Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
Igniters, seems that this module is completely abandoned for more than 2 years. But it is enormous and it seems that nobody wants to take care of it. I suggest just removing it or moving it to extensions (as option). WDYT?
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
I am personally for moving to extensions. Alex has already mentioned all the reasons why it should be done and all of them are quite important. The module seems to be quite independent and there is no problem to move it to ignite-extensions. So I am +1 for moving to ignite-extensions. чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 12:45, Kseniya Romanova : > > > > do you know anyone who uses it? > > I know some teams, who do. At the last Ignite Summit we had a talk > featuring Ml module (from the Groovy community). > Anyway, We need here the module maintainer opinion > + Alex > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:38 PM Andrey Mashenkov < > andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > -1 for removal. > > 0 for relocation > > > > imho, TC resources and module size aren't good arguments for > > removal/moving. > > ML tests could be run nightly. > > ML module contains few integrations (with TensorFlow and other), these > > optional integrations are wighty and could be moved to extension, > > but core functionality still can be left untouched if it is highly > coupled > > with core Ignite and moving to extension is hard. > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:22 PM Anton Vinogradov wrote: > > > > > +1 to relocation > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:09 PM Alex Plehanov > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Pavel, do you know anyone who uses it? > > > > > > > > Looks like it isn't used at all (no questions on mail lists, no > > > > tickets), but we spend developers time to build module with every > > > > Ignite rebuild, we spend users traffic to download module (ML with > > > > dependencies takes about 1/4 of our binary release package size) and > > > > we spend team-city resources to test module. > > > > > > > > +1 for removing or moving to extensions. > > > > > > > > ср, 9 авг. 2023 г. в 14:19, Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > > > > > > > > Does it have any outstanding issues? A stable and useful module > > should > > > > not > > > > > be removed just because it does not evolve. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 1:46 PM Ivan Daschinsky < > ivanda...@apache.org > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Igniters, seems that this module is completely abandoned for more > > > than > > > > 2 > > > > > > years. But it is enormous and it seems that nobody wants to take > > care > > > > of > > > > > > it. I suggest just removing it or moving it to extensions (as > > > option). > > > > > > WDYT? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Andrey V. Mashenkov > > > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. Actually, all integrations are some adapters that allow to load pretrained models (h2o, catboost etc.) чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 13:08, Ivan Daschinsky : > I am personally for moving to extensions. Alex has already mentioned all > the reasons why it should be done and all of them are quite important. > The module seems to be quite independent and there is no problem to move > it to ignite-extensions. > So I am +1 for moving to ignite-extensions. > > > чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 12:45, Kseniya Romanova : > >> > >> > do you know anyone who uses it? >> >> I know some teams, who do. At the last Ignite Summit we had a talk >> featuring Ml module (from the Groovy community). >> Anyway, We need here the module maintainer opinion >> + Alex >> >> On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:38 PM Andrey Mashenkov < >> andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > -1 for removal. >> > 0 for relocation >> > >> > imho, TC resources and module size aren't good arguments for >> > removal/moving. >> > ML tests could be run nightly. >> > ML module contains few integrations (with TensorFlow and other), these >> > optional integrations are wighty and could be moved to extension, >> > but core functionality still can be left untouched if it is highly >> coupled >> > with core Ignite and moving to extension is hard. >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:22 PM Anton Vinogradov wrote: >> > >> > > +1 to relocation >> > > >> > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:09 PM Alex Plehanov > > >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > > Pavel, do you know anyone who uses it? >> > > > >> > > > Looks like it isn't used at all (no questions on mail lists, no >> > > > tickets), but we spend developers time to build module with every >> > > > Ignite rebuild, we spend users traffic to download module (ML with >> > > > dependencies takes about 1/4 of our binary release package size) and >> > > > we spend team-city resources to test module. >> > > > >> > > > +1 for removing or moving to extensions. >> > > > >> > > > ср, 9 авг. 2023 г. в 14:19, Pavel Tupitsyn : >> > > > > >> > > > > Does it have any outstanding issues? A stable and useful module >> > should >> > > > not >> > > > > be removed just because it does not evolve. >> > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 1:46 PM Ivan Daschinsky < >> ivanda...@apache.org >> > > >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > Igniters, seems that this module is completely abandoned for >> more >> > > than >> > > > 2 >> > > > > > years. But it is enormous and it seems that nobody wants to take >> > care >> > > > of >> > > > > > it. I suggest just removing it or moving it to extensions (as >> > > option). >> > > > > > WDYT? >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Best regards, >> > Andrey V. Mashenkov >> > >> > > > -- > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
