[GitHub] ignite pull request: IGNITE-1622 - Fixed cache.clear() with near c...

GitHub user vkulichenko opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/153 IGNITE-1622 - Fixed cache.clear() with near cache You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/vkulichenko/incubator-ignite ignite-1622

Re: [VOTE] Establishing duration of Apache Ignite Chair rotation

+1 (binding) On 10/14/2015 1:30 AM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: Hi! As discussed in the "[DISCUSS] PMC Chair rotation" thread last month, I propose that we adopt a rule allowing for a Apache Ignite Chair rotation on a yearly basis. The proposed policy is this: - a position of an Apache Ignite

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-1669) We have broken UI for query result with many (in my case 40) columns

Pavel Konstantinov created IGNITE-1669: -- Summary: We have broken UI for query result with many (in my case 40) columns Key: IGNITE-1669 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1669

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-1670) "Loading..." overlay has incorrect position (right-top) - should be in the center of the tabe

Pavel Konstantinov created IGNITE-1670: -- Summary: "Loading..." overlay has incorrect position (right-top) - should be in the center of the tabe Key: IGNITE-1670 URL:

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-1672) The first column of exported table has fully qualified name, but others columns aren't

Pavel Konstantinov created IGNITE-1672: -- Summary: The first column of exported table has fully qualified name, but others columns aren't Key: IGNITE-1672 URL:

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-1667) Load metadata: we should handle case when connection with DB was lost after user clicked Save

Pavel Konstantinov created IGNITE-1667: -- Summary: Load metadata: we should handle case when connection with DB was lost after user clicked Save Key: IGNITE-1667 URL:

hello

Hello everyone, I want to to contribute to ignite and learning, nice to meet you!

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-1661) memory leak

wjw465150 created IGNITE-1661: - Summary: memory leak Key: IGNITE-1661 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1661 Project: Ignite Issue Type: Bug Components: cache

Re: .Net: separate methods for async operations.

> I disagree here. I think consistency matters. > Moreover, based on the previous .NET examples you have provided, I do not see much difference between .NET and Java, other than different syntax What really matters is consistency with the rest of .NET platform. There are clear design guidelines:

Re: .Net: separate methods for async operations.

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:56 PM, Vladimir Ozerov wrote: > Dima, > > I do not like JSR 107 v1.1 approach. First, it is not user friendly. > Second, it is prone to deadlock/starvation problems we are currently > discussing in another thread because these "Collectors" are

Re: .Net: separate methods for async operations.

> Do we have a choice here? We will have to implement JSR107 anyway. Let's > just make sure that whatever approach we come up with does not contradict > JSR107 functionality. As I understand from JSR107 mailing list, nobodody really understand what the next version will be about. For now they are

Re: hello

Hi, 姜为 , Welcome to the Ignite community! Please properly subscribe to the dev list by sending email to dev-subscr...@ignite.apache.org and following instructions in the reply. For resources and information on how to get involved, you

IgniteEvents.remoteListen() semantics

Igniters, I was looking at IgniteEvents.remoteListen() and failed to understand how it works. Can someone explain me semantics please? 1) What is the point of *local* listener in the method "*remote*Listen"? Are we collecting events remotely and send them to the local node? If yes, then this is

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-1663) .Net: Check why node ID is nullable in IEvents and IMessaging interfaces.

Vladimir Ozerov created IGNITE-1663: --- Summary: .Net: Check why node ID is nullable in IEvents and IMessaging interfaces. Key: IGNITE-1663 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1663

Re: .Net: separate methods for async operations.

