Since the feedback has been to proceed with this proposal I will open a
JIRA ticket and start the work on this.
Thanks for the feedback on this.
Joris.
On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 1:11 PM Kirk Lund wrote:
> I'm for un-deprecating it.
>
> On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 7:01 AM Joris Melchior
> wrote:
>
> >
Hi,
I have seen that if I change the default number of dispatcher threads ( 5 )
when creating a gateway sender, I get an error saying I must specify an order
policy:
"Must specify --order-policy when --dispatcher-threads is larger than 1."
I find this odd, taking into account that the default
Hi Alberto,
This is already solved in Geode 1.12.0.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-7561
BR,
Mario
Šalje: Alberto Bustamante Reyes
Poslano: 15. siječnja 2020. 18:14
Prima: dev@geode.apache.org
Predmet: GW sender dispatcher threads & order policy
Hi
Hi Mario,
My code contains that fix, its not the same issue. GEODE-7561 solves the issue
with the value "1" for dispatcher threads, but an explicit value for
order-policy is still required if you specify a value for dispatcher threads.
BR/
Alberto B.
De: Mario
Yes, sorry I re-read mail and see that it is not the same issue.
Here is how it is working now:
OrderPolicy cannot have an invalid string as it doesn't allow any string except
this from the OrderPolicy.ENUM: KEY, THREAD and PARTITION.
1. If dispatcher threads is more than 1 you need to set o
Just my two cents.
I think that we should probably strip CI into a separate repo. The key
indicator is that if something were wrong in the CI yaml, would I hold a
release for that? I think no. So that suggests to me it is a separate thing.
Same goes for benchmarks. If we were failing a benchmar
Just a reminder, still looking for that release manager… Please don’t all
volunteer at once!
Glory and street cred await the intrepid release manager volunteer.
Hello All,
It is that time again. It is time to cut a new release branch for 1.12 on
February 3rd.
We need a volunteer! No experie
We can live in areas of gray that don’t require any changes. Nobody is asking
for benchmarks so let’s not do work to add them. Nobody is complaining they CI
is included so let’s not do work to remove them. Is it ideal, meh...
> On Jan 15, 2020, at 5:50 PM, Mark Hanson wrote:
>
> Just my two c
+1 for no changes
On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 5:57 PM Jacob Barrett wrote:
> We can live in areas of gray that don’t require any changes. Nobody is
> asking for benchmarks so let’s not do work to add them. Nobody is
> complaining they CI is included so let’s not do work to remove them. Is it
> ideal