>> * com.github.fommil.netlib:core:1.1.2 - not developed and archived since 2017. Last version released in 2013 [2] Moreover, this version is so outdated and JNI extension was so strangely made (linked to libgfortran3 for example), that native BLAS simply doesn't work. Always fallback option is used (f2jBLAS, and it is also outdated). There is a modern option -- https://github.com/luhenry/netlib, it is used in spark mllib. I have run all tests successfully with it (with few lines changed, of course) using native blas (libopenblas on ubuntu 22.04) So it is possible to state that nobody has run it on native blas. So I have some concerns about existence of prod like installations with Ignite ML module пт, 11 авг. 2023 г. в 13:14, Николай Ижиков : > A few cents to let you know how abandoned ML module is. > > 1. Last valuable commit December 9, 2020 - > https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/04f6a33851d9f7bd269a09fdc2c74485b1e01a8a > > 2. Dependencies and current versions of them: > > * com.dropbox.core:dropbox-core-sdk:2.1.1 current version is - 5.4.5 [1] > * com.github.fommil.netlib:core:1.1.2 - not developed and archived since > 2017. Last version released in 2013 [2] > * org.apache.commons:commons-rng-core:1.0 current version is 1.5 [3] > * com.zaxxer:SparseBitSet:1.0 current version is 1.2 [4] > * ai.catboost:catboost-prediction:0.24 current version is 1.2 [5] > * ai.h2o:h2o-genmodel:3.26.0.8 current version is 3.42.0.2 [6] > > ML community make a huge step forward since 2020. > So I doubt ML features and tools integrations works as expected nowadays. > Those type of Ignite features(abandoned or supported partially) has to be > in extensions. > > [1] https://github.com/dropbox/dropbox-sdk-java > [2] https://github.com/fommil/netlib-java > [3] https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-rng/commons-rng-core/ > [4] https://github.com/brettwooldridge/SparseBitSet > [5] https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/ai.catboost/catboost-prediction > [6] https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/ai.h2o/h2o-genmodel > > > > > 11 авг. 2023 г., в 12:19, Kseniya Romanova > написал(а): > > > > As far as I know, the integration was removed from the Tensorflow side. > > > > On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 2:04 PM Andrey Mashenkov < > andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Ivan, > >> > >>> Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. > >> > >> Ok. You are right. > >> Tensorflow is mentioned in docs: docs/_docs/setup.adoc. > >> > >> Adapters may require compilation time dependencies, but these > dependencies > >> shouldn't be part or release package, > >> regardless whether the ML module is a part of Ignite or extensions. > WDYT? > >> > >> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 1:36 PM Ivan Daschinsky > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. > >>> Actually, all integrations are some adapters that allow to load > >> pretrained > >>> models (h2o, catboost etc.) > >>> > >>> чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 13:08, Ivan Daschinsky : > >>> > >>>> I am personally for moving to extensions. Alex has already mentioned > >> all > >>>> the reasons why it should be done and all of them are quite important. > >>>> The module seems to be quite independent and there is no problem to > >> move > >>>> it to ignite-extensions. > >>>> So I am +1 for moving to ignite-extensions. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 12:45, Kseniya Romanova >: > >>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> do you know anyone who uses it? > >>>>> > >>>>> I know some teams, who do. At the last Ignite Summit we had a talk > >>>>> featuring Ml module (from the Groovy community). > >>>>> Anyway, We need here the module maintainer opinion > >>>>> + Alex > >>>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:38 PM Andrey Mashenkov < > >>>>> andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> -1 for removal. > >>>>>> 0 for relocation > >>>>>> > >>>>>> imho, TC resources and module size aren't good arguments for > >>>>>> removal/moving. > >>>>>> ML tests could be run nightly. > >>>>>> ML module contains few integrations (with TensorFlow
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
I've filed a ticket and created 2 PRs. After tuning of TC I'm going to merge both of them, if nobody disagrees with it. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-20216 пн, 14 авг. 2023 г. в 22:29, Ivan Daschinsky : > >> * com.github.fommil.netlib:core:1.1.2 - not developed and archived > since 2017. Last version released in 2013 [2] > Moreover, this version is so outdated and JNI extension was so strangely > made (linked to libgfortran3 for example), that native BLAS simply doesn't > work. > Always fallback option is used (f2jBLAS, and it is also outdated). > There is a modern option -- https://github.com/luhenry/netlib, it is used > in spark mllib. > > I have run all tests successfully with it (with few lines changed, of > course) using native blas (libopenblas on ubuntu 22.04) > > So it is possible to state that nobody has run it on native blas. So I > have some concerns about existence of prod like installations with Ignite > ML module > > пт, 11 авг. 2023 г. в 13:14, Николай Ижиков : > >> A few cents to let you know how abandoned ML module is. >> >> 1. Last valuable commit December 9, 2020 - >> https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/04f6a33851d9f7bd269a09fdc2c74485b1e01a8a >> >> 2. Dependencies and current versions of them: >> >> * com.dropbox.core:dropbox-core-sdk:2.1.1 current version is - 5.4.5 [1] >> * com.github.fommil.netlib:core:1.1.2 - not developed and archived >> since 2017. Last version released in 2013 [2] >> * org.apache.commons:commons-rng-core:1.0 current version is 1.5 [3] >> * com.zaxxer:SparseBitSet:1.0 current version is 1.2 [4] >> * ai.catboost:catboost-prediction:0.24 current version is 1.2 [5] >> * ai.h2o:h2o-genmodel:3.26.0.8 current version is 3.42.0.2 [6] >> >> ML community make a huge step forward since 2020. >> So I doubt ML features and tools integrations works as expected nowadays. >> Those type of Ignite features(abandoned or supported partially) has to be >> in extensions. >> >> [1] https://github.com/dropbox/dropbox-sdk-java >> [2] https://github.com/fommil/netlib-java >> [3] https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-rng/commons-rng-core/ >> [4] https://github.com/brettwooldridge/SparseBitSet >> [5] https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/ai.catboost/catboost-prediction >> [6] https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/ai.h2o/h2o-genmodel >> >> >> >> > 11 авг. 2023 г., в 12:19, Kseniya Romanova >> написал(а): >> > >> > As far as I know, the integration was removed from the Tensorflow side. >> > >> > On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 2:04 PM Andrey Mashenkov < >> andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> Ivan, >> >> >> >>> Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. >> >> >> >> Ok. You are right. >> >> Tensorflow