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 1:54 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > > I disagree here. I think consistency matters. > > Moreover, based on the previous .NET examples you have provided, I do not > see much difference between .NET and Java, other than different syntax > > What really

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-1664) .Net: Review generic type arguments in the API

Pavel Tupitsyn created IGNITE-1664: --- Summary: .Net: Review generic type arguments in the API Key: IGNITE-1664 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1664 Project: Ignite Issue

Re: IgniteEvents.remoteListen() semantics

Related question: What does first UUID arg mean in "IgniteBiPredicate locLsnr"? It can either be event source node id, which is already included in Event interface, or local node id, which does not make much sense. On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 1:57 PM, Vladimir Ozerov

[GitHub] ignite pull request: IGNITE-1662 .Net: Improve docs for IEvents an...

GitHub user ptupitsyn opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/148 IGNITE-1662 .Net: Improve docs for IEvents and IMessaging. You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/ptupitsyn/ignite ignite-1662

IGFS: properties to use for implicit mkdirs

Currently we have #create, #append , #mkdirs operations that implicitly create parent directories if they are absent. Now #mkdirs uses the properties passed in for the implicitly created directories if they are not null, and uses default properties (with 0777 permission flag) if the properties are

Re: .Net: separate methods for async operations.

Raul, Yes, my design is an attempt to address exactly the problems you've mentioned (get rid of state, better type safety, cleaner code). I'm not an expert in reactive streams, but I believe Future is the most low level feature possible here, so higher level abstractions can be build using it.

Fwd: .Net: separate methods for async operations.

I like this approach. To me, the current API is messy and hacky, and even "spiritually" contradictory, may I say. The whole raison d'être of the current approach seems to be to achieve parity of APIs of IgniteCompute, IgniteMessaging, etc. in sync and async modes. However, truth of the matter is

Re: .Net: separate methods for async operations.

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Raul Kripalani wrote: > I like this approach. > > To me, the current API is messy and hacky, and even "spiritually" > contradictory, may I say. The whole raison d'être of the current approach > seems to be to achieve parity of APIs of

[GitHub] ignite pull request: Ignite 1526 IBM JDK is not fully supported by...

GitHub user agura opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/151 Ignite 1526 IBM JDK is not fully supported by the platfrom You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/agura/incubator-ignite ignite-1526

IGNITE-1371

Hi guys, I am working on IGNITE-1371 issue and almost done with it. Could you please assign me appropriate right to the issue, so that I'll be able to create a patch and send it to you. Thanks, Igor Rudyak

Re: IGFS concurrency issue

Ah, that makes sense - sorry I jumped to obviously wrong conclusion based on existing HDFS secondary storage implementation. Cos On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 09:41AM, Vladimir Ozerov wrote: > Cos, > > We are trying to keep IGFS decoupled from HDFS. Instead, we define IGFS as > an in-memory file

Re: IGNITE-1371

Welcome Igor. I have assigned the ticket to you and added you to the contributors' group. Please consider subscribing to this list as well, so you'll be able to receive the emails from it, and write into it without a moderator's approval. Thanks, Cos On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 02:47PM, Igor

Re: [VOTE] Establishing duration of Apache Ignite Chair rotation

+1 -- Nikita Ivanov On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > Hi! > > As discussed in the "[DISCUSS] PMC Chair rotation" thread last month, I > propose > that we adopt a rule allowing for a Apache Ignite Chair rotation on a > yearly > basis. The proposed

Re: IGNITE-1371

Cool, thanks Konstantin. Regards, Igor Rudyak On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > Welcome Igor. > > I have assigned the ticket to you and added you to the contributors' group. > Please consider subscribing to this list as well, so you'll be able to >

Re: [VOTE] Establishing duration of Apache Ignite Chair rotation

+1 (binding) On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > Hi! > > As discussed in the "[DISCUSS] PMC Chair rotation" thread last month, I > propose > that we adopt a rule allowing for a Apache Ignite Chair rotation on a > yearly > basis. The proposed policy is

[jira] [Created] (IGNITE-1660) Add logging to a file for web agent

Pavel Konstantinov created IGNITE-1660: -- Summary: Add logging to a file for web agent Key: IGNITE-1660 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1660 Project: Ignite Issue Type: