> On Apr 1, 2020, at 10:46 AM, Donal Evans wrote:
>
> There's a subtlety with the second no-op case though, since you could have
> a situation where you call the command with no arguments (include all
> regions) and don't find any partitioned regions, which would be fine
I think in this case i
> Would it be reasonable to return error in the case that
> all explicitly included region aren't found?
Yes, this sounds reasonable. Thanks for pointing out that subtlety and for
updating the RFC.
From the RFC:
> The command will return error status if:
I assume this means ERROR or FAILURE (no
I was reviewing the list of RFC’s stil under discussion and noticed that the
following may need to be moved to a different status:
Classloader Isolation [1] - Udo
Logging to standard out [2] - Jake
Replace singleton PoolManager with ClientCache scoped service [3] - Dan
Certificate based authoriza
Hi,
The
Yesterday was the end date for comments for this RFC.
I tried to answer the questions that were sent and also address the concerns
about the proposal.
The main concern was related to the reordering of events that could happen in
the gateway sender in order to group events of the same
Re-sending this from the correct email address. I think the original got
eaten.
> From the RFC:
> > The command will return error status if:
> I assume this means ERROR or FAILURE (non-success) status. It seems a
> little confusing that there are both ERROR and FAILURE statuses. Maybe you
> could
Yes, thanks for clarifying.
> On Apr 2, 2020, at 10:12 AM, Donal Evans wrote:
>
> Re-sending this from the correct email address. I think the original got
> eaten.
>
>
>> From the RFC:
>>> The command will return error status if:
>> I assume this means ERROR or FAILURE (non-success) status. It
Build Update for apache/geode-native
-
Build: #2364
Status: Passed
Duration: 1 hr, 17 mins, and 25 secs
Commit: df791c5 (moleske-patch-2)
Author: M. Oleske
Message: Fix broken Geode Image Link
View the changeset: https://github.com/apache/geode-native/commit/d