is mentioned in docs: docs/_docs/setup.adoc. >> >> >> >> Adapters may require compilation time dependencies, but these >> dependencies >> >> shouldn't be part or release package, >> >> regardless whether the ML module is a part of Ignite or extensions. >> WDYT? >> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 1:36 PM Ivan Daschinsky >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. >> >>> Actually, all integrations are some adapters that allow to load >> >> pretrained >> >>> models (h2o, catboost etc.) >> >>> >> >>> чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 13:08, Ivan Daschinsky : >> >>> >> >>>> I am personally for moving to extensions. Alex has already mentioned >> >> all >> >>>> the reasons why it should be done and all of them are quite >> important. >> >>>> The module seems to be quite independent and there is no problem to >> >> move >> >>>> it to ignite-extensions. >> >>>> So I am +1 for moving to ignite-extensions. >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 12:45, Kseniya Romanova > >: >> >>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> do you know anyone who uses it? >> >>>>> >> >>>>> I know some teams, who do. At the last Ignite Summit we had a talk >> >>>>> featuring Ml module (from the Groovy community). >> >>>>> Anyway, We need here the module maintainer opinion >> >>
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-20216 Also, I've updated dependencies and fixed BLAS issue (tested with intel mkl blas on ubuntu 22.04) ср, 16 авг. 2023 г. в 12:11, Ivan Daschinsky : > I've filed a ticket and created 2 PRs. After tuning of TC I'm going to > merge both of them, if nobody disagrees with it. > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-20216 > > > > пн, 14 авг. 2023 г. в 22:29, Ivan Daschinsky : > >> >> * com.github.fommil.netlib:core:1.1.2 - not developed and archived >> since 2017. Last version released in 2013 [2] >> Moreover, this version is so outdated and JNI extension was so strangely >> made (linked to libgfortran3 for example), that native BLAS simply doesn't >> work. >> Always fallback option is used (f2jBLAS, and it is also outdated). >> There is a modern option -- https://github.com/luhenry/netlib, it is >> used in spark mllib. >> >> I have run all tests successfully with it (with few lines changed, of >> course) using native blas (libopenblas on ubuntu 22.04) >> >> So it is possible to state that nobody has run it on native blas. So I >> have some concerns about existence of prod like installations with Ignite >> ML module >> >> пт, 11 авг. 2023 г. в 13:14, Николай Ижиков : >> >>> A few cents to let you know how abandoned ML module is. >>> >>> 1. Last valuable commit December 9, 2020 - >>> https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/04f6a33851d9f7bd269a09fdc2c74485b1e01a8a >>> >>> 2. Dependencies and current versions of them: >>> >>> * com.dropbox.core:dropbox-core-sdk:2.1.1 current version is - 5.4.5 >>> [1] >>> * com.github.fommil.netlib:core:1.1.2 - not developed and archived >>> since 2017. Last version released in 2013 [2] >>> * org.apache.commons:commons-rng-core:1.0 current version is 1.5 [3] >>> * com.zaxxer:SparseBitSet:1.0 current version is 1.2 [4] >>> * ai.catboost:catboost-prediction:0.24 current version is 1.2 [5] >>> * ai.h2o:h2o-genmodel:3.26.0.8 current version is 3.42.0.2 [6] >>> >>> ML community make a huge step forward since 2020. >>> So I doubt ML features and tools integrations works as expected nowadays. >>> Those type of Ignite features(abandoned or supported partially) has to >>> be in extensions. >>> >>> [1] https://github.com/dropbox/dropbox-sdk-java >>> [2] https://github.com/fommil/netlib-java >>> [3] https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-rng/commons-rng-core/ >>> [4] https://github.com/brettwooldridge/SparseBitSet >>> [5] https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/ai.catboost/catboost-prediction >>> [6] https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/ai.h2o/h2o-genmodel >>> >>> >>> >>> > 11 авг. 2023 г., в 12:19, Kseniya Romanova >>> написал(а): >>> > >>> > As far as I know, the integration was removed from the Tensorflow side. >>> > >>> > On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 2:04 PM Andrey Mashenkov < >>> andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> >> Ivan, >>> >> >>> >>> Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. >>> >> >>> >> Ok. You are right. >>> >> Tensorflow is mentioned in docs: docs/_docs/setup.adoc. >>> >> >>> >> Adapters may require compilation time dependencies, but these >>> dependencies >>> >> shouldn't be part or release package, >>> >> regardless whether the ML module is a part of Ignite or extensions. >>> WDYT? >>> >> >>> >> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 1:36 PM Ivan Daschinsky >>> >> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. >>> >>> Actually, all integrations are some adapters that allow to load >>> >> pretrained >>> >>> models (h2o, catboost etc.) >>> >>> >>> >>> чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 13:08, Ivan Daschinsky : >>> >>> >>> >>>> I am personally for moving to extensions. Alex has already mentioned >>> >> all >>> >>>> the reasons why it should be done and all of them are quite >>> important. >>> >>>> The module seems to be quite independent and there is no problem to >>> >> move >>> >>>> it to ignite-extensions. >>> >>>&
Re: TX code cleanup (MVCC removal)
The plan looks good to me. Some of the tests are in the ODBC test suite, so i can help if needed. ср, 16 авг. 2023 г. в 16:32, Anton Vinogradov : > Igniters, > > I started the TX code cleanup [1] last month and almost finished with the > obvious garbage. > Now, started the code deduplication, I was faced with code overcomplexity > because of unfinished MVCC. > > The community agreed to remove MVCC, but the initial attempt [2] was not > successful because of the impossibility to get rid of 20k+ lines of the > code at once. > So, my proposal is to remove it step by step. > > 1) MVCC tests should be removed from the project > 2) MVCC-related code should be removed from the project by reasonably sized > commits, checking it does not affect the existing tests. > > I'm ready to perform the removal. > > Any objections/tips? > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-19844 > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-13871 > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
