Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for Apache Geode version 1.11.0.RC3.

+1 for a short-term solution in 1.11 while we discuss a more complete proposal for 1.12 On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 10:09 PM Jacob Barrett wrote: > I think we can tone down the inflammatory statements. It is well > established that, like any legacy code base, Geode has issues. One of them > is a less

Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for Apache Geode version 1.11.0.RC3.

I think we can tone down the inflammatory statements. It is well established that, like any legacy code base, Geode has issues. One of them is a less than ideal set of APIs for certain tasks. Whatever the issues were in the past with getting APIs adjusted to suit the SDG project should be left i

Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for Apache Geode version 1.11.0.RC3.

If you must know, there are important test cases in both SBDG and SSDG to be able to register (and subsequently unregister) the "mock" Pool with the PoolManager, which unfortunately is a consequence of the SDG PoolFactoryBean's design being reliant on the PoolManager (to resolve the Pool), and to s

Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for Apache Geode version 1.11.0.RC3.

@udo, if one needs to use a strong word like 'offender', then the offender is the one using an internal API. Geode is under no obligation to maintain or "fix" these for any project. Is there a Jira, github issue, or pull-request to promote the internal class to the public space? Is there a feature

Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for Apache Geode version 1.11.0.RC3.

@Dan, I will add my -1 to this. I understand your argument of "let's solve the problem by removing  the offender". But in reality who is the offender? Is it the one class that is using an "internal" api OR is it the implementation itself that is to tightly coupled that extending it is impos

Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for Apache Geode version 1.11.0.RC3.

> > Quite frankly the reasons STDG (or dependent projects downstream like SDG, > SBDG, SSDG) are doing what it is (they are) doing is irrelevant to point > articulated in the description of GEODE-753. > What bothers me here is not your suggestions in GEODE-1753, but the fact that you are vetoing a

Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for Apache Geode version 1.11.0.RC3.

See comment [1] on ticket, GEODE-7531 [2]. Quite frankly the reasons STDG (or depe

Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for Apache Geode version 1.11.0.RC3.

On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 2:11 PM John Blum wrote: > This is not a test failure in SDG. SDG builds fine with Apache Geode 1.11 > (and all tests pass), as I indicated above in my origin +0 vote. > > This is a definitive problem for SBDG when using STDG to mock Apache Geode > resources/objects, which

Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for Apache Geode version 1.11.0.RC3.

So, outstanding issues that I see right now are GEODE-7531 GEODE-7537 GEODE-7538 Thanks, Mark > On Dec 4, 2019, at 2:11 PM, John Blum wrote: > > This is not a test failure in SDG. SDG builds fine with Apache Geode 1.11 > (and all tests pass), as I indicated above in my origin +0 vote. > > T

Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for Apache Geode version 1.11.0.RC3.

This is not a test failure in SDG. SDG builds fine with Apache Geode 1.11 (and all tests pass), as I indicated above in my origin +0 vote. This is a definitive problem for SBDG when using STDG to mock Apache Geode resources/objects, which is caused by GEODE-7531. Either way, the design/code chan

Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for Apache Geode version 1.11.0.RC3.

On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 11:16 AM John Blum wrote: > I am changing my vote to -1! > > I have filed GEODE-7531 > [1], > which is a serious blocking issue for all things *Spring* for Apache > Geode. This issue alone is currently preventing me from u

Re: Request for addition to 1.11 RC: GEODE-7454: Docs for Cluster Management Service

Go for it > On Dec 4, 2019, at 11:32 AM, Dave Barnes wrote: > > Following up: Thanks for incorporating this docs-only change into the > release candidate. > When testing, I realized I need to add a template variable to the config > file to make this work. > Anyone object to me submitting a 1-lin

Re: Request for addition to 1.11 RC: GEODE-7454: Docs for Cluster Management Service

Following up: Thanks for incorporating this docs-only change into the release candidate. When testing, I realized I need to add a template variable to the config file to make this work. Anyone object to me submitting a 1-line change in each of the 2 affected files? Again, docs only, no code change.

Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for Apache Geode version 1.11.0.RC3.

Just an update… 1.11.0.RC3 is not going out. We are in a holding pattern on RC4 due to the issue that Lynn mentioned and other issues found. This is another strike against that RC3 release. If the contributors deem the fix necessary ( I assume they would ), we will put in a fix for that as we

Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for Apache Geode version 1.11.0.RC3.

> On Dec 4, 2019, at 9:24 AM, John Blum wrote: > > Anyway, it because Apache Geode's public API is broken/incomplete > (especially from a framework/tooling perspective, but even an application > perspective in many cases) that SDG must rely on certain (non-protected) > "internal" APIs. It tur

Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for Apache Geode version 1.11.0.RC3.

I am changing my vote to -1! I have filed GEODE-7531 [1], which is a serious blocking issue for all things *Spring* for Apache Geode. This issue alone is currently preventing me from upgrading *Spring Boot for Apache Geode* (SBDG) to Apache Geode

Re: [DISCUSSION] De/un-deprecate IndexType ENUM

This proposal seems reasonable to me On 12/3/19 10:19 AM, Joris Melchior wrote: Ah, that makes sense. I will update! On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 12:41 PM Alexander Murmann wrote: Joris, the "to be reviewed by" field is for a target date by which to wrap up the discussion. Do you mind updating th

Re: [VOTE] Release candidate for Apache Geode version 1.11.0.RC3.

Indeed, both dependencies (geode-logging & geode-serialization) are listed as runtime dependencies. *> Is SDG creating its dependencies manually?* I am not quite following your thinking on this question. Of course SDG uses transitive dependencies. SDG must declare direct dependencies on geode-co

Re: WAN replication issue in cloud native environments

Alberto, Something else to think about SNI based routing. I believe Mario might be working on adding SNI to Geode - he at least had a proposal that he e-mailed out. Basics are the destination host is in the SNI field and the proxy can inspect and route the request to the right service instance.

Re: Wiki access

Done. You should have access now. Thanks! -Dan On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 4:05 AM Mario Kevo wrote: > Hi All, > > Can I have access to edit the Geode Wiki? > My username is "mario.kevo". > > Thanks, > Mario >

Wiki access

Hi All, Can I have access to edit the Geode Wiki? My username is "mario.kevo". Thanks, Mario

RE: WAN replication issue in cloud native environments

Hi Jacob, Yes,we are using LoadBalancer service type. But note the problem is not the transport layer but on Geode as GW senders are complaining “sender-2-parallel : Could not connect due to: There are no active servers.” when one of the servers in the receiving cluster is killed. So, there is