIC and
> TRANSACTIONAL cases. In TRANSACTIONAL case, transactions recovery protocol
> allows to recover consistency if any participating node will fail, but for
> ATOMIC caches there's possible scenario with failure of primary node where
> neither of backups will contain the most recent state of the data. Example:
> one backup have received updates 1, 3, 5 while another have received 2, 4
> (which is possible due to message reordering), and even tracking counters
> [1] won't restore the consistency. The problem is that we can't distinguish
> what kind of conflict we have faced in case update counters have diverged
> in a mixed group.
>
> 3) Mixed groups are poorly tested. I can't find any tests except a couple
> of smoke tests in IgniteCacheGroupsTest. We can't be sure that different
> synchronization protocols will work correctly for such configurations,
> especially under load and with a variety of dependent configuration
> parameters.
>
> 4) I have never heard of any feedback on mixed groups. I have asked
> different people on this and no one recalled any attempts to configure such
> groups. I believe that in fact no one has ever tried to do it.
>
> Please let me know if you are aware of any cases where mixed groups are
> used or reasons to keep them. Otherwise I'll create a ticket to prohibit
> mixed configurations.
>
> [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11797
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Ivan Rakov
>

Re: Quick Introduction of myself - Kartheek.

[Denis Magda]

Hi Kartheek,

Welcome to the community! It's nice to see you got interested in the
project and decided to contribute.

Please check this page out for commonly asked questions pertaining to the
contribution process as well as a list of tickets for newcomers:
https://ignite.apache.org/community/contribute.html

Let us know once you selected a first task to work on.

-
Denis


On Sat, Feb 1, 2020 at 9:52 PM Kartheek kark  wrote:

> Good Morning everyone,
> I am kartheek, currently working in saas and analytics domain.
> How I would like to contribute -
> 1. Understanding problems in  various architectures, and helping them solve
> it
> 2. Code and solve the problems, which helps to further enhance my
> knowledge.
>As well, Can I be introduced to my peers who are working in timezone
> close to Indian Time Zone ?
>
>I am happy to be a part of this team.
>
> Thanks and regards,
> Kartheek B,
> Linkedin 
>

Re: Contribution. IGNITE-11663

[Denis Magda]

Alex Scherbakof, as the one who created the ticket, could you please help
Artem and share more details?

-
Denis


On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 4:54 AM Artem Demchenko 
wrote:

> Hi, everyone! I have a question about the following task:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11663.
>
> The description is not quite concrete, so I want to clarify requirements.
>
> Currently, there are
> “internal.processors.cache.persistence.wal.record.RecordTypes.java” class,
> which contains one class field “public static final
> Set DELTA_TYPE_SET = new HashSet<>();” and static
> block to fill set above with particular values. This class has only one
> usage.
>
> My PR https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/7330 purpose to move all
> logic
> from “internal.processors.cache.persistence.wal.record.RecordTypes.java” to
> the only place where it used
> “internal.processors.cache.persistence.wal.SingleSegmentLogicalRecordsIterator.java”.
>
> Am I doing everything right or not? If not, what has to be done?
>
>
> --
> Demchenko Artem.
>

Re: Data vanished from cluster after INACTIVE/ACTIVE switch

[Denis Magda]

Back up Ivan's opinion here. Initially, the activation/deactivation was
created for the baseline topology designed for cases with native
persistence. My thinking was that the mechanism itended to prevent data
inconsistencies while nodes with data on the disk will be in the process of
joining the cluster.

Artem, could you please update the docs bringing this to the attention of
the user community?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12615

AG, what if we don't purge data from memory at least for the caches not
backed by the native persistence? Is this a big deal? We can certainly put
this off by my guts feel we'll return to this question sooner or later.