ML Extensions suite is ready and it works, all tests from the main module and parsers, all examples -- everything works and all green [1]. The green visa has been obtained. So I am going to merge it tomorrow, if there is no objection. [1] --- https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteExtensions_Tests_Ml/7438920?hideProblemsFromDependencies=false&hideTestsFromDependencies=false
Re: [PROPOSAL] Move Ignite 2.x to JDK11 compilation
+1. It's time to do it at last. пт, 25 авг. 2023 г. в 12:06, Peter Ivanov : > Mostly, yes. > > In other words - proposal is about starting shipping Apache Ignite releases > with JDK11 compiled binaries thus dropping JDK8-10 runtime support. > > пт, 25 авг. 2023 г. в 12:03, Anton Vinogradov : > > > I looks like you're proposing not migration to 2.11 (because it is > already > > supported), but Java 8-9 support dropping. > > > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 11:54 AM Peter Ivanov > wrote: > > > > > Hi, Igniters! > > > > > > > > > I would like to propose the next, if you don't mind me saying, > > > revolutionary step forward in our project: moving Ignite 2.x > compilation > > to > > > JDK11 minimum version. > > > I'd rather not make arguments, pros and cons other that currently exist > > in > > > Java world - you know them better than me. Let's just say that it seems > > > that time has come - consider at least that JDK11 as the LTS version is > > > already about 4 and a half years on the go, and Ignite 3.x started from > > > JDK11 right away. > > > > > > This change may possibly require from us additional efforts on > supporting > > > the last version with JDK8 in terms of releasing additional patches and > > > hotfixes a bit longer than usual. However, this is up to the community > to > > > decide. > > > > > > Currently, Apache Ignite 2.x (with Extensions as well) is already > > prepared > > > for being compiled with JDK11 and almost all tests are passing. If we > > come > > > to an agreement about this proposal and designate the next version that > > > will become the first to provide JDK11 compiled binaries - I am ready > to > > > start the process of updating the TeamCity building project > accordingly. > > > > > > > > > Please, share your thoughts. > > > > > > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
Re: [PROPOSAL] Move Ignite 2.x to JDK11 compilation
+1, sounds reasonable for the open source project. IMHO, Eclipse Temurin JDK is a rule of thumb choice nowadays. ср, 30 авг. 2023 г. в 18:40, Peter Ivanov : > Hi, Igniters! > > As part of this proposal I would also like to discuss the JDK vendors we > are using on our CI platforms TeamCIty. > Historically, Ignite 2.x is being built under Oracle's edition - mostly > because of some features like JFR or similar. > However today we have pretty much solid alternative represented by OpenJDK > and its most popular build Eclipse Temurin, which provides every required > version for our needs (and especially LTS versions 1.8, 11 and 17) with all > necessary updates. > > So, I suggest we update our build agents for TeamCity accordingly, provide > OpenJDK framework for those 3 major versions and discontinue Oracle's > builds. > WDYT? > > пт, 25 авг. 2023 г. в 12:13, Ivan Daschinsky : > > > +1. It's time to do it at last. > > > > пт, 25 авг. 2023 г. в 12:06, Peter Ivanov : > > > > > Mostly, yes. > > > > > > In other words - proposal is about starting shipping Apache Ignite > > releases > > > with JDK11 compiled binaries thus dropping JDK8-10 runtime support. > > > > > > пт, 25 авг. 2023 г. в 12:03, Anton Vinogradov : > > > > > > > I looks like you're proposing not migration to 2.11 (because it is > > > already > > > > supported), but Java 8-9 support dropping. > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 11:54 AM Peter Ivanov > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, Igniters! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to propose the next, if you don't mind me saying, > > > > > revolutionary step forward in our project: moving Ignite 2.x > > > compilation > > > > to > > > > > JDK11 minimum version. > > > > > I'd rather not make arguments, pros and cons other that currently > > exist > > > > in > > > > > Java world - you know them better than me. Let's just say that it > > seems > > > > > that time has come - consider at least that JDK11 as the LTS > version > > is > > > > > already about 4 and a half years on the go, and Ignite 3.x started > > from > > > > > JDK11 right away. > > > > > > > > > > This change may possibly require from us additional efforts on > > > supporting > > > > > the last version with JDK8 in terms of releasing additional patches > > and > > > > > hotfixes a bit longer than usual. However, this is up to the > > community > > > to > > > > > decide. > > > > > > > > > > Currently, Apache Ignite 2.x (with Extensions as well) is already > > > > prepared > > > > > for being compiled with JDK11 and almost all tests are passing. If > we > > > > come > > > > > to an agreement about this proposal and designate the next version > > that > > > > > will become the first to provide JDK11 compiled binaries - I am > ready > > > to > > > > > start the process of updating the TeamCity building project > > > accordingly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please, share your thoughts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > > > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
PRs have been merged. Many thanks for review to Nikita Amelchev and Aleksei Zinoviev пт, 25 авг. 2023 г. в 17:05, Nikita Amelchev : > +1 for moving to extensions > > This module is good as an extension: > - does not depend on the internal Ignite API, > - the released module will be compatible with any required version of > Ignite using the provided dependency scope. > > Ivan, I have reviewed your patch, LGTM. > > чт, 17 авг. 2023 г. в 17:06, Dmitry Pavlov : > > > > +1 for Apache Way in decision making (it states there should not be time > pressure for the decision making). > > > > 0 for removal > > 0 for moving to extensions > > > > but since Aleksei is an expert here, it makes sense to me to wait for > him. > > > > Sincerely, > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > On 2023/08/16 17:32:55 Aleksei Zinovev wrote: > > > Hi, I have objection for fast merging, (not for moving) as a module > > > maintainer. > > > > > > I never used ignite extension, need a time to be familiar with it and > test > > > the pr. > > > > > > Please postpone it till 10 september. > > > > > > I don't understand reasons to do it so fast. I suppose it's ok to wait > > > 15-20 days with PR > > > > > > Thanks for collaboration and doing this work. > > > > > > > -- > Best wishes, > Amelchev Nikita > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
