RE: Updating geode-native-build docker image

The geode-native-build image has not been updated yet. Could someone build and push it? I could do it, but Im not a committer. If that is not a problem, my dockerhub user is alb3rtobr. De: Anthony Baker Enviado: jueves, 8 de agosto de 2019 0:54 Para: dev@geode.ap

Re: Proposal to include GEODE-7088 and GEODE-7089 in 1.10.0

The cherry-pick for GEODE-7088 is clean so I didn't open a PR for that one. The cherry-pick for GEODE-7089 required manual merging due to several unrelated stats changes added to develop recently. The PR to merge that one into release/1.10.0 is here: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/3976 The

Re: [DISCUSS] Pulling the current proposed 1.10 release until we can agree on develop being stable

While I share your concern that too many things are getting cherry-picked into the release, I disagree that recutting the branch is a good solution. Recutting the branch effectively cherry-picks everything on the develop branch. This means we start at ground zero evaluating this release. Each

Re: [DISCUSS] Pulling the current proposed 1.10 release until we can agree on develop being stable

Udo, it sounds like you would like to modify the release process to start the stabilization work on develop (rather than cutting the branch as the first step). I would love to hear community opinion on this proposal. For 1.10, in the time we have cherry-picked 11 fixes to release/1.10.0, develo

Re: Proposal to include GEODE-7088 and GEODE-7089 in 1.10.0

Thank you Ryan, +1 for inclusion On 8/26/19 3:33 PM, Ryan McMahon wrote: Udo, Here are inline answers to your questions: *Is this an existing issue?* Short answer - yes, but it has never been in a release version of Geode. The leak was introduced as part of some changes to address handling m

[DISCUSS] Pulling the current proposed 1.10 release until we can agree on develop being stable

Hi there Apache Geode devs, It has been some weeks since the proposed 1.10 release was cut. We've gone through a few cycles where we keep on submitting "please include ticket GEODE-XXX" because it is critical and will break the system. WHICH in reality tells me that current develop is broken a

Re: Proposal to include GEODE-7088 and GEODE-7089 in 1.10.0

+1 This will be a good inclusion in Apache Geode 1.10.0 release. Regards Naba On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 3:36 PM Jacob Barrett wrote: > +1 > > Thanks for the details! > > > On Aug 26, 2019, at 3:33 PM, Ryan McMahon wrote: > > > > Udo, > > > > Here are inline answers to your questions: > > > > *I

Re: Proposal to include GEODE-7088 and GEODE-7089 in 1.10.0

+1 Thanks for the details! > On Aug 26, 2019, at 3:33 PM, Ryan McMahon wrote: > > Udo, > > Here are inline answers to your questions: > > *Is this an existing issue?* > > Short answer - yes, but it has never been in a release version of Geode. > The leak was introduced as part of some change

Re: Proposal to include GEODE-7088 and GEODE-7089 in 1.10.0

Udo, Here are inline answers to your questions: *Is this an existing issue?* Short answer - yes, but it has never been in a release version of Geode. The leak was introduced as part of some changes to address handling multiple concurrent registration requests for a given client on a single serve

Re: Proposal to include GEODE-7088 and GEODE-7089 in 1.10.0

Hi Ryan, thank you for bringing your concern. Geode's release process dictates a time-based schedule to cut release branches. The release/1.10.0 branch was already cut ov

Re: Proposal to include GEODE-7088 and GEODE-7089 in 1.10.0

In order to better understand this request: Is this an existing issue? Why is it more critical to squeeze it into an existing (almost release) version of Apache Geode? What guarantees do we have that this fix makes the application more stable compared to adding another hidden issue, which we

Proposal to include GEODE-7088 and GEODE-7089 in 1.10.0

Hi all, I would like to propose cherry-picking GEODE-7088 and GEODE-7089 to the 1.10.0 release branch. The two JIRAs are related to the same root problem, which I would classify as critical. We discovered a case where a failed client registration could lead to a memory leak in a server, eventual

Re: Propose including GEODE-7085 in 1.10

There appears to be consensus that this is a critical fix. The following commits have been brought into support/1.10.0 as the critical fix for GEODE-7085 : git cherry-pick -x f58710116db1cd8c

Re: Propose including GEODE-7085 in 1.10

+1 On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 10:40 AM Alexander Murmann wrote: > +1 > > While it's not new, it's critical > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 10:38 AM Juan José Ramos > wrote: > > > +1 > > > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 6:36 PM Dan Smith wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I'd like to propose including the fi

Re: Propose including GEODE-7085 in 1.10

+1 While it's not new, it's critical On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 10:38 AM Juan José Ramos wrote: > +1 > > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 6:36 PM Dan Smith wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I'd like to propose including the fixes for GEODE-7085 into 1.10 (SHA's > > below). This is not a new issue, but it does resu

Re: Propose including GEODE-7085 in 1.10

+1 On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 6:36 PM Dan Smith wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to propose including the fixes for GEODE-7085 into 1.10 (SHA's > below). This is not a new issue, but it does result not being able to > recover from disk without this fix if a cluster has more than 2 billion > updates to a s

Propose including GEODE-7085 in 1.10

Hi, I'd like to propose including the fixes for GEODE-7085 into 1.10 (SHA's below). This is not a new issue, but it does result not being able to recover from disk without this fix if a cluster has more than 2 billion updates to a single bucket from a single member. SHAs: f587101 , f17931bf Th

RE: Travis-ci & geode-native repo

that was fast: I contacted Travis support and they increased the timeout for us 🙂 De: Alberto Bustamante Reyes Enviado: lunes, 26 de agosto de 2019 13:03 Para: dev@geode.apache.org Asunto: RE: Travis-ci & geode-native repo Thanks for the answer Jake (sorry for t

RE: Travis-ci & geode-native repo

Thanks for the answer Jake (sorry for the late answer, I was on holidays). Do you know if Travis is offering that support from free? The task of moving from Travis to Concourse sounds interesting, is there an existing ticket about it? De: Jacob Barrett Enviado:

Need PR reviews

Hi Geode dev, we need review for following PRs: Jira ticket: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-7086 PR: https://github.com/apache/geode-native/pull/510 Jira ticket: https://issues.apac