-
Denis


On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 2:17 AM Ivan Pavlukhin  wrote:

> For me it looks like some coincidence effect. I understand that we get
> such behavior because deactivation works the same way as for
> persistent caches. Was cluster activation/deactivation designed and
> described for in-memory caches? Current behavior sounds for me a as
> big risk. I expect a lot of upset users unexpectedly purged all their
> data.
>
> пт, 31 янв. 2020 г. в 00:00, Alexey Goncharuk  >:
> >
> > Because originally the sole purpose of deactivation was resource
> > deallocation.
> >
> > чт, 30 янв. 2020 г. в 22:13, Denis Magda :
> >
> > > Such a revelation for me that data is purged from RAM if someone
> > > deactivates the cluster. Alex, do you remember why we decided to
> implement
> > > it this way initially?
> > >
> > > -
> > > Denis
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 2:09 AM Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I agree on CLI and JMX because those interfaces can be used by a
> system
> > > > administrator and can be invoked by mistake.
> > > >
> > > > As for the Java API, personally, I find it strange to add 'force' or
> > > > 'confirm' flags to it because it is very unlikely that such an
> invocation
> > > > is done by mistake. Such mistakes are caught during the testing
> phase and
> > > > developers will end up hard-coding 'true' as a flag anyways.
> > > >
> > >
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Ivan Pavlukhin
>

Re: Native Persistence & JDBC

[Denis Magda]

Forwarding this thread to the dev list.

Ignite SQL experts, could you check this thread and create a proper ticket
for this minor usability improvement? Probably, the ticket is not even
needed.

Basically, our driver reports this error - *SQLException: Client is
invalid. Probably cache name is wrong - *if the cluster with persistence is
deactivated while the error message needs to advise to activate the
cluster instead.

-
Denis


On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 4:54 PM narges saleh  wrote:

> Hello Ilya,
> It seems the issue was that I had not enabled the cluster. I'd have
> expected a different type of error.
> Now that I enabled the cluster, the code works with native persistence.
> thanks.
>
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 5:36 AM Ilya Kasnacheev 
> wrote:
>
>> Hello!
>>
>> Can you please provide complete error message, with stack traces if
>> present?
>>
>> Regards,
>> --
>> Ilya Kasnacheev
>>
>>
>> пн, 20 янв. 2020 г. в 21:03, narges saleh :
>>
>>> Hello Ilya
>>>
>>> I do have the PERSON2 cache. Here is the snippet for the cache
>>> configuration. I don't have any issue with this configuration if I don't
>>> enable native persistence.
>>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> >>
>>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 10:40 AM Ilya Kasnacheev <
>>> ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hello!

 Maybe you don't have PERSON2 cache? :)

 Regards,
 --
 Ilya Kasnacheev


 пн, 20 янв. 2020 г. в 02:47, narges saleh :

> Hi All
>
> I am using JDBC connection for inserting data into caches specified in
> my config file (via query entities). If I don't enable native persistence,
> everything works fine and I can insert the data into cache/table and query
> the cache/table. But if I enable native persistence, the client dies as
> soon it attempts to create the JDBC connection, using the configuration
> file, with this error:
>
> SQLException: Client is invalid. Probably cache name is wrong.
>
> The connection command is this:
>
> Connection conn = DriverManager.getConnection(
> "jdbc:ignite:cfg://cache=PERSON2:streaming=true:streamingFlushFrequency=
> 2000@file:///opt/ignite/config/query-entity-store.xml");
>
> Any idea what could I be doing wrong?
>
> thanks.
>

Re: Data vanished from cluster after INACTIVE/ACTIVE switch

[Denis Magda]

Such a revelation for me that data is purged from RAM if someone
deactivates the cluster. Alex, do you remember why we decided to implement
it this way initially?

-
Denis


On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 2:09 AM Alexey Goncharuk 
wrote:

> I agree on CLI and JMX because those interfaces can be used by a system
> administrator and can be invoked by mistake.
>
> As for the Java API, personally, I find it strange to add 'force' or
> 'confirm' flags to it because it is very unlikely that such an invocation
> is done by mistake. Such mistakes are caught during the testing phase and
> developers will end up hard-coding 'true' as a flag anyways.
>

Re: Contribution

[Denis Magda]

Nikolay, Andrey,

Would you be the best committers to help out here? You are already deeply
involved in metrics development and can quickly suggest Lev how to proceed
with this task.

-
Denis


On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 2:46 AM Лев Киселев 
wrote:

> Hello everyone, I have question about following task:
> [https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10698]
> Solution proposed in task description is seem to be logical.
> So, I need to every replace @MXBeanParametersNames and
> @MXBeanParametersDescriptions (everywhere, for uniformity) with something
> like:
> void methodName(@MXBeanParameterInformation(name = "name", description =
> "description") firstParameter, ...) {}.
> And, of course, need to change processing logic at
> getParameterName/getDescription methods from IgniteStandardMXBean.
> Do I understand correctly what needs to be done?
>

Re: Internal classes are exposed in public API

[Denis Magda]

Folks, seriously, we should deprecate an existing API only after the new
one is no longer considered experimental. There might be API and
configuration changes in the experimental API before it's announced as GA.
I would encourage us to do this properly - let's release the new APIs
labeling them as experimental for now and not label the existing as
deprecated until the new is announced as GA.