Remove sonar step from PR checks
Hi! It seems that these checks simply don't work, at least for PRs. Yep, they work ok for master, but some of warnings from these tools seem to be just rubbish, like this one -- [1]. We should either do a tremendous job to fix these issues or simply disable these checks. Simply ignoring is not an option, I suppose. I think we should at least remove PR checks. What do you think? --- [1] --- https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?resolved=false&sinceLeakPeriod=true&types=CODE_SMELL&id=apache_ignite&open=AYi0-_4zULfXwSrNiDt_ -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
Re: Remove sonar step from PR checks
Sonar shows lots of false positives. We cannot add //NOSONAR to all of them -- it is a tremendous job. But constantly red checks lead to ignoring of all checks. Simply nobody pay attention to them. It is not acceptable and contradicts to the idea of running these checks. чт, 28 сент. 2023 г. в 13:43, Anton Vinogradov : > Removing a quality tool it not a good idea. > AFAIU, we have two issues here: > > 1) Sonar always failed at PR because ot token issues > Error: Failed to execute goal > org.sonarsource.scanner.maven:sonar-maven-plugin:3.9.1.2184:sonar > (default-cli) on project apache-ignite: Project not found. Please check the > 'sonar.projectKey' and 'sonar.organization' properties, the 'SONAR_TOKEN' > environment variable, or contact the project administrator -> [Help 1] > > 2) Sonar shows *correct* hints for a *bad* code we have. > > Both issues should be solved properly, not by removing the quality tool. > > My huge -1 here > > On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 1:36 PM Ivan Daschinsky > wrote: > > > Hi! It seems that these checks simply don't work, at least for PRs. > > Yep, they work ok for master, but some of warnings from these tools seem > to > > be just rubbish, like > > this one -- [1]. > > We should either do a tremendous job to fix these issues or simply > disable > > these checks. > > > > Simply ignoring is not an option, I suppose. I think we should at least > > remove PR checks. > > What do you think? > > > > --- > > [1] --- > > > > > https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?resolved=false&sinceLeakPeriod=true&types=CODE_SMELL&id=apache_ignite&open=AYi0-_4zULfXwSrNiDt_ > > > > > > > > -- > > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > > > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
Re: Remove sonar step from PR checks
I have already shown one example. Here is another one -- https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?resolved=false&types=BUG&id=apache_ignite&open=AYdcaDNkmXUD5o3U1M1d Also, it is required to exclude from check examples, tests, jmh benchmarks and so on. A lot of useless information doesn't help to find new issues in new code. And this is one of the most important goals of such a tool. чт, 28 сент. 2023 г. в 13:58, Anton Vinogradov : > > Sonar shows lots of false positives. > Thats not a true. > We have a *bad* code, unfortunatelly, and that's the *reason* of such > hints. > Could you please show "a lot" of false positives? > The url you provided contains a lot of *correct* hints. > > > But constantly red checks lead to ignoring of all checks. > I'm checking each report, and fixed a lot of dummy issues thanks to it. > > On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 1:49 PM Ivan Daschinsky > wrote: > > > Sonar shows lots of false positives. We cannot add //NOSONAR to all of > them > > -- it is a tremendous job. > > But constantly red checks lead to ignoring of all checks. Simply nobody > pay > > attention to them. It is not acceptable and contradicts to > > the idea of running these checks. > > > > чт, 28 сент. 2023 г. в 13:43, Anton Vinogradov : > > > > > Removing a quality tool it not a good idea. > > > AFAIU, we have two issues here: > > > > > > 1) Sonar always failed at PR because ot token issues > > > Error: Failed to execute goal > > > org.sonarsource.scanner.maven:sonar-maven-plugin:3.9.1.2184:sonar > > > (default-cli) on project apache-ignite: Project not found. Please check > > the > > > 'sonar.projectKey' and 'sonar.organization' properties, the > 'SONAR_TOKEN' > > > environment variable, or contact the project administrator -> [Help 1] > > > > > > 2) Sonar shows *correct* hints for a *bad* code we have. > > > > > > Both issues should be solved properly, not by removing the quality > tool. > > > > > > My huge -1 here > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 1:36 PM Ivan Daschinsky > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi! It seems that these checks simply don't work, at least for PRs. > > > > Yep, they work ok for master, but some of warnings from these tools > > seem > > > to > > > > be just rubbish, like > > > > this one -- [1]. > > > > We should either do a tremendous job to fix these issues or simply > > > disable > > > > these checks. > > > > > > > > Simply ignoring is not an option, I suppose. I think we should at > least > > > > remove PR checks. > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > --- > > > > [1] --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?resolved=false&sinceLeakPeriod=true&types=CODE_SMELL&id=apache_ignite&open=AYi0-_4zULfXwSrNiDt_ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > > > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
Re: Remove sonar step from PR checks
No, I just think that we should remove 1 yaml file unless the sonar check is not properly configured. чт, 28 сент. 2023 г. в 14:09, Anton Vinogradov : > Ivan, > According to your proposal, should we also remove the "Platform .NET" tests > [1] since they are always failed instead of fixing them? > > [1] > > https://ci2.