-
Denis


On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 9:27 AM Alexey Goncharuk 
wrote:

> Nikita,
>
> Disagree here. I already gave an example in this thread of how you need to
> peek into configuration in order to obtain an instance of exporter SPI
> which may not necessarily be the type you need. That's why IGNITE-12553 was
> created in the first place.
>

Re: New channel about integration with Spring Framework

[Denis Magda]

Folks, why don't you name the channel "ignite-spring-framework_russian" in
Slack ;)

-
Denis


On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 12:50 AM Maksim Stepachev <
maksim.stepac...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes, I do.
>
> ср, 29 янв. 2020 г. в 11:22, Sergey Chernolyas <
> sergey.chernol...@gmail.com
> >:
>
> > Do you mean channel at Telegram ?
> >
> > On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 11:20, Maksim Stepachev <
> maksim.stepac...@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Okey, but our channel has 90+ active members.
> > >
> > > ср, 29 янв. 2020 г. в 11:15, Sergey Chernolyas <
> > > sergey.chernol...@gmail.com
> > > >:
> > >
> > > > Hi Maksim!
> > > >
> > > > The link is unavailable :-(  I can't open it. I think Slack is more
> > > > preferable.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 11:13, Maksim Stepachev <
> > > maksim.stepac...@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Could we use the telegram channel for it for the Russian community?
> > > > >
> > > > > https://t.me/RU_Ignite
> > > > >
> > > > > ср, 29 янв. 2020 г. в 10:53, Sergey Chernolyas <
> > > > > sergey.chernol...@gmail.com
> > > > > >:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi igniters!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have created new channel "#ignite-spring-framework" for
> > discussion
> > > > > about
> > > > > > integration with Spring Framework.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > -
> > > > > >
> > > > > > With best regards, Sergey Chernolyas
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > -
> > > >
> > > > With best regards, Sergey Chernolyas
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > -
> >
> > With best regards, Sergey Chernolyas
> >
>

Re: Hello

[Denis Magda]

Hi Sergey, welcome back!

The dev list is a preferable way for communication. It's ok to keep the dev
list in CC all the times even if Maksim will be working mostly with you on
the Spring Data tasks.

Anyway, you can use our community Slack channel for instant messaging:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Collaborate#HowtoCollaborate-IgniteSlack

-
Denis


On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 12:21 AM Sergey Chernolyas <
sergey.chernol...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> Cool! Thank you very much! Can I put your answer to new channel?  Also ...
> do you have Skype,Viber or Whatup for direct communication ?
>
> On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 11:19, Maksim Stepachev  >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I going to work with spring data. My plans add flux and mono to it. A few
> > days ago Nikolay Izhikov finished the new spring boot starter.
> > https://github.com/apache/ignite-extensions/tree/master/modules
> >
> > You may add the spring data module.
> >
> >
> > ср, 29 янв. 2020 г. в 10:46, Sergey Chernolyas <
> > sergey.chernol...@gmail.com
> > >:
> >
> > > Hi Ivan!
> > >
> > > Thank you very much for your email. Yes, I need some assistance
> because I
> > > am new at contribution to the the project. But .. I did some PR to
> Ignite
> > > project two years ago. In spice of it, I need a assistance.
> > >
> > > I have created ticket
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12582
> > .
> > > My customer is needs to the feature and I want to implement it.  I will
> > try
> > > to configure my developer environment as it wrote in the guide. Also
> ...
> > > do  you know contributors who works with Spring Data?
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 29 Jan 2020 at 08:51, Ivan Pavlukhin 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Sergey,
> > > >
> > > > Welcome to the Apache Ignite Community.
> > > >
> > > > Do you need some assistance? Or might be you have something to tell
> > > > the Community. Do not hesitate to write back.
> > > >
> > > > I see that your Jira account was already added to the contributors
> > > > list. You can find some contribution guidelines at
> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute
> > > >
> > > > вт, 28 янв. 2020 г. в 22:26, Sergey Chernolyas <
> > > > sergey.chernol...@gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > My jiraId is schernolyas
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > -
> > > > >
> > > > > With best regards, Sergey Chernolyas
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Ivan Pavlukhin
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > -
> > >
> > > With best regards, Sergey Chernolyas
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> -
>
> With best regards, Sergey Chernolyas
>

New Blog: Why my in-memory Ignite cluster underperforms? Network and co-located compute

[Denis Magda]

Igniters,

I've just published an article that describes one of the reasons for why an
Ignite cluster can underperform. It's reviewed how a selection of proper
Ignite APIs can put less pressure on the network and proliferate the
performance:
https://www.gridgain.com/resources/blog/why-my-in-memory-cluster-underperforms-negating-network-impact

Let me know what you think. Suggest any other themes you would want to be
laid out.

Btw, our community member Denis Mekhanikov is doing a webinar about
co-located computations in Ignite tomorrow, join him to learn more about
this area:
https://www.gridgain.com/resources/webinars/distributed-computing-apache-ignite

-
Denis

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New Apache Ignite PMC member: Igor Sapego

[Denis Magda]

Igor, thanks for being an invaluable member of the community all this time!
Congrats!

-
Denis


On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 9:58 PM Ivan Pavlukhin  wrote:

> Hello Ignite Community,
>
> The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Ignite has invited
> Igor Sapego to join the PMC as a new member and we are pleased to
> announce that he has accepted.
>
> Igor is an active Community member for a long time. He made a
> worthless contribution in Ignite C++ development and continues to do
> it today. Moreover he drives thin clients development for other
> programming languages. Additionally, always helpful on users mailing
> list. Wrote blog posts and spoke publicly about Ignite.
>
> Being a PMC member enables assistance with the management and to guide
> the direction of the project.
>
> Please join me in congratulating Igor!
>
> Best regards,
> Ivan Pavlukhin
> on behalf of Apache Ignite PMC
>

Re: Apache Ignite contribution

[Denis Magda]

Folks,

We had this discussion about communication channels before and summarized
it on this wiki:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Collaborate

Dev list is a preferred channel but we're free to go to Slack or Telegram
(mention it there if you'd like) on some occasions.

-
Denis


On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 5:43 AM Alexey Zinoviev 
wrote:

> Of course, telegram/slack and etc are indexed by google and results
> couldn't be found there, but we should provide more options for onboarding
> for newcomers and share knowledge and help for them.
> I suggest to use official ASF slack for simple questions about development
> and asking help.
> The current telegram channel works as a fast user-list or stack-overflow.
> This is developer-user communication, not the right place to discuss
> developer deals.
>
> I'll suggest to add this links with explanation for newcomers (not only
> "how to contribute" but and "where to ask" and "who could help me with this
> task")
>
>
>
>
>
> пн, 27 янв. 2020 г. в 15:17, Ivan Pavlukhin :
>
> > I beleive that dev list should be the only mean of (technical)
> > decision making for the project.
> >
> > But other resources can show better productivity and especially for
> > newcomers. And I am little bit worried that means of communication
> > seems a little bit scattered. I will try telegram =)
> >
> > пн, 27 янв. 2020 г. в 14:57, Dmitriy Pavlov :
> > >
> > > Hi Igniters,
> > >
> > > I would name dev list as the only one official channel. Other options
> are
> > > supplementary channels just for convenience (Slack for voice calls &
> > chats,
> > > Russian local resources for easier communication without foreign
> language
> > > barrier). But still, I hope we're on the same page that
> > > _If it didn't happen on the list, it didn't happen._
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > > Dmitriy Pavlov
> > >
> > > пн, 27 янв. 2020 г. в 12:24, Alexey Zinoviev :
> > >
> > > > And dont forget asf slack with a few channel about Apache ignite
> > > >
> > > > пн, 27 янв. 2020 г., 12:20 Ivan Pavlukhin :
> > > >
> > > > > Maksim, folks,
> > > > >
> > > > > Actually I am curious what kind of communication channel is
> mentioned
> > > > > telegram channel? Should we add a link to it on official "community
> > > > > resources" page?
> > > > >
> > > > > пн, 27 янв. 2020 г. в 11:40, Maksim Stepachev <
> > > > maksim.stepac...@gmail.com
> > > > > >:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hello!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you have the telegram, join to Russian channel:
> > > > > https://t.me/RU_Ignite
> > > > > >
> > > > > > чт, 23 янв. 2020 г. в 16:07, Ilya Kasnacheev <
> > > > ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com
> > > > > >:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hello!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have added you to Contributors of our project, you can now
> > assign
> > > > > issues
> > > > > > > to yourself.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please read
> > > > > > >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/How+to+Contribute
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Ilya Kasnacheev
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > чт, 23 янв. 2020 г. в 15:31, Лев Киселев <
> > lev.kiselev.1...@gmail.com
> > > > >:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > > > > I want to take part in the development of Apache Ignite.
> > > > > > > > Primary skills: Java SE, Java 8, Spring framework, SQL.
> > > > > > > > Also: Multithreading (incl. FJP), Design Patterns, Algorithms
> > and
> > > > > Data
> > > > > > > > Structures.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > My JIRA ID: l4ndsc4pe
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > Ivan Pavlukhin
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Ivan Pavlukhin
> >
>