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_PlatformNetCoreLinux?branch=%3Cdefault%3E&mode=builds > > On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 1:57 PM Anton Vinogradov wrote: > > > > Sonar shows lots of false positives. > > Thats not a true. > > We have a *bad* code, unfortunatelly, and that's the *reason* of such > > hints. > > Could you please show "a lot" of false positives? > > The url you provided contains a lot of *correct* hints. > > > > > But constantly red checks lead to ignoring of all checks. > > I'm checking each report, and fixed a lot of dummy issues thanks to it. > > > > On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 1:49 PM Ivan Daschinsky > > wrote: > > > >> Sonar shows lots of false positives. We cannot add //NOSONAR to all of > >> them > >> -- it is a tremendous job. > >> But constantly red checks lead to ignoring of all checks. Simply nobody > >> pay > >> attention to them. It is not acceptable and contradicts to > >> the idea of running these checks. > >> > >> чт, 28 сент. 2023 г. в 13:43, Anton Vinogradov : > >> > >> > Removing a quality tool it not a good idea. > >> > AFAIU, we have two issues here: > >> > > >> > 1) Sonar always failed at PR because ot token issues > >> > Error: Failed to execute goal > >> > org.sonarsource.scanner.maven:sonar-maven-plugin:3.9.1.2184:sonar > >> > (default-cli) on project apache-ignite: Project not found. Please > check > >> the > >> > 'sonar.projectKey' and 'sonar.organization' properties, the > >> 'SONAR_TOKEN' > >> > environment variable, or contact the project administrator -> [Help 1] > >> > > >> > 2) Sonar shows *correct* hints for a *bad* code we have. > >> > > >> > Both issues should be solved properly, not by removing the quality > tool. > >> > > >> > My huge -1 here > >> > > >> > On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 1:36 PM Ivan Daschinsky > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > Hi! It seems that these checks simply don't work, at least for PRs. > >> > > Yep, they work ok for master, but some of warnings from these tools > >> seem > >> > to > >> > > be just rubbish, like > >> > > this one -- [1]. > >> > > We should either do a tremendous job to fix these issues or simply > >> > disable > >> > > these checks. > >> > > > >> > > Simply ignoring is not an option, I suppose. I think we should at > >> least > >> > > remove PR checks. > >> > > What do you think? > >> > > > >> > > --- > >> > > [1] --- > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?resolved=false&sinceLeakPeriod=true&types=CODE_SMELL&id=apache_ignite&open=AYi0-_4zULfXwSrNiDt_ > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > -- > >> > > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > >> > > > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
Re: Remove sonar step from PR checks
>> No, I just think that we should remove 1 yaml file unless the sonar check is not properly configured. No, I just think that we should remove 1 yaml file unless the sonar check is properly configured. -- corrected чт, 28 сент. 2023 г. в 14:12, Ivan Daschinsky : > No, I just think that we should remove 1 yaml file unless the sonar check > is not properly configured. > > чт, 28 сент. 2023 г. в 14:09, Anton Vinogradov : > >> Ivan, >> According to your proposal, should we also remove the "Platform .NET" >> tests >> [1] since they are always failed instead of fixing them? >> >> [1] >> >> https://ci2.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_PlatformNetCoreLinux?branch=%3Cdefault%3E&mode=builds >> >> On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 1:57 PM Anton Vinogradov wrote: >> >> > > Sonar shows lots of false positives. >> > Thats not a true. >> > We have a *bad* code, unfortunatelly, and that's the *reason* of such >> > hints. >> > Could you please show "a lot" of false positives? >> > The url you provided contains a lot of *correct* hints. >> > >> > > But constantly red checks lead to ignoring of all checks. >> > I'm checking each report, and fixed a lot of dummy issues thanks to it. >> > >> > On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 1:49 PM Ivan Daschinsky >> > wrote: >> > >> >> Sonar shows lots of false positives. We cannot add //NOSONAR to all of >> >> them >> >> -- it is a tremendous job. >> >> But constantly red checks lead to ignoring of all checks. Simply nobody >> >> pay >> >> attention to them. It is not acceptable and contradicts to >> >> the idea of running these checks. >> >> >> >> чт, 28 сент. 2023 г. в 13:43, Anton Vinogradov : >> >> >> >> > Removing a quality tool it not a good idea. >> >> > AFAIU, we have two issues here: >> >> > >> >> > 1) Sonar always failed at PR because ot token issues >> >> > Error: Failed to execute goal >> >> > org.sonarsource.scanner.maven:sonar-maven-plugin:3.9.1.2184:sonar >> >> > (default-cli) on project apache-ignite: Project not found. Please >> check >> >> the >> >> > 'sonar.projectKey' and 'sonar.organization' properties, the >> >> 'SONAR_TOKEN' >> >> > environment variable, or contact the project administrator -> [Help >> 1] >> >> > >> >> > 2) Sonar shows *correct* hints for a *bad* code we have. >> >> > >> >> > Both issues should be solved properly, not by removing the quality >> tool. >> >> > >> >> > My huge -1 here >> >> > >> >> > On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 1:36 PM Ivan Daschinsky > > >> >> > wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > Hi! It seems that these checks simply don't work, at least for PRs. >> >> > > Yep, they work ok for master, but some of warnings from these tools >> >> seem >> >> > to >> >> > > be just rubbish, like >> >> > > this one -- [1]. >> >> > > We should either do a tremendous job to fix these issues or simply >> >> > disable >> >> > > these checks. >> >> > > >> >> > > Simply ignoring is not an option, I suppose. I think we should at >> >> least >> >> > > remove PR checks. >> >> > > What do you think? >> >> > > >> >> > > --- >> >> > > [1] --- >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> >> https://sonarcloud.io/project/issues?resolved=false&sinceLeakPeriod=true&types=CODE_SMELL&id=apache_ignite&open=AYi0-_4zULfXwSrNiDt_ >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > -- >> >> > > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy >> >> >> > >> > > > -- > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
Re: New Apache Ignite PMC member: Nikita Amelchev
Congratulations, you deserve it On Wed, Nov 22, 2023, 18:10 Nikita Amelchev wrote: > Thank you everyone, I'm very pleased! > > ср, 22 нояб. 2023 г. в 15:46, Ilya Shishkov : > > > > Congratulations, Nikita! > > > > ср, 22 нояб. 2023 г. в 14:53, Maksim Timonin : > > > > > > Congratulations! > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 2:29 PM Anton Vinogradov > wrote: > > > > > > > Welcome aboard :) > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 2:11 PM Maxim Muzafarov > wrote: > > > > > > > > > My congratulations, Nikita! > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 21 Nov 2023 at 15:20, Dmitriy Pavlov > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello Igniters, > > > > > > > > > > > > The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Ignite > > > > > > has invited Nikita Amelchev to become a member of PMC and we are > > > > pleased > > > > > > to announce that he has accepted. > > > > > > > > > > > > We appreciate his constant efforts in improving Apache Ignite > code, as > > > > > well > > > > > > as efforts in preparing 2 major releases. > > > > > > > > > > > > A PMC member helps manage and guide the direction of the project. > > > > > > > > > > > > Congratulations on your new role! Keep the pace! > > > > > > > > > > > > Best Regards > > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > > > on behalf of Apache Ignite PMC > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Best wishes, > Amelchev Nikita >