Re: Slim binary release and docker image for Apache Ignite

[Denis Magda]

Alex, could you please list all the modules that will be excluded? It will
help to confirm we haven't dumped anything essential.

-
Denis


On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 12:33 AM Alexey Goncharuk <
alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Got it, sounds good!
> Should we consider the list of modules included in the slim package
> finalized?
>
> чт, 16 янв. 2020 г. в 13:13, Igor Sapego :
>
> > Alexey, if I understand correctly, Ilya does not suggest to pre-built
> > binaries, just to ship it with configure script pre-generated, which
> > is a common practice for autotools packages. Building will be still
> > required for the user, but there will be less requirements and
> > possible errors during build.
> >
> > I like the idea. Let's do this.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Igor
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 11:57 AM Alexey Goncharuk <
> > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > To me it doesn't really matter if it will be 'slim' or 'lite' :) I
> would
> > > not name it 'core' because indeed it would be confusing with the core
> > > module name.
> > >
> > > Agree that platforms support is useful, so I would keep them as Ilya
> > > suggested. As for the C++ packages pre-build - let's hear out Igor's
> > > opinion on this. Pre-built binaries certainly add usability, but I am
> not
> > > sure how those binaries should be tested afterwards.
> > >
> > > ср, 15 янв. 2020 г. в 18:33, Alexey Kuznetsov :
> > >
> > > > I'm +1 for "SLIM" it is a common name in Docker world.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 9:48 PM Petr Ivanov 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 for slim binary
> > > > > Plus docker-slim
> > > > > Plus RPM / DEB packages modularisation like PHP distribution — with
> > > core
> > > > > and lots of integrations / modules.
> > > > >
> > > > > > On 15 Jan 2020, at 17:40, Ilya Kasnacheev <
> > ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hello!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think we should name it "core" since we already have
> ignite-core
> > > and
> > > > it
> > > > > > will be confusing. Maybe we should go full 00s and call it
> "lite"?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I also think we should keep both .Net and C++. .Net is runnable
> out
> > > of
> > > > > box
> > > > > > which is awesome, and C++ needs building but it is rather small
> in
> > > > source
> > > > > > form.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I also suggest a different change to build process. Let's ship
> C++
> > > with
> > > > > > automake, etc, already run, for all binary packaging options?
> > WDYT? I
> > > > can
> > > > > > assist in build process tuning.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Ilya Kasnacheev
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ср, 15 янв. 2020 г. в 17:18, Denis Magda :
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Alex,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I'm on your end and support the proposal. Could you also clarify
> > if
> > > > you
> > > > > >> suggest we keeping or removing C++ and .NET thick clients?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Speaking of the naming, how about titling such packages as
> 'core'
> > > > > instead
> > > > > >> of 'slim', i.e., 'apache-ignite-core-{version}'?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> -
> > > > > >> Denis
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 5:17 AM Ilya Kasnacheev <
> > > > > ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> Hello!
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Pavel, I believe these JARs are fully covered by the list of
> &g

Re: AWS EBS Discovery: Contributor Wanted

[Denis Magda]

I support the idea of triggering such tests on demand. We can create a wiki
page with instructions on how to run the tests. Unless there is a more
elegant solution.

Sergey, would you be able to review Emmanouil's changes in the IP Finder
source code?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-8617

-
Denis


On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 2:22 AM Emmanouil Gkatziouras 
wrote:

> Hi all!
>
> I do believe being able to execute some AWS integration tests on demand
> would be of value, especially for reviewers who cannot have an AWS stack
> created on demand.
> More than happy to help on that.
>
> Kind regards
> *Emmanouil Gkatziouras*
> https://egkatzioura.com/ |
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/gkatziourasemmanouil/
> https://github.com/gkatzioura
>
>
> On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 at 15:15, Sergey Chugunov 
> wrote:
>
> > Hello Emmanouil,
> >
> > It would be great if we have at least basic integration tests in real AWS
> > environment. Even though they may require more work to keep them green (I
> > mean here AWS quotas and additional configuration/reconfiguration
> efforts)
> > it worth it because these tests can also be useful as an examples.
> >
> > As the same time as IpFinder is such a basic component I don't think we
> > need to include them in constantly triggered suites like Run All but to
> > trigger them manually before/right after merging them to master branch or
> > when developing something in related code.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > --
> > Thank you,
> > Sergey Chugunov.
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 5:32 PM Emmanouil Gkatziouras <
> > gkatzio...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all!
> > >
> > > Yes It seems possible to get some free quota for integration tests on
> AWS
> > > [1] however most probably they are not gonna last forever.
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/opensource/aws-promotional-credits-open-source-projects/
> > >
> > > King Regards
> > > *Emmanouil Gkatziouras*
> > > https://egkatzioura.com/ |
> > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/gkatziourasemmanouil/
> > > https://github.com/gkatzioura
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 22 Jan 2020 at 16:48, Denis Magda  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Emmanouil,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for preparing a pull-request for Application Load Balancer:
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-8617
> > > >
> > > > Igniters, who is willing to step in as a primary reviewer?
> > > >
> > > > As for automated testing on AWS, are you aware of any sponsorship
> > program
> > > > of AWS for open source projects of our kind? It will be ideal to have
> > > real
> > > > testing on AWS but someone needs to pay.
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > > Denis
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Jan 19, 2020 at 6:45 AM Emmanouil Gkatziouras <
> > > > gkatzio...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi all!
> > > > >
> > > > > I have spinned up an Application Load Balancer and an autoscaling
> > group
> > > > on
> > > > > AWS and the Ignite discovery using TcpDiscoveryAlbIpFinder works as
> > > > > expected.
> > > > >
> > > > >- On startup nodes discover each other.
> > > > >- On ec2 node down, connection is lost and the cluster
> decreases.
> > > > >- On an extra node addition the cluster size increases
> > > > >
> > > > > This contribution is essential since the Previous ELB based
> discovery
> > > > uses
> > > > > the Classic Load Balancer which is still available however
> > > > > AWS advices users to use the Application one. [1]
> > > > > While my pull request gets reviewed I will also have a look at
> > > > > the IGNITE-12398 [2] issue which has to do with the S3 discovery.
> > > > > Another idea would also be to implement a `TCP Load Balancer based`
> > > > > discovery.
> > > > >
> > > > > In order to test this issue and future ones I implemented some
> > > terraform
> > > > > scripts (which I shall use for other issues too) [3].
> > > > > If some automated e2e testing on AWS is being considered they might
> > be
> > > of
> > > > > value.
&g

Re: New blog post on Apache Ignite in AWS

[Denis Magda]

Sergey,

Thanks for a compact and clear article. I especially enjoyed the part that
explains how to connect from a local laptop to an already running Ignite
cluster on AWS. Looking forward to more content from you!

-
Denis


On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 11:35 PM Sergey Chugunov 
wrote:

> Hello community,
>
> Recently I published a new blog post on getting started with Apache Ignite
> in AWS [1]. I tried to make my example as simple as possible while keeping
> it usable.
>
> Let me know if this post is useful for you.
>
> I plan to write several follow-up posts about AWS-specific things but
> based on feedback may cover other topics in more detail.
>
> Any feedback is welcome, thank you!
>
> [1] https://www.gridgain.com/node/6247
>

Re: Please a reviewer for the case IGNITE-12518

[Denis Magda]

Hi Luis,

Presently, the community is on the route of Ignite simplification. We're
trying to define Ignite core that has minimal dependencies with 3rd party
libraries. That also led to the modularization initiative [1] with the
first results in the form of Ignite Extensions repository where we're
moving all 3rd party integrations.

Saikat, do you think Luis's contribution needs to reside in the extensions
repository?