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite 2.16.0 RC0
+1 from me (binding) 1. Checked checksums 2. Checked C++/ODBC driver: built from source and ran examples on Ubuntu 22.04/gcc 11.4.0/OpenJDK-Temurin 17.0.8 3. Checked ODBC driver with pyodbc (python 3.11 + pyodbc 4.0.35). Checked on calcite and H2 engines. (Ubuntu 22.04) вт, 19 дек. 2023 г. в 13:54, Zhenya Stanilovsky : > > Finally i build it (some local maven problems). > Check compilation, run calcite tests. > +1 (non-binding) > > > > >> > >>>Hello, Zhenya. > >>> > >>>Java profiles should be activated automatically (on reload maven > >>>project). Which JDK are you using? Is the project built from maven? > >>> > >>>I can't reproduce on HotSpot 1.8.0_201-b09, OpenJDK 21+35-2513. > >>> > >>>вт, 19 дек. 2023г. в 11:16, Zhenya Stanilovsky < > arzamas...@mail.ru.invalid >: > > > Hi, probably it`s a kind of problem from my side, but cloning by tag > and further steps: > * change profile to java-8 > * Reload all maven Projects > * Try to run: ScriptTestSuite will raise guava dependency problem: > > /ignite/internal/processors/query/calcite/sql/IgniteSqlRollback.java:20:33 > java: package com.google.common.collect does not exist > --- > * change profile to java-9 > * reload > * the same problem : > > modules/core/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/testframework/GridTestUtils.java:79:33 > java: package com.google.common.collect does not exist > > probably i need to clean all and try to rebuild from scratch .. for > now it`s not clear for me. > > >+1 > > > >- Started the node from binaries > >- Tested .NET examples > >- Tested NuGet packages > > > >On Sun, Dec 17, 2023 at 2:48PM Nikita Amelchev < > namelc...@apache.org > > >wrote: > > > >> Dear Community, > >> > >> The release candidate is ready. > >> > >> I have uploaded release candidate to > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/2.16.0-rc0 > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/packages_2.16.0-rc0 > >> > >> The following staging can be used for testing: > >> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheignite-1559 > >> > >> Tag name is 2.16.0-rc0: > >> https://github.com/apache/ignite/releases/tag/2.16.0-rc0 > >> > >> 2.16.0 most important changes: > >> * Cache dumps; > >> * Calcite engine: added hints, became more stable, covered with > >> diagnostic tools; > >> * Fixes to support JDK 14-21; > >> * Cluster Management API (IEP-81); > >> * Java thin client: Service Awareness feature; > >> etc. > >> > >> RELEASE NOTES: > >> > >> > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob_plain;f=RELEASE_NOTES.txt;hb=ignite-2.16 > >> > >> Complete list of resolved issues: > >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-19650?jql=(project%20%3D%20%27Ignite%27%20AND%20fixVersion%20is%20not%20empty%20AND%20fixVersion%20in%20(%272.16%27))%20AND%20(component%20is%20EMPTY%20OR%20component%20not%20in%20(documentation))%20and%20status%20in%20(%27CLOSED%27%2C%20%27RESOLVED%27)%20AND%20resolution%20in(Fixed%2C%20Done%2C%20Implemented%2C%20Delivered)%20ORDER%20BY%20priority > >> > >> DEVNOTES > >> > >> > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=blob_plain;f=DEVNOTES.txt;hb=ignite-2.16 > >> > >> The vote is formal, see voting guidelines > >> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html > >> > >> +1 - to accept Apache Ignite 2.16.0-rc0 > >> 0 - don't care either way > >> -1 - DO NOT accept Apache Ignite 2.16.0-rc0 (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 > >> > >> This vote will be open till Sun December 24, 2023, 15:00 UTC. > >> > >> > https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/vote?iso=20231224T15&p0=0&msg=VOTE+on+the+Apache+Ignite+Release+2.16.0+RC0&font=sanserif > >> > >> -- > >> Best wishes, > >> Amelchev Nikita > >> > > > > > >>> > >>> > >>>-- > >>>Best wishes, > >>>Amelchev Nikita > >> > >> > >> > >>
Re: Ignite Extensions
Hi, Steven. Currently I am preparing an initial release of the ML extension. Just thinking about creating a new thread and here you are :) The release branch is ready, I just need to prepare artifacts and upload them to staging. Then I am going to start the vote thread. https://github.com/apache/ignite-extensions/tree/release/ignite-ml-ext-1.0.0 пн, 22 янв. 2024 г. в 18:15, Stephen Darlington : > Hi all, > > With Ignite 2.16 now out, is there any movement towards releasing some of > the Ignite Extensions? > > We have a question in the user mailing list about the ML extensions, which > were moved from core to extensions. And I'd like to see the SpringBoot > extensions released so that we can support current versions (3.x does not > work with Ignite out of the box). > > Regards, > Stephen > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
Re: Ignite Extensions
Also, I have updated dependencies and fixed native BLAS integration (tested on ubuntu 22.04 with Intel MKL) пн, 22 янв. 2024 г. в 19:18, Ivan Daschinsky : > Hi, Steven. Currently I am preparing an initial release of the ML > extension. Just thinking about creating a new thread and here you are :) > The release branch is ready, I just need to prepare artifacts and upload > them to staging. Then I am going to start the vote thread. > > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-extensions/tree/release/ignite-ml-ext-1.0.0 > > пн, 22 янв. 2024 г. в 18:15, Stephen Darlington : > >> Hi all, >> >> With Ignite 2.16 now out, is there any movement towards releasing some of >> the Ignite Extensions? >> >> We have a question in the user mailing list about the ML extensions, which >> were moved from core to extensions. And I'd like to see the SpringBoot >> extensions released so that we can support current versions (3.x does not >> work with Ignite out of the box). >> >> Regards, >> Stephen >> > > > -- > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
[VOTE] Release Apache Ignite ML Extension 1.0.0 RC1
Dear Community, I am happy to start this voting thread. The release candidate have been uploaded to: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/ignite-extensions/ignite-ml-ext-1.0.0-rc1/ The staging maven repository is here: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheignite-1560 The release notes are here: https://github.com/apache/ignite-extensions/blob/ignite-ml-ext-1.0.0-rc1/modules/ml-ext/ml/RELEASE_NOTES.txt The release checker results are here: https://github.com/apache/ignite-extensions/actions/runs/7626105841 The TC run is here: https://ci2.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteExtensions_Tests_Ml/7716025?hideProblemsFromDependencies=false&hideTestsFromDependencies=false The vote is formal, see voting guidelines https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html +1 - to accept 0 - don't care either way -1 - DO NOT accept (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 This vote will be open for at least 4 days till Fri Jan 26, 2022, 17:00 UTC+3. Please, write me down the thread if you need additional time to check the release.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ignite ML Extension 1.0.0 RC1
Sorry for my mistake, this vote will be open till Jan 26, 2024 вт, 23 янв. 2024 г. в 16:27, Ivan Daschinsky : > Dear Community, > I am happy to start this voting thread. > > The release candidate have been uploaded to: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ignite/ignite-extensions/ignite-ml-ext-1.0.0-rc1/ > > The staging maven repository is here: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheignite-1560 > > The release notes are here: > > https://github.com/apache/ignite-extensions/blob/ignite-ml-ext-1.0.0-rc1/modules/ml-ext/ml/RELEASE_NOTES.txt > > The release checker results are here: > https://github.com/apache/ignite-extensions/actions/runs/7626105841 > > The TC run is here: > > https://ci2.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteExtensions_Tests_Ml/7716025?hideProblemsFromDependencies=false&hideTestsFromDependencies=false > > > > The vote is formal, see voting guidelines > https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html > > +1 - to accept > 0 - don't care either way > -1 - DO NOT accept (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 > > > This vote will be open for at least 4 days till Fri Jan 26, 2022, > 17:00 UTC+3. Please, write me down the thread if you need > additional time to check the release. > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
[VOTE] Release Apache Ignite ML Extension 1.0.0 RC1
Dear community, The release of Apache Ignite ML Extension 1.0.0. RC1 has been accepted Vote result: +1 -- 4 votes (4 binding votes) 0 -- 0 votes -1 -- 0 votes +1 votes: Nikita Amelchev Alex Plehanov Maxim Muzafarov Alexey Zinoviev The new release will be announced soon.
[ANNOUNCE] Apache Ignite ML Extension 1.0.0 released
The Apache Ignite Community is pleased to announce the release of Apache Ignite ML Extension 1.0.0. You can download source release here: https://downloads.apache.org/ignite/ignite-extensions/ignite-ml-ext/1.0.0/ Artifacts can be downloaded from here: https://central.sonatype.com/artifact/org.apache.ignite/ignite-ml-ext Please let us know if you encounter any problems: https://ignite.apache.org/community/resources.html#ask --- Best Regards Ivan Daschinsky on behalf of Apache Ignite PMC
Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Ignite ML Extension 1.0.0 released
All parsers also have been uploaded to maven central: https://central.sonatype.com/artifact/org.apache.ignite/ignite-ml-ext/dependents пн, 29 янв. 2024 г. в 12:00, Ivan Daschinsky : > The Apache Ignite Community is pleased to announce the release of Apache > Ignite ML Extension 1.0.0. > > You can download source release here: > https://downloads.apache.org/ignite/ignite-extensions/ignite-ml-ext/1.0.0/ > > Artifacts can be downloaded from here: > https://central.sonatype.com/artifact/org.apache.ignite/ignite-ml-ext > > Please let us know if you encounter any problems: > https://ignite.apache.org/community/resources.html#ask > > --- > Best Regards > Ivan Daschinsky > on behalf of Apache Ignite PMC >
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-14511) Putting bytes to cache converted to string by default.
Ivan Daschinsky created IGNITE-14511:
Summary: Putting bytes to cache converted to string by default.
Key: IGNITE-14511
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14511
Project: Ignite
Issue Type: Bug
Components: python, thin client
Affects Versions: python-0.3.4
Reporter: Ivan Daschinsky
Currently, when you put {{b'\x01\x02}} to cache without a type hint, you
will get string {{'\x01\x02'}}. It is very confusing. If you put {{bytes}} with
{{value_hint=ByteArrayObject}} you will get {{bytearray}}. As for me, it is
quite
strange to return mutable {{bytearray}} instead of {{bytes}}
I suggest following:
1. By default treat {{bytes}} as {{ByteArrayObject}}
2. Method {{to_python}} of {{ByteArrayObject}} to {{bytes}}, not to
{{bytearray}}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-14518) Generated PKG_INFO of package doesn't contains license info and long description
Ivan Daschinsky created IGNITE-14518: Summary: Generated PKG_INFO of package doesn't contains license info and long description Key: IGNITE-14518 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14518 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Bug Components: python, thin client Reporter: Ivan Daschinsky -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-14564) Add LICENSE and NOTICE file to all packages
Ivan Daschinsky created IGNITE-14564: Summary: Add LICENSE and NOTICE file to all packages Key: IGNITE-14564 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14564 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Task Components: python, thin client Affects Versions: python-0.4.0 Reporter: Ivan Daschinsky We should add these files to all artifacts according to Apache release policy -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-14595) ExpiryPolicy support to python thin client
Ivan Daschinsky created IGNITE-14595: Summary: ExpiryPolicy support to python thin client Key: IGNITE-14595 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-14595 Project: Ignite Issue Type: New Feature Components: python, thin client Reporter: Ivan Daschinsky It's of a crucial importance to add support for expiration policy in python client. This is on of the most used feature of any cache. -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)