[1]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-36%3A+Modularization

-
Denis


On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 8:48 PM Luis Arce  wrote:

> Hi Saikat,
> Thanks for you response:
>
> My system need a web server for work. i work correctly with Wildfly and i
> use Ignite as Backend for database.
> My problem is the combination of both is around 6 GB RAM for work in the
> VPS.
> For this reason i modified the unique plugin with webserver inside
> (rest-http module).
> The change enabled the possibility for use only 3GB RAM in a VPS (
> vpsserver.com) saving money and enabling horizontal scalling.
> I shared this change in the Jira ticket touching the two classes of
> rest-http plugin.
> The change has less impact (programaticly), the point is the library
> dependencies (quantity of jars).
>
> It change has sense for you?, i think is a util because that technologies
> dont has present inside of ignite currently and is friendly with the code
> of rest-ignite.
>
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> *Luis Arce Martínez*Licenciado e Ingeniero en Informática y Gestión
> 09-57861903
> Linkedin:
> https://cl.linkedin.com/in/luisalejandroarcemartinez
>
>
>
>
>
> El mié., 22 ene. 2020 a las 0:38, Saikat Maitra ( >)
> escribió:
>
> > Hello Luis,
> >
> > Thank you for your email. You can plan to create a separate application
> for
> > jaxws service and use any build tools like gradle or maven to define your
> > dependencies.
> >
> > Please find below some of the performance tips related to Ignite
> >
> > https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/durable-memory-tuning
> >
> > You can use IgniteClient in your service and can connect to remote
> cluster
> > of Apache Ignite for data persistence.
> >
> > Can you please correct my understanding on the usage of ignite-rest-http
> > in IGNITE-12518, I see the dependencies you have mentioned are related to
> > your project and my understanding is you are trying to use
> ignite-rest-http
> > jetty server for running your application. My understanding is this
> change
> > will make ignite-rest-http very large jar file with dependencies
> > like tomcat-servlet-api-9.0.10.jar may not needed outside of your project
> > scope.
> >
> > Please let me know your thoughts.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Saikat
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 19, 2020 at 9:47 PM Luis Arce  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Saikat,
> > > I agree, the impact of changes is bigger on the module.
> > > I have a question: If i need create a jaxws service what is your
> > > recomendation?
> > > My motivation for the changes is the next:
> > > *Introduction.*
> > > A few time ago i design a ABB for traceability for Oracle Service Bus
> > with
> > > the objective of detecting failures points in many processes of a
> > customer.
> > > In first instance my team worked with rest-http module in ignite 2.4
> with
> > > poor results, the quantity of TPS was 4.Then we make a implementation
> of
> > > Rest service inside Apache Tomcat and call to Apache Ignite directly to
> > > Database with persistence activated. This change, enabled the
> possibility
> > > for work with 4 environment of the customer (Development, Testing, QA,
> > > Production) with 8GB of RAM in the machine, the configuration of the
> > client
> > > had a Oracle Portal for the View layer, EJB for composition of the
> > > controller layer, and OSB for the integration the TPS of the client are
> > > biggest.
> > >
> > > *AS-IS*
> > >
> > > [image: imagen.png]
> > >
> > > *To Be roadmap*
> > >
> > > [image: imagen.png]
> > >
> > > With the ignite modification published in Jira is possible run JSF for
> > run
> > > my reports and forms, JaxWS for the service SOAP and Jersey for Rest (i
> > > start modification in this task).
> > > The code published in Jira have capabilites for work with Primefaces
> > > (tested ok), JaxWS (tested ok), but jersey is not included yet.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > >
> > > *Luis Arce Martínez*Licenciado e Ingeniero en Informática y Gestión
> > > 09-57861903
> > > Linkedin:
> > > https://cl.linkedin.com/in/luisalejandroarcemartinez
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > El jue., 16 ene. 2020 a las 0:25, Saikat Maitra (<
> > saikat.mai...@gmail.com>)
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > >> Hi Luis,
> > >>
> > >> Thank you for sharing the details on the changes. I reviewed the
> > >> dependencies that you shared in the jira issue and wanted to discuss
> on
> > >> the
> > >> changes.
> > >>
> > >> The purpose of ignite-rest-http is to provide a web based interface to
> > >> easily access and use the ignite features and the changes you
> suggested
> > >> can
> > >